Association of alcohol consumption with selected cardiovascular disease outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis

By P. Ronksley, S. Brien, B. Turner, K. Mukamal, W. Ghali. British medical journal, 2011

1,593 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Objective To conduct a comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis of studies assessing the effect of alcohol consumption on multiple cardiovascular outcomes. Design Systematic review and meta-analysis. Data sources A search of Medline (1950 through September 2009) and Embase (1980 through September 2009) supplemented by manual searches of bibliographies and conference proceedings. Inclusion criteria Prospective cohort studies on the association between alcohol consumption and overall mortality from cardiovascular disease, incidence of and mortality from coronary heart disease, and incidence of and mortality from stroke. Studies reviewed Of 4235 studies reviewed for eligibility, quality, and data extraction, 84 were included in the final analysis. Results The pooled adjusted relative risks for alcohol drinkers relative to non-drinkers in random effects models for the outcomes of interest were 0.75 (95% confidence interval 0.70 to 0.80) for cardiovascular disease mortality (21 studies), 0.71 (0.66 to 0.77) for incident coronary heart disease (29 studies), 0.75 (0.68 to 0.81) for coronary heart disease mortality (31 studies), 0.98 (0.91 to 1.06) for incident stroke (17 studies), and 1.06 (0.91 to 1.23) for stroke mortality (10 studies). Dose-response analysis revealed that the lowest risk of coronary heart disease mortality occurred with 1–2 drinks a day, but for stroke mortality it occurred with ≤1 drink per day. Secondary analysis of mortality from all causes showed lower risk for drinkers compared with non-drinkers (relative risk 0.87 (0.83 to 0.92)). Conclusions Light to moderate alcohol consumption is associated with a reduced risk of multiple cardiovascular outcomes.

Subfields: Epidemiology, Neurology, Pathology and Forensic Medicine

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/4bc0e235e52599534220cc5f913b5bbea27b90cd

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Pathology and Forensic Medicine

  1. S. Kasner

Citations in the corpus