Tier 1 — highest

Effects of Urolithin A supplementation on muscle health outcomes in humans from randomized controlled trials

Dao T, Nguyen TT, Gariani K, Kim HJ, Ryu D
Frontiers in Nutrition 2026 13:1834344

Bibliography

PubMed
PMID 42559151
PubMed Central
PMC13440176

Study snapshot

DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
ModelHuman randomized Urolithin A supplementation trials
Sample5 randomized trials; 236 participants
InterventionOral Urolithin A versus placebo
DurationShort-term trials included through December 2025
Endpoints6-minute walk test; Muscle strength and endurance; Aerobic capacity; Mitochondrial and biochemical biomarkers; Risk of bias and GRADE certainty

What the study showed, in plain terms

The 2026 meta-analysis is the best current reality check on Urolithin A muscle claims. Five RCTs involving 236 participants were eligible. Only the six-minute walk test could be pooled, and the average effect favored Urolithin A but was not statistically significant; certainty was rated low. Other muscle and mitochondrial findings were too heterogeneous for a reliable pooled estimate.

Key findings

Five randomized trials with 236 participants were included.

The pooled 6-minute-walk estimate favored Urolithin A by about 17 metres but crossed zero and was not statistically significant.

GRADE certainty for the pooled walking outcome was low.

Strength, endurance and mitochondrial signals were considered exploratory because of heterogeneity.

What this study can and cannot tell us

Only two trials contributed to the pooled 6-minute-walk analysis.

Underlying trials were small, short and clinically heterogeneous.

Most non-walking outcomes could not be quantitatively pooled.

Editorial review

Reviewed by the Biohack Blueprint research team

Last verified