-
International Archives of Allergy and... 2023Food protein-induced enterocolitis syndrome (FPIES) is a non-IgE-mediated gastrointestinal food-induced hypersensitivity disorder that occurs mostly in infants. Long... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Food protein-induced enterocolitis syndrome (FPIES) is a non-IgE-mediated gastrointestinal food-induced hypersensitivity disorder that occurs mostly in infants. Long considered a rare disease, a recent increase in physician awareness and publication of diagnosis of guidelines has resulted in an increase in recognized FPIES cases. We aimed to conduct a systematic review of FPIES studies in the past 10 years. A search was conducted on PubMed and Embase in March 2022. Our systematic review focused on 2 domains: (1) the most reported FPIES food triggers; and (2) the resolution rate and median age at resolution of patients with FPIES. We found that cow's milk was the most reported trigger globally. Patterns of the most common triggers varied by country, with fish being one of the most common triggers in the Mediterranean region. We also found that the rate and median age of resolution varied by trigger. Patients with FPIES to cow's milk acquired tolerance at a younger age (most by age 3 years), while fish-FPIES was more persistent (mean resolution by age 37 months-7 years). Overall, many studies found a resolution rate of 60% for any food.
Topics: Female; Animals; Cattle; Food Hypersensitivity; Milk; Enterocolitis; Allergens; Syndrome; Dietary Proteins
PubMed: 36882041
DOI: 10.1159/000529138 -
Nutrients Aug 2020Breastfeeding is considered the most optimal mode of feeding for neonates and mothers. Human milk changes over the course of lactation in order to perfectly suit the...
BACKGROUND
Breastfeeding is considered the most optimal mode of feeding for neonates and mothers. Human milk changes over the course of lactation in order to perfectly suit the infant's nutritional and immunological needs. Its composition also varies throughout the day. Circadian fluctuations in some bioactive components are suggested to transfer chronobiological information from mother to child to assist the development of the biological clock. This review aims to give a complete overview of studies examining human milk components found to exhibit circadian variation in their concentration.
METHODS
We included studies assessing the concentration of a specific human milk component more than once in 24 h. Study characteristics, including gestational age, lactational stage, sampling strategy, analytical method, and outcome were extracted. Methodological quality was graded using a modified Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS).
RESULTS
A total of 83 reports assessing the circadian variation in the concentration of 71 human milk components were included. Heterogeneity among studies was high. The methodological quality varied widely. Significant circadian variation is found in tryptophan, fats, triacylglycerol, cholesterol, iron, melatonin, cortisol, and cortisone. This may play a role in the child's growth and development in terms of the biological clock.
Topics: Adult; Biological Clocks; Breast Feeding; Circadian Rhythm; Female; Humans; Infant; Infant Nutritional Physiological Phenomena; Infant, Newborn; Lactation; Male; Milk, Human
PubMed: 32759654
DOI: 10.3390/nu12082328 -
Psychiatrike = Psychiatriki Sep 2022Autism is a complex spectrum of disorders with genetic, epigenetic, autoimmune, oxidative stress, and environmental etiologies. Treatment of ASD using dietary approach...
Autism is a complex spectrum of disorders with genetic, epigenetic, autoimmune, oxidative stress, and environmental etiologies. Treatment of ASD using dietary approach is a promising strategy, especially owing to its safety and availability. Our study critically analysed the roles and efficacy of antioxidants, probiotics, prebiotics, camel milk and vitamin D. This systematic review provides an updated synopsis of human studies that investigated therapeutic benefits of these dietary interventions in autism. A total of 943 papers were identified out of which 21 articles were included in the systematic review. The selected studies investigated the impact of 5 different dietary supplementations in ASD symptom and behaviours. These agents include; antioxidants/polyphenolic compounds, probiotics, prebiotics, camel milk and vitamin D. From the results of the present review, antioxidants/polyphenolic compounds decreased the levels of inflammatory cytokines and improved behavioural symptoms. Probiotics improved behavioural and GI symptoms as well as restored gut microbiota equilibrium. Prebiotics decreased levels of inflammatory cytokines, improved behavioural and GI symptoms and improved gut microbiota. Vitamin D improved behavioural symptoms and offered protective effects against neurotoxicity. Camel milk reduced inflammatory responses and oxidative stress. Given the chronic nature as well as early onset of ASD, dietary supplements become useful to complement nutritional deficiencies in children with ASD. Key benefits of these agents stem from their ability to target multiple physiological areas via the gut brain-axis and are devoid of potential harmful or aggravating effects on ASD patients. The evidence collated in this review propose that dietary intervention may provide a new platform for the management of autism.
Topics: Animals; Antioxidants; Autism Spectrum Disorder; Camelus; Child; Cytokines; Humans; Prebiotics; Vitamin D
PubMed: 35477082
DOI: 10.22365/jpsych.2022.073 -
Oxidative Medicine and Cellular... 2021Despite evidence of health benefits from kefir administration, a systematic review with meta-analysis on bioactive compounds associated with these benefits is still... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Despite evidence of health benefits from kefir administration, a systematic review with meta-analysis on bioactive compounds associated with these benefits is still absent in the literature. Kefir is fermented milk resulting from the metabolism of a complex microbiota in symbiosis. Recent researches have investigated the bioactive compounds responsible for the preventive and therapeutic effects attributed to kefir. However, differences in functional potential between industrial and artisanal kefir are still controversial. Firstly, we identified differences in the microbial composition among both types of kefir. Available evidence concerning the action of different bioactive compounds from kefir on health, both from and studies, was subsequently summarized to draw a primary conclusion of the dose and the intervention time for effect, the producer microorganisms, the precursor in the milk, and the action mechanism. Meta-analysis was performed to investigate the statistically significant differences ( < 0.05) between intervention and control and between both types of kefir for each health effect studied. In summary, the bioactive compounds more commonly reported were exopolysaccharides, including kefiran, bioactive peptides, and organic acids, especially lactic acid. Kefir bioactive compounds presented antimicrobial, anticancer, and immune-modulatory activities corroborated by the meta-analysis. However, clinical evidence is urgently needed to strengthen the practical applicability of these bioactive compounds. The mechanisms of their action were diverse, indicating that they can act by different signaling pathways. Still, industrial and artisanal kefir may differ regarding functional potential-OR of 8.56 (95% CI: 2.27-32.21, ≤ .001)-according to the observed health effect, which can be associated with differences in the microbial composition between both types of kefir.
Topics: Animals; Anti-Infective Agents; Antineoplastic Agents; Biological Products; Fermentation; Humans; Immunomodulating Agents; Kefir; Milk
PubMed: 34745425
DOI: 10.1155/2021/9081738 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Aug 2019Artificial formula can be manipulated to contain higher amounts of macro-nutrients than maternal breast milk but breast milk confers important immuno-nutritional...
BACKGROUND
Artificial formula can be manipulated to contain higher amounts of macro-nutrients than maternal breast milk but breast milk confers important immuno-nutritional advantages for preterm or low birth weight (LBW) infants.
OBJECTIVES
To determine the effect of feeding preterm or LBW infants with formula compared with maternal breast milk on growth and developmental outcomes.
SEARCH METHODS
We used the standard strategy of Cochrane Neonatal to search the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 2018, Issue 9), and Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, Ovid Maternity & Infant Care Database, and CINAHL to October 2018. We searched clinical trials databases, conference proceedings, and the reference lists of retrieved articles.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials that compared feeding preterm or low birth weight infants with formula versus maternal breast milk.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors planned independently to assess trial eligibility and risk of bias, and extract data. We planned to analyse treatment effects as described in the individual trials and report risk ratios and risk differences for dichotomous data, and mean differences for continuous data, with 95% confidence intervals. We planned to use a fixed-effect model in meta-analyses and to explore potential causes of heterogeneity in subgroup analyses. We planned to use the GRADE approach to assess the certainty of evidence.
MAIN RESULTS
We did not identify any eligible trials.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There are no trials of formula versus maternal breast milk for feeding preterm or low birth weight infants. Such trials are unlikely to be conducted because of the difficulty of allocating an alternative form of nutrition to an infant whose mother wishes to feed with her own breast milk. Maternal breast milk remains the default choice of enteral nutrition because observational studies, and meta-analyses of trials comparing feeding with formula versus donor breast milk, suggest that feeding with breast milk has major immuno-nutritional advantages for preterm or low birth weight infants.
Topics: Humans; Infant; Infant Formula; Infant Nutritional Physiological Phenomena; Infant, Low Birth Weight; Infant, Newborn; Infant, Premature; Milk, Human; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Weight Gain
PubMed: 31452191
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD002972.pub3 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Dec 2020The introduction and advancement of enteral feeds for preterm or low birth weight infants is often delayed because of concerns that early full enteral feeding will not... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
The introduction and advancement of enteral feeds for preterm or low birth weight infants is often delayed because of concerns that early full enteral feeding will not be well tolerated or may increase the risk of necrotising enterocolitis. Early full enteral feeding, however, might increase nutrient intake and growth rates; accelerate intestinal physiological, metabolic, and microbiomic postnatal transition; and reduce the risk of complications associated with intravascular devices for fluid administration. OBJECTIVES: To determine how early full enteral feeding, compared with delayed or progressive introduction of enteral feeds, affects growth and adverse events such as necrotising enterocolitis, in preterm or low birth weight infants.
SEARCH METHODS
We used the standard search strategy of Cochrane Neonatal to search Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials; MEDLINE Ovid, Embase Ovid, Maternity & Infant Care Database Ovid, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, and clinical trials databases, conference proceedings, and the reference lists of retrieved articles for randomised controlled trials and quasi-randomised trials to October 2020.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials that compared early full enteral feeding with delayed or progressive introduction of enteral feeds in preterm or low birth weight infants.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used the standard methods of Cochrane Neonatal. Two review authors separately assessed trial eligibility, evaluated trial quality, extracted data, and synthesised effect estimates using risk ratios (RR), risk differences, and mean differences (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). We used the GRADE approach to assess the certainty of evidence.
MAIN RESULTS
We included six trials. All were undertaken in the 2010s in neonatal care facilities in India. In total, 526 infants participated. Most were very preterm infants of birth weight between 1000 g and 1500 g. Trials were of good methodological quality, but a potential source of bias was that parents, clinicians, and investigators were not masked. The trials compared early full feeding (60 mL/kg to 80 mL/kg on day one after birth) with minimal enteral feeding (typically 20 mL/kg on day one) supplemented with intravenous fluids. Feed volumes were advanced daily as tolerated by 20 mL/kg to 30 mL/kg body weight to a target steady-state volume of 150 mL/kg to 180 mL/kg/day. All participating infants were fed preferentially with maternal expressed breast milk, with two trials supplementing insufficient volumes with donor breast milk and four supplementing with preterm formula. Few data were available to assess growth parameters. One trial (64 participants) reported a slower rate of weight gain (median difference -3.0 g/kg/day), and another (180 participants) reported a faster rate of weight gain in the early full enteral feeding group (MD 1.2 g/kg/day). We did not meta-analyse these data (very low-certainty evidence). None of the trials reported rate of head circumference growth. One trial reported that the mean z-score for weight at hospital discharge was higher in the early full enteral feeding group (MD 0.24, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.42; low-certainty evidence). Meta-analyses showed no evidence of an effect on necrotising enterocolitis (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.38 to 2.54; 6 trials, 522 participants; I² = 51%; very low-certainty evidence).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Trials provided insufficient data to determine with any certainty how early full enteral feeding, compared with delayed or progressive introduction of enteral feeds, affects growth in preterm or low birth weight infants. We are uncertain whether early full enteral feeding affects the risk of necrotising enterocolitis because of the risk of bias in the trials (due to lack of masking), inconsistency, and imprecision.
Topics: Body Weight; Enteral Nutrition; Enterocolitis, Necrotizing; Fluid Therapy; Humans; Infant Formula; Infant, Newborn; Infant, Premature; Infant, Very Low Birth Weight; Milk, Human; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Weight Gain
PubMed: 33368149
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013542.pub2 -
Nutrients Sep 2019Whey protein (WP) is a dairy food supplement and, due to its effects on fat-free mass (FFM) gain and fat mass (FM) loss, it has been widely consumed by resistance... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Whey protein (WP) is a dairy food supplement and, due to its effects on fat-free mass (FFM) gain and fat mass (FM) loss, it has been widely consumed by resistance training practitioners. This review analyzed the impact of WP supplementation in its concentrated (WPC), hydrolyzed (WPH) and isolated (WPI) forms, comparing it exclusively to isocaloric placebos. Random effect meta-analyses were performed from the final and initial body composition values of 246 healthy athletes undergoing 64.5 ± 15.3 days of training in eight randomized clinical trials (RCT) collected systematically from five scientific databases. The weighted mean difference (WMD) was statistically significant for FM loss (WMD = -0.96, 95% CI = -1.37, -0.55, < 0.001) and, in the analysis of subgroups, this effect was maintained for the WPC (WMD = -0.63, 95% CI = -1.19, -0.06, = 0.030), with protein content between 51% and 80% (WMD = -1.53; 95% CI = -2.13, -0.93, < 0.001), and only for regular physical activity practitioners (WMD = -0.95; 95% CI = -1.70, -0.19, = 0.014). There was no significant effect on FFM in any of the scenarios investigated ( > 0.05). Due to several and important limitations, more detailed analyses are required regarding FFM gain.
Topics: Athletes; Body Composition; Dietary Supplements; Humans; Whey Proteins
PubMed: 31480653
DOI: 10.3390/nu11092047 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jul 2019When sufficient maternal breast milk is not available, alternative forms of enteral nutrition for preterm or low birth weight (LBW) infants are donor breast milk or...
BACKGROUND
When sufficient maternal breast milk is not available, alternative forms of enteral nutrition for preterm or low birth weight (LBW) infants are donor breast milk or artificial formula. Donor breast milk may retain some of the non-nutritive benefits of maternal breast milk for preterm or LBW infants. However, feeding with artificial formula may ensure more consistent delivery of greater amounts of nutrients. Uncertainty exists about the balance of risks and benefits of feeding formula versus donor breast milk for preterm or LBW infants.
OBJECTIVES
To determine the effect of feeding with formula compared with donor breast milk on growth and development in preterm or low birth weight (LBW) infants.
SEARCH METHODS
We used the Cochrane Neonatal search strategy, including electronic searches of the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2019, Issue 5), Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (3 May 2019), as well as conference proceedings, previous reviews, and clinical trials.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing feeding with formula versus donor breast milk in preterm or LBW infants.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors assessed trial eligibility and risk of bias and extracted data independently. We analysed treatment effects as described in the individual trials and reported risk ratios (RRs) and risk differences (RDs) for dichotomous data, and mean differences (MDs) for continuous data, with respective 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We used a fixed-effect model in meta-analyses and explored potential causes of heterogeneity in subgroup analyses. We assessed the certainty of evidence for the main comparison at the outcome level using GRADE methods.
MAIN RESULTS
Twelve trials with a total of 1879 infants fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Four trials compared standard term formula versus donor breast milk and eight compared nutrient-enriched preterm formula versus donor breast milk. Only the five most recent trials used nutrient-fortified donor breast milk. The trials contain various weaknesses in methodological quality, specifically concerns about allocation concealment in four trials and lack of blinding in most of the trials. Most of the included trials were funded by companies that made the study formula.Formula-fed infants had higher in-hospital rates of weight gain (mean difference (MD) 2.51, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.93 to 3.08 g/kg/day), linear growth (MD 1.21, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.65 mm/week) and head growth (MD 0.85, 95% CI 0.47 to 1.23 mm/week). These meta-analyses contained high levels of heterogeneity. We did not find evidence of an effect on long-term growth or neurodevelopment. Formula feeding increased the risk of necrotising enterocolitis (typical risk ratio (RR) 1.87, 95% CI 1.23 to 2.85; risk difference (RD) 0.03, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.05; number needed to treat for an additional harmful outcome (NNTH) 33, 95% CI 20 to 100; 9 studies, 1675 infants).The GRADE certainty of evidence was moderate for rates of weight gain, linear growth, and head growth (downgraded for high levels of heterogeneity) and was moderate for neurodevelopmental disability, all-cause mortality, and necrotising enterocolitis (downgraded for imprecision).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
In preterm and LBW infants, moderate-certainty evidence indicates that feeding with formula compared with donor breast milk, either as a supplement to maternal expressed breast milk or as a sole diet, results in higher rates of weight gain, linear growth, and head growth and a higher risk of developing necrotising enterocolitis. The trial data do not show an effect on all-cause mortality, or on long-term growth or neurodevelopment.
Topics: Humans; Infant; Infant Formula; Infant Nutritional Physiological Phenomena; Infant, Low Birth Weight; Infant, Newborn; Infant, Premature; Milk, Human; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Weight Gain
PubMed: 31322731
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD002971.pub5 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... May 2020Many women express concern about their ability to produce enough milk, and insufficient milk is frequently cited as the reason for supplementation and early termination... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Many women express concern about their ability to produce enough milk, and insufficient milk is frequently cited as the reason for supplementation and early termination of breastfeeding. When addressing this concern, it is important first to consider the influence of maternal and neonatal health, infant suck, proper latch, and feeding frequency on milk production, and that steps be taken to correct or compensate for any contributing issues. Oral galactagogues are substances that stimulate milk production. They may be pharmacological or non-pharmacological (natural). Natural galactagogues are usually botanical or other food agents. The choice between pharmacological or natural galactagogues is often influenced by familiarity and local customs. Evidence for the possible benefits and harms of galactagogues is important for making an informed decision on their use.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effect of oral galactagogues for increasing milk production in non-hospitalised breastfeeding mother-term infant pairs.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register, ClinicalTrials.gov, the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP), Health Research and Development Network - Phillippines (HERDIN), Natural Products Alert (Napralert), the personal reference collection of author LM, and reference lists of retrieved studies (4 November 2019).
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs (including published abstracts) comparing oral galactagogues with placebo, no treatment, or another oral galactagogue in mothers breastfeeding healthy term infants. We also included cluster-randomised trials but excluded cross-over trials.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth methods for data collection and analysis. Two to four review authors independently selected the studies, assessed the risk of bias, extracted data for analysis and checked accuracy. Where necessary, we contacted the study authors for clarification.
MAIN RESULTS
Forty-one RCTs involving 3005 mothers and 3006 infants from at least 17 countries met the inclusion criteria. Studies were conducted either in hospitals immediately postpartum or in the community. There was considerable variation in mothers, particularly in parity and whether or not they had lactation insufficiency. Infants' ages at commencement of the studies ranged from newborn to 6 months. The overall certainty of evidence was low to very low because of high risk of biases (mainly due to lack of blinding), substantial clinical and statistical heterogeneity, and imprecision of measurements. Pharmacological galactagogues Nine studies compared a pharmacological galactagogue (domperidone, metoclopramide, sulpiride, thyrotropin-releasing hormone) with placebo or no treatment. The primary outcome of proportion of mothers who continued breastfeeding at 3, 4 and 6 months was not reported. Only one study (metoclopramide) reported on the outcome of infant weight, finding little or no difference (mean difference (MD) 23.0 grams, 95% confidence interval (CI) -47.71 to 93.71; 1 study, 20 participants; low-certainty evidence). Three studies (metoclopramide, domperidone, sulpiride) reported on milk volume, finding pharmacological galactagogues may increase milk volume (MD 63.82 mL, 95% CI 25.91 to 101.72; I² = 34%; 3 studies, 151 participants; low-certainty evidence). Subgroup analysis indicates there may be increased milk volume with each drug, but with varying CIs. There was limited reporting of adverse effects, none of which could be meta-analysed. Where reported, they were limited to minor complaints, such as tiredness, nausea, headache and dry mouth (very low-certainty evidence). No adverse effects were reported for infants. Natural galactagogues Twenty-seven studies compared natural oral galactagogues (banana flower, fennel, fenugreek, ginger, ixbut, levant cotton, moringa, palm dates, pork knuckle, shatavari, silymarin, torbangun leaves or other natural mixtures) with placebo or no treatment. One study (Mother's Milk Tea) reported breastfeeding rates at six months with a concluding statement of "no significant difference" (no data and no measure of significance provided, 60 participants, very low-certainty evidence). Three studies (fennel, fenugreek, moringa, mixed botanical tea) reported infant weight but could not be meta-analysed due to substantial clinical and statistical heterogeneity (I = 60%, 275 participants, very low-certainty evidence). Subgroup analysis shows we are very uncertain whether fennel or fenugreek improves infant weight, whereas moringa and mixed botanical tea may increase infant weight compared to placebo. Thirteen studies (Bu Xue Sheng Ru, Chanbao, Cui Ru, banana flower, fenugreek, ginger, moringa, fenugreek, ginger and turmeric mix, ixbut, mixed botanical tea, Sheng Ru He Ji, silymarin, Xian Tong Ru, palm dates; 962 participants) reported on milk volume, but meta-analysis was not possible due to substantial heterogeneity (I = 99%). The subgroup analysis for each intervention suggested either benefit or little or no difference (very low-certainty evidence). There was limited reporting of adverse effects, none of which could be meta-analysed. Where reported, they were limited to minor complaints such as mothers with urine that smelled like maple syrup and urticaria in infants (very low-certainty evidence). Galactagogue versus galactagogue Eight studies (Chanbao; Bue Xue Sheng Ru, domperidone, moringa, fenugreek, palm dates, torbangun, moloco, Mu Er Wu You, Kun Yuan Tong Ru) compared one oral galactagogue with another. We were unable to perform meta-analysis because there was only one small study for each match-up, so we do not know if one galactagogue is better than another for any outcome.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Due to extremely limited, very low certainty evidence, we do not know whether galactagogues have any effect on proportion of mothers who continued breastfeeding at 3, 4 and 6 months. There is low-certainty evidence that pharmacological galactagogues may increase milk volume. There is some evidence from subgroup analyses that natural galactagogues may benefit infant weight and milk volume in mothers with healthy, term infants, but due to substantial heterogeneity of the studies, imprecision of measurements and incomplete reporting, we are very uncertain about the magnitude of the effect. We are also uncertain if one galactagogue performs better than another. With limited data on adverse effects, we are uncertain if there are any concerning adverse effects with any particular galactagogue; those reported were minor complaints. High-quality RCTs on the efficacy and safety of galactagogues are urgently needed. A set of core outcomes to standardise infant weight and milk volume measurement is also needed, as well as a strong basis for the dose and dosage form used.
Topics: Administration, Oral; Body Weight; Breast Feeding; Domperidone; Female; Galactogogues; Humans; Infant; Infant, Newborn; Lactation; Metoclopramide; Milk, Human; Mothers; Phytotherapy; Plant Extracts; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Sulpiride; Thyrotropin-Releasing Hormone
PubMed: 32421208
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011505.pub2 -
Nutrients Aug 2023To determine the effectiveness of whey protein (WP) supplementation during resistance exercise training (RET) vs. RET with or without placebo supplementation on skeletal... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Effectiveness of Whey Protein Supplementation during Resistance Exercise Training on Skeletal Muscle Mass and Strength in Older People with Sarcopenia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
OBJECTIVE
To determine the effectiveness of whey protein (WP) supplementation during resistance exercise training (RET) vs. RET with or without placebo supplementation on skeletal muscle mass, strength, and physical performance in older people with Sarcopenia.
METHODS
Electronic searches in the PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, LILACS, SPORTDiscus, Epistemonikos, and CINAHL databases were performed until 20 January 2023. Randomized clinical trials conducted on sarcopenic adults aged 60 or older were included. The studies had to compare the effectiveness of the addition of supplements based on concentrated, isolated, or hydrolyzed whey protein during RET and compare it with RET with or without placebo supplementation on skeletal muscle mass and strength changes. The study selection process, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment were carried out by two independent reviewers.
RESULTS
Seven randomized clinical trials (591 participants) were included, and five of them provided data for quantitative synthesis. The overall pooled standardized mean difference (SMD) estimate showed a small effect size in favor of RET plus WP for skeletal muscle mass according to appendicular muscle index, with statistically significant differences compared with RET with or without the placebo group (SMD = 0.24; 95% CI, 0.05 to 0.42; = 0.01; = 0%, = 0.42). The overall pooled mean difference (MD) estimate showed a significant difference of +2.31 kg (MD = 2.31 kg; 95% CI, 0.01 to 4.6; = 0.05; = 81%, < 0.001) in handgrip strength in the RET plus WP group compared with the RET group with or without placebo. The narrative synthesis revealed discordance between the results of the studies on physical performance.
CONCLUSIONS
WP supplementation during RET is more effective in increasing handgrip strength and skeletal muscle mass in older people with Sarcopenia compared with RET with or without placebo supplementation. However, the effect sizes were small, and the MD did not exceed the minimally important clinical difference. The quality of the evidence was low to very low according, to the GRADE approach. Further research is needed in this field.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Aged; Sarcopenia; Whey Proteins; Muscle Strength; Muscle, Skeletal; Hand Strength; Resistance Training; Dietary Supplements
PubMed: 37571361
DOI: 10.3390/nu15153424