-
The British Journal of Nutrition Oct 2015Rice is an important staple food for more than half of the world's population. Especially in Asian countries, rice is a major contributor to dietary glycaemic load (GL).... (Review)
Review
Rice is an important staple food for more than half of the world's population. Especially in Asian countries, rice is a major contributor to dietary glycaemic load (GL). Sustained consumption of higher-GL diets has been implicated in the development of chronic diseases such as type 2 diabetes mellitus. Given that a reduction in postprandial glycaemic and insulinaemic responses is generally seen as a beneficial dietary change, it is useful to determine the variation in the range of postprandial glucose (PPG) and insulin (PPI) responses to rice and the primary intrinsic and processing factors known to affect such responses. Therefore, we identified relevant original research articles on glycaemic response to rice through a systematic search of the literature in Scopus, Medline and SciFinder databases up to July 2014. Based on a glucose reference value of 100, the observed glycaemic index values for rice varieties ranged from 48 to 93, while the insulinaemic index ranged from 39 to 95. There are three main factors that appear to explain most of the variation in glycaemic and insulinaemic responses to rice: (1) inherent starch characteristics (amylose:amylopectin ratio and rice cultivar); (2) post-harvest processing (particularly parboiling); (3) consumer processing (cooking, storage and reheating). The milling process shows a clear effect when compared at identical cooking times, with brown rice always producing a lower PPG and PPI response than white rice. However, at longer cooking times normally used for the preparation of brown rice, smaller and inconsistent differences are observed between brown and white rice.
Topics: Amylopectin; Amylose; Blood Glucose; Chemical Phenomena; Cooking; Food Handling; Glycemic Index; Glycemic Load; Humans; Insulin; Oryza; Postprandial Period; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Starch; Whole Grains
PubMed: 26310311
DOI: 10.1017/S0007114515001841 -
The American Journal of Clinical... Aug 2021Starchy foods can have a profound effect on metabolism. The structural properties of starchy foods can affect their digestibility and postprandial metabolic responses,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Starchy foods can have a profound effect on metabolism. The structural properties of starchy foods can affect their digestibility and postprandial metabolic responses, which in the long term may be associated with the risk of type 2 diabetes and obesity.
OBJECTIVES
This systematic review sought to evaluate the clinical evidence regarding the impact of the microstructures within starchy foods on postprandial glucose and insulin responses alongside appetite regulation.
METHODS
A systematic search was performed in the PUBMED, Ovid Medicine, EMBASE, and Google Scholar databases for data published up to 18 January 2021. Data were extracted by 3 independent reviewers from randomized crossover trials (RCTs) that investigated the effect of microstructural factors on postprandial glucose, insulin, appetite-regulating hormone responses, and subjective satiety scores in healthy participants.
RESULTS
We identified 745 potential articles, and 25 RCTs (n = 369 participants) met our inclusion criteria: 6 evaluated the amylose-to-amylopectin ratio, 6 evaluated the degree of starch gelatinization, 2 evaluated the degree of starch retrogradation, 1 studied starch-protein interactions, and 12 investigated cell and tissue structures. Meta-analyses showed that significant reductions in postprandial glucose and insulin levels was caused by starch with a high amylose content [standardized mean difference (SMD) = -0.64 mmol/L*min (95% CI: -0.83 to -0.46) and SMD = -0.81 pmol/L*min (95% CI: -1.07 to -0.55), respectively], less-gelatinized starch [SMD = -0.54 mmol/L*min (95% CI: -0.75 to -0.34) and SMD = -0.48 pmol/L*min (95% CI: -0.75 to -0.21), respectively], retrograded starch (for glucose incremental AUC; SMD = -0.46 pmol/L*min; 95% CI: -0.80 to -0.12), and intact and large particles [SMD = -0.43 mmol/L*min (95% CI: -0.58 to -0.28) and SMD = -0.63 pmol/L*min (95% CI: -0.86 to -0.40), respectively]. All analyses showed minor or moderate heterogeneity (I2 < 50%). Sufficient evidence was not found to suggest how these structural factors influence appetite.
CONCLUSIONS
The manipulation of microstructures in starchy food may be an effective way to improve postprandial glycemia and insulinemia in the healthy population. The protocol for this systematic review and meta-analysis was registered in the international prospective register of systematic reviews (PROSPERO) as CRD42020190873.
Topics: Blood Glucose; Dietary Carbohydrates; Food Analysis; Humans; Postprandial Period; Starch
PubMed: 34049391
DOI: 10.1093/ajcn/nqab098