Tier 2 — strong

Co-enzyme Q10 supplementation for the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease

Nadine Flowers, Louise Hartley, Daniel Todkill, Saverio Stranges, Karen Rees
Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2014 2014(12):CD010405

Bibliography

PubMed
PMID 25474484
PubMed Central
PMC9759150
DOI
10.1002/14651858.CD010405.pub2
Funding
Internal support: Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, UK. External support: NIHR Cochrane Programme Grant, UK.
Competing interests
The review declared no known conflicts of interest.

Study snapshot

DesignCochrane systematic review of randomized controlled trials
ModelHuman primary-prevention randomized controlled trials
Sample6 completed RCTs; 218 participants randomized.
InterventionCoQ10 100–200 mg/day versus placebo or no intervention. Two trials examined CoQ10 alone and four examined CoQ10 in statin-treated participants; these groups were analyzed separately.
DurationApproximately 3 months across the included completed trials.
EndpointsCardiovascular and all-cause mortality; Non-fatal cardiovascular events; Systolic and diastolic blood pressure; Blood lipids; Adverse effects; Costs

What the study showed, in plain terms

This Cochrane review asked whether CoQ10 can prevent cardiovascular disease before it occurs. It found only six small randomized trials involving 218 high-risk adults without diagnosed cardiovascular disease. None reported mortality or non-fatal cardiovascular events, so the review could not show that CoQ10 prevents heart attacks, strokes or cardiovascular death. Effects on blood pressure and lipids were inconsistent or inconclusive.

Key findings

Six completed randomized trials with 218 participants were identified. No included study reported cardiovascular mortality, all-cause mortality or non-fatal cardiovascular events. The two blood-pressure trials were heterogeneous: one was null for systolic pressure and one reported a large reduction; pooled diastolic pressure was not significantly changed. Lipid effects were not established. The authors concluded that the evidence was too sparse and underpowered for firm primary-prevention conclusions.

What this study can and cannot tell us

The evidence base was very small, with 20–52 participants per completed trial, approximately three months of follow-up, unclear allocation methods across all six trials, and no direct clinical-event data. The search was current only to December 2013, so this review should be interpreted as a rigorous historical assessment of the primary-prevention evidence rather than a current comprehensive cardiovascular review.

Citation network

Articles citing this research paper

1 article

Biohack Blueprint analyses that reference this study in their evidence base.

Editorial review

Reviewed by the Biohack Blueprint research team

Last verified

Dr. Khaled Mahmoud, MBBChCritical Care Medicine, Longevity Science & Editorial Direction Dr. Amr Yasser, PhDCardiometabolic, Musculoskeletal, Gut & Bioavailability Dr. Abdulla Mostafa, PhDCellular Senescence, Neurological, Mitochondrial & Brain-Ageing Biology