Summary
Background
Several observational studies have suggested that high consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs) and artificially sweetened beverages (ASBs) is associated with increased blood pressure, but this relationship has not been investigated comprehensively.
Aims
To quantitatively examine the association between sugar-sweetened and artificially sweetened beverage intake and risk of hypertension.
Methods
We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of eligible prospective cohort studies, identified by searching PubMed, Embase and Web of Science databases up to May 2015. Pooled relative risks (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using a random-effects model, and generalized least-squares trend estimation was used to assess dose-response relationships.
Results
Six studies (246,822 subjects and 80,628 incident cases of hypertension) were identified for the meta-analysis of SSBs and hypertension. The pooled RR of hypertension in the highest category of SSB consumption (≥ 1 serving/day, mean) compared with the lowest category of SSB (< 0.6 serving/month, mean) was 1.12 (95% CI: 1.07, 1.17). In a dose-response analysis, a 1 serving/day increase in SSB intake was associated with an 8% increased risk of hypertension (RR: 1.08, 95% CI: 1.06, 1.11). Four studies (227,254 subjects and 78,177 incident cases of hypertension) were included in the meta-analysis of ASBs and hypertension. The pooled RRs were 1.14 (95% CI: 1.10, 1.18) for highest versus lowest analysis and 1.09 (95% CI: 1.06, 1.11) for every additional 1 serving/day increase in ASB consumption. The positive association did not vary significantly by sex, duration of follow-up or adjustment for body mass index.
Conclusions
Our findings indicate that high SSB and ASB consumption is associated with an increased risk of hypertension.
Résumé
Justification
Plusieurs études observationnelles ont suggéré qu’une consommation excessive de boissons sucrées avec édulcorants de synthèse serait associée à une augmentation de la pression artérielle mais cette association n’a jamais été investiguée de façon systématique.
Objectif
Examiner l’association entre ces boissons sucrées de façon artificielle par édulcorants et le risque d’hypertension artérielle.
Méthode
Une revue systématique et méta-analyse des études de cohortes prospectives a été identifiée à partir d’une recherche sur les moteurs, PubMed, Embase et Web of Science jusqu’en mai 2015. Le risque relatif avec IC 95 % a été calculé à l’aide d’un modèle de randomisation, et les estimations des risques relatifs ont été effectuées.
Résultats
Six études (246 822 patients et 80 628 cas incidents d’HTA) ont été identifiées pour cette méta-analyse. Le risque relatif d’HTA dans la catégorie la plus élevée de consommation de boissons avec édulcorants (< 0,6 boisson par mois, en moyenne) était de 1,12 (IC 95 % : 1,07–1,17). L’analyse de dose-réponse indique que l’augmentation de la consommation d’une boisson sucrée avec édulcorants par jour est associée à une augmentation de 8 % du risque d’HTA (risque relatif : 1,08, IC 95 % : 1,06–1,11). Quatre études (227 254 patients et 78 177 cas incidents d’HTA) ont été prises en compte dans la méta-analyse. Le risque relatif global est de 1,14 (IC 95 % : 1,10–1,18) pour l’analyse de la consommation la plus élevée d’une boisson sucrée avec édulcorants par rapport à la plus faible est de 1,09 (IC 95 % : 1,06–1,11) pour chaque prise supplémentaire d’une boisson par jour. L’association n’est pas influencée par le sexe, la durée de suivi ou après l’ajustement sur l’indice de masse corporelle.
Conclusion
Ces résultats indiquent qu’une consommation excessive de boissons avec édulcorants est associée à une augmentation du risque d’HTA.
Background
Approximately 80 million people, accounting for ∼33% of adults in the USA aged ≥ 20 years, have hypertension, based on a recent report from the American Heart Association, and the prevalence of hypertension is still increasing . The number of adults with hypertension has been predicted to increase by about 60% by 2025, worldwide . High blood pressure or hypertension is associated with increased risk of mortality from cardiovascular diseases, such as coronary artery disease, congestive heart failure and myocardial infarction, and risk of other diseases, including kidney disease ; it is therefore very important to identify lifestyle factors that can reduce the risk of hypertension. There are some established risk factors for hypertension, including obesity, low levels of physical activity and high sodium intake .
Sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs) are the primary sources of added sugar, and include carbonated (soft) drinks and fruit drinks with added sugar. SSBs containing sweeteners, such as sucrose or high fructose corn syrup, provide a liquid form of energy, and thus are less likely to affect satiety than isoenergetic foods . Much of the research into SSB intake has focused on weight gain and obesity . SSBs may also have a direct impact on increased blood pressure, independent of weight gain. Artificially sweetened beverages (ASBs), which include sugar alternatives such as aspartame and saccharin, have emerged as alternatives to SSB, and their consumption is increasing, but the health effects of ASBs have not been well studied . Several prospective cohort studies have been conducted to determine the association between SSB and ASB intake and risk of hypertension , but to our knowledge, the prospective association of long-term SSB and ASB intake with risk of hypertension has not been investigated comprehensively. We therefore systematically conducted a meta-analysis of prospective cohort studies to assess the association between risk of hypertension and the consumption of SSBs and ASBs, including a dose-response analysis.
Methods
Literature search and study selection
In accordance with the Meta-analysis Of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) guidelines , we conducted a literature search regarding the effect of SSB and ASB intake on hypertension, using PubMed, Embase and Web of Science databases up to May 2015. The search terms were as follows: “sweetened beverage, sweetened drink, sugary drink, soft drink, carbonated drink, soda, fruit drink, lemonade, squashes or punch” combined with “hypertension, hypertensive, blood pressure, systolic OR diastolic”. In addition, we reviewed the reference lists of relevant articles to search for more eligible studies. Only human studies published in English as full-length articles were considered. Additionally, studies were included in the meta-analysis if they met the following criteria: a prospective cohort design; the exposure of interest was the consumption of SSBs or ASBs; the outcome of interest was defined as incident hypertension or high blood pressure; relative risks (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were reported. Studies focused on patients with specific diseases were excluded. Among the eligible studies, two articles reported results from the same cohort , so we included the results from the more recent article in the meta-analysis .
Data extraction
Two investigators (Y.K. and Y.J.) independently extracted data from selected articles, and discrepancies were resolved by reviewing the original articles and discussion. We considered one article as three prospective studies, because it reported separated RRs from three large cohort studies, including the Nurses’ Health Study (NHS) I , the NHS II and the Health Professionals Follow-up Study (HPFS) . The following data were extracted for each study: study design; duration of follow-up; publication year; first author’s last name; cohort name; geographic region; sample size; beverage category; adjustment factors; and RR and 95% CI for the association between various categories of SSB or ASB intake and hypertension. The most fully adjusted RRs were extracted when the study provided several RRs.
Quality assessment
We used the Newcastle-Ottawa quality assessment scale to assess the quality of studies included in the meta-analysis. Studies were evaluated on three aspects, as follows: the selection of study groups (0–4 points); the comparability of groups (0–3 points); and ascertainment of outcome (0–4 points). Studies with a total score of ≥ 8 points were considered to be of high quality.
Statistical analysis
The natural logarithm of the RR of each study was combined using the DerSimonian and Laird random-effects models, which incorporate both within-study and between-study variations , to estimate a pooled RR of hypertension for the highest versus lowest category of beverage consumption. The RR from each study as well as a pooled RR are presented as a forest plot, where the size of the data markers (squares) corresponds to the inverse of the variance of the natural logarithm of the RR from each study, and the diamond indicates a pooled RR. To test statistical heterogeneity among the studies, the Cochran Q test was used, and inconsistency was quantified by I 2 statistics [100% × (Q– df )/Q] . We conducted subgroup analyses by sex, duration of follow-up and adjustment for body mass index (BMI), and used a meta-regression model to assess the variations in risk estimates by study characteristics. Furthermore, we performed a sensitivity analysis in which one study at a time was excluded; the pooled estimate was recalculated for the other studies to evaluate the effect of each individual study.
The dose-response association among different categories of beverage intake was estimated using generalized least-squares trend estimation analysis, based on the method developed by Greenland and Longnecker . When the study did not report the median or mean dose for categories of beverage consumption, we used the midpoint of the category. The highest open-ended category was assumed to have the same interval of intake as the previous category. After unifying the unit to servings/day, we estimated the pooled RR for a 1 serving/day increase in beverage consumption. One study included in the highest versus lowest meta-analysis was left out because it had only two categories of beverage intake . In addition, we examined a potential non-linear dose-response relationship between beverage intake and hypertension, by adding a quadratic term of beverage intake into the model.
Finally, publication bias was assessed through the tests of Begg and Mazumdar and Egger et al. . A two-sided P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. All the statistical analyses were carried out using Stata/SE software, version 12.0 (Stata Corporation, College Station, TX, USA).
Results
Study characteristics
The detailed literature search process is presented in Fig. 1 . We identified seven prospective cohort studies with a total of 250,185 subjects and 81,471 incident cases of hypertension that met the inclusion criteria of the meta-analysis . The characteristics of the prospective cohort studies included in the meta-analysis are presented in Table 1 . Six studies were conducted in the USA and one study was performed in Spain. The age at baseline ranged from 18 to 84 years, and duration of follow-up ranged from 4 to 38 years. All studies used food frequency questionnaires for dietary assessment. Four studies provided sex-specific RRs . The systolic and diastolic blood pressure criteria for defining hypertension were > 140 and 90 mmHg in four studies , ≥ 130 and 85 mmHg in two studies and ≥ 135 and 85 mmHg in one study . The ascertainment of hypertension was done through the measurement of blood pressure , medical record review and self-report . All studies adjusted for age, smoking, physical activity and energy intake in multivariable models. Four studies provided RRs that were adjusted for BMI . Study quality scores ranged from 6 to 9 out of a possible score of 11 points. Of the seven studies, five received a score of > 8 points, indicating high quality .

| Source | Country; cohort name | Duration of follow-up (years) | Age at baseline (years) | Cases/subjects ( n / n ) | Sex | Consumption of SSBs/ASBs (serving) | RR (95% CI) | Adjustment for covariates |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dhingra et al., 2007 | USA; FHS | 4 | 52.9 | 1377/6449 | M and F | SSBs | Age, sex, baseline level of the metabolic syndrome component, physical activity index, smoking, dietary consumption of saturated fat, trans fat, fibre, magnesium, total calories and glycaemic index | |
| None (ref) | 1.0 (ref) | |||||||
| 1/day | 1.16 (0.92, 1.47) | |||||||
| ≥ 1/day | 1.18 (0.96, 1.44) | |||||||
| ≥ 2/day | 1.20 (0.90, 1.60) | |||||||
| Nettleton et al., 2009 | USA; MESA | 7 | 45–84 | 843/3363 | M and F | ASBs | Age, study site, sex, race/ethnicity, energy intake education, physical activity, smoking status, pack-years and weekly supplement use or more | |
| Rare/never | 1.0 (ref) | |||||||
| < 1 serving/week | 1.07 (0.83, 1.37) | |||||||
| <1 serving/day | 1.11 (0.91, 1.34) | |||||||
| ≥ 1 serving/day | 1.17 (0.95, 1.45) | |||||||
| Duffey et al., 2010 | USA; CARDIA | 10 | 18–30 | 609/2639 | M and F | SSBs | Age, sex, race, CARDIA exam centre, weight, smoking status, energy from food, total physical activity, energy from the three other beverages (low-fat milk, whole-fat milk, fruit juice) and energy from alcohol | |
| Quartile 1 (ref) | ||||||||
| Quartile 4 | 1.06 (1.01, 1.12) | |||||||
| Cohen et al., 2012 | USA; NHS I | 38 | 30–55 | 42,022/88,540 | F | SSBs | Age, race, family history of hypertension, physical activity, calcium, magnesium and vitamin D intake, cereal fibre and trans fat intake, carbohydrate consumption, DASH-style diet, total fructose consumption, daily calories, alcohol, whether or not trying to lose weight, smoking status, oral contraceptive use, non-narcotic analgesic use, mutually controlled for SSB and ASB intake, BMI, weight change between surveys | |
| < 1/month (ref) | 1.0 (ref) | |||||||
| 1–4/month | 1.02 (0.99, 1.04) | |||||||
| 2–6/week | 1.04 (1.01, 1.07) | |||||||
| ≥ 1/day | 1.12 (1.08, 1.17) | |||||||
| ASBs | ||||||||
| < 1/month (ref) | 1.0 (ref) | |||||||
| 1–4/month | 1.03 (1.00, 1.06) | |||||||
| 2–6/week | 1.07 (1.04, 1.10) | |||||||
| ≥ 1/day | 1.11 (1.08, 1.14) | |||||||
| Cohen et al., 2012 | USA; NHS II | 16 | 25–42 | 21,873/97,991 | F | SSBs | As above | |
| < 1/month (ref) | 1.0 (ref) | |||||||
| 1–4/month | 1.00 (0.96, 1.04) | |||||||
| 2–6/week | 1.07 (1.03, 1.11) | |||||||
| ≥ 1/day | 1.17 (1.11, 1.23) | |||||||
| ASBs | ||||||||
| < 1/month (ref) | 1.0 (ref) | |||||||
| 1–4/month | 1.01 (0.97, 1.06) | |||||||
| 2–6/week | 1.06 (1.01-1.10) | |||||||
| ≥ 1/day | 1.12 (1.08, 1.16) | |||||||
| Cohen et al., 2012 | USA; HPFS | 22 | 40–75 | 13,439/37,360 | M | SSBs | Age, race, family history of hypertension, physical activity, calcium, magnesium and vitamin D intake, cereal fibre and trans fat intake, carbohydrate consumption, DASH-style diet, total fructose consumption, daily calories, alcohol, whether or not trying to lose weight, smoking status, non-narcotic analgesic use, mutually controlled for SSB and ASB intake, BMI, weight change between surveys | |
| < 1/month (ref) | 1.0 (ref) | |||||||
| 1–4/month | 0.97 (0.93, 1.02) | |||||||
| 2–6/week | 1.04 (1.00, 1.10) | |||||||
| ≥ 1/day | 1.06 (0.99, 1.14) | |||||||
| ASBs | ||||||||
| < 1/month (ref) | 1.0 (ref) | |||||||
| 1–4/month | 1.08 (1.02, 1.13) | |||||||
| 2–6/week | 1.09 (1.04, 1.14) | |||||||
| ≥ 1/day | 1.20 (1.14, 1.26) | |||||||
| Sayon-Orea et al., 2014 | Spain; SUN | 8.1 | 36.4 | 1308/13,843 | M and F | SSBs | Age, sex, baseline BMI, family history of hypertension, self-reported hypercholesterolaemia, physical activity, years of university education, smoking status, total energy intake, energy-adjusted sodium, potassium, low-fat dairy, olive oil, fruit, vegetables, cereals, legumes, meat, whole-fat dairy and fish consumption, alcohol | |
| None (ref) | 1.0 (ref) | |||||||
| < 7/week | 1.07 (0.94, 1.22) | |||||||
| ≥ 7/week | 1.34 (1.09, 1.65) |
Stay updated, free articles. Join our Telegram channel
Full access? Get Clinical Tree