Meat Consumption Associated with the Risk of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

<b>Background:</b> Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a global public health issue and a major cause of morbidity and mortality. Meat consumption is considered one of the factors influencing the risk of COPD. This study aims to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to synthesize evidence on meat consumption and COPD risk. <b>Methods:</b> A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed and reported through a comprehensive search in PubMed and Web of Science from inception to March 2025 (PROSPERO registration ID: CRD42024595137). This meta-analysis included fifteen observational studies. Forest plots were presented, statistical heterogeneity was quantified with the <i>I</i>² statistic and investigated through subgroup analyses. Funnel plots and Egger's test were used to evaluate publication bias. <b>Results:</b> The results showed that the odds ratio (OR) for total meat consumption and the risk of COPD was 1.15 (95% confidence interval (CI): 1.01-1.31), suggesting that meat consumption was associated with a higher risk of COPD. Our analysis revealed that fish consumption (OR: 0.84; 95% CI: 0.72-0.97) had a protective effect on COPD risk while processed meat consumption (OR: 1.18; 95% CI: 1.02-1.37) and cured meat consumption (OR: 1.64; 95% CI: 1.41-1.90) was significantly associated with an increased risk of COPD. In addition, subgroup analysis suggested that higher meat consumption was associated with an elevated risk of COPD in cross-sectional study (OR = 1.78; 95% CI: 1.57-2.02), case-control study (OR = 1.52; 95% CI: 1.10-2.10) and in group with 1000 or more participants (OR = 1.16; 95% CI: 1.01-1.33). <b>Conclusions:</b> The pooled results of this meta-analysis suggest an association between total meat consumption (encompassing fish, processed meat, cured meat, and unprocessed meat) and COPD. However, the strength of this evidence is tempered by substantial between-study heterogeneity and inconsistent findings across study designs-notably, cohort data failed to support a significant association. Future research should standardize classifications and explore meat subtypes to address heterogeneity.