Cholesterol-Lowering Efficacy of Plant Sterols/Stanols Provided in Capsule and Tablet Formats: Results of a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Abstract
Plant sterols/stanols-enriched foods possess well-documented low-density lipoprotein (LDL)-cholesterol-lowering effect. However, the relative efficacy of plant sterols/stanols as supplements (tablets/capsules) compared with other dietary forms still needs to be determined. Our aim was to precisely identify and quantify the LDL-cholesterol-lowering effect of plant sterols/stanols as supplements in contrast to food-based approaches. Eight eligible clinical trials published from January 1992 to April 2013 were identified from five databases. A random effect model was used to calculate weighted mean effect sizes for net differences in LDL-cholesterol concentrations. Among the included trials with the duration between 4 and 6 weeks, plant sterol/stanol dose ranged from 1.0 to 3.0 g/day administrated mainly with the main meals (2 or 3 times/day). Intake of plant sterol/stanol supplements decreased LDL-cholesterol concentrations by 12 mg/dL (0.31 mmol/L) (95% CI -0.39 to -0.23; P<0.000) compared with placebo. The test of heterogeneity was not significant (χ(2) , P=0.50, I(2)=0%). Further analysis showed no significant difference between the LDL-cholesterol-lowering action of plant sterols/stanols supplements (-12 mg/dL [-0.31 mmol/L]; 95% CI -0.39 to -0.24; P<0.0001) vs foods enriched with plant sterols/stanols (-12 mg/dL [-0.31 mmol/L]; 95% CI -0.35 to -0.27; P<0.0001). Plant sterol/stanol supplements as part of a healthy diet represent an effective means of delivering LDL-choleste…
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Systematic reviews and meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials have shown beneficial effects of plant sterols on non-HDL-C, apoB, TC, and TG.
“Systematic reviews and meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials have shown beneficial effects of plant sterols, 38,39 viscous fibres, 37,40,41 plant proteins, 34 and nuts 33,42,43 on the established alternate lipid targets, non-HDL-C and apoB, and other blood lipids including TC and TG.”
From Portfolio Dietary Pattern and Cardiovascular Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Controlled Trials (2018) · cites this paper as [39]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 97 · Cited by 88
- Authors
- Amir Shaghaghi, M., Abumweis, S. S., & Jones, P. J. H.
- Corresponding author
- Jones, Peter J.H.
- Venue
- Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2013-11
- Volume
- 113
- Issue
- 11
- Pages
- 1494-1503
- ISSN
- 2212-2672 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2021321646
- Cited by
- 88
- References
- 97
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 14 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 7
- FWCI
- 1.53
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Lipoproteins and Cardiovascular Health
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Cholesterol and Lipid Metabolism
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Natural Products and Biological Research
- Keywords
- phytosterols, plant stanols, LDL cholesterol lowering, cholesterol-lowering supplements, dietary supplements, functional foods, hypercholesterolemia
- MeSH terms
- Anticholesteremic Agents, Diet, Humans, Cholesterol, LDL, Phytosterols, Reproducibility of Results, MEDLINE, Dietary Supplements
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review