Meta-analysis challenges link between omega-3 supplements and atrial fibrillation risk

A meta-analysis with over 114,000 participants has found that consuming a low dose of omega-3 does not increase the risk of atrial fibrillation (AF), challenging multiple previous studies that have stated the opposite. 

The researchers say the findings resolve that confusion, as multiple analyses in recent years have suggested that omega-3 supplementation may increase the risk of AF. They argue that the new analysis provides the “clearest picture to date of the relationship between omega-3 fatty acid supplementation and AF.”

“Our findings show that the relationship between omega-3s and atrial fibrillation is much more nuanced than previous headlines suggested,” says senior author of the study, William Harris, Ph.D., president of the Fatty Acid Research Institute (FARI).

“For the vast majority of people taking nutritional doses of omega-3s, these data should provide reassurance that there is no meaningful increase in atrial fibrillation risk.”

Larger set of data

Published in Circulation: Arrhythmia and Electrophysiology, the study analyzed data from 35 randomized controlled trials including 114,592 participants. It also included unpublished trial data and safety information that was previously unavailable.

The findings showed that consuming less than 1,500 mg daily of eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) and docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) was not linked to a higher risk of AF. These findings were also consistent among people with a heightened risk for cardiovascular disease.

The findings showed that consuming less than 1,500 mg daily of EPA and DHA was not linked to a higher risk of AF.When consuming a dose above 1,500 mg daily, there was a slight increased risk of 0.8%.

The researchers say that previous reviews have included a maximum of eight randomized trials and focused mainly on cardiovascular disease. The new FARI analysis had a larger set of studies, including 15 trials with previously unpublished data, some of which did not have any AF events reported.

They argue that this provides a “more clinically meaningful interpretation of evidence.” Additionally, prior studies have shown other health benefits from EPA supplementation, including reductions in heart attack, stroke, and other cardiovascular events, “that substantially outweigh the small increase in atrial fibrillation risk. ”

“The decision to take or discontinue omega-3 supplements should be a discussion between a patient and his or her health care provider,” says Harris.

“What this study does is provide clinicians with better guidance on which patients may benefit from closer monitoring when using high-dose omega-3 therapies (2–4 g daily) while reassuring consumers that it is safe to consume omega-3 fatty acids from foods and dietary supplements.”

The researchers note that nutritional and pharmaceutical doses of omega-3 do not carry the same clinical implications as higher pharmacological doses.

Recent headlines on omega-3

Recent research on fish oil supplementation has also challenged other previously stated claims.

Recent research on fish oil supplementation has also challenged other previously stated claims on brain health.A study published earlier this month found that omega-3 supplementation does not provide any meaningful benefits for memory, cognition, or brain changes related to Alzheimer’s disease. Even though supplementing with fish oil provides the brain with omega-3, the researchers suggested the findings challenge the idea that such supplementation has preventative effects for Alzheimer’s.

Another contrary finding on EPA and brain health was found as researchers linked the fatty acid to impaired healing after repeated traumatic brain injuries. Nutrition Insight sat down with the co-author to discuss its role in brain health and how formulators can better take into account ratios of these compounds when designing cognitive health products.

He told us that one key point is that omega-3 fatty acids should not be considered interchangeable, and formulations should reflect that. “There is already some recognition of this in early life nutrition, where DHA is often prioritized, suggesting that different omega-3 components can serve different biological roles. Our findings support the need to evaluate EPA and DHA separately, especially when the brain is undergoing repair.”

On this year’s Global Omega-3 Day, we spotlighted the latest research developments in omega-3, with exclusive insights on new cancer research, ocular health innovations, and global deficiencies from Nordic Naturals, Ocusoft, and the University of Michigan, US.