-
BMJ (Clinical Research Ed.) May 2022To investigate the association between gestational diabetes mellitus and adverse outcomes of pregnancy after adjustment for at least minimal confounding factors. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
To investigate the association between gestational diabetes mellitus and adverse outcomes of pregnancy after adjustment for at least minimal confounding factors.
DESIGN
Systematic review and meta-analysis.
DATA SOURCES
Web of Science, PubMed, Medline, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, from 1 January 1990 to 1 November 2021.
REVIEW METHODS
Cohort studies and control arms of trials reporting complications of pregnancy in women with gestational diabetes mellitus were eligible for inclusion. Based on the use of insulin, studies were divided into three subgroups: no insulin use (patients never used insulin during the course of the disease), insulin use (different proportions of patients were treated with insulin), and insulin use not reported. Subgroup analyses were performed based on the status of the country (developed or developing), quality of the study, diagnostic criteria, and screening method. Meta-regression models were applied based on the proportion of patients who had received insulin.
RESULTS
156 studies with 7 506 061 pregnancies were included, and 50 (32.1%) showed a low or medium risk of bias. In studies with no insulin use, when adjusted for confounders, women with gestational diabetes mellitus had increased odds of caesarean section (odds ratio 1.16, 95% confidence interval 1.03 to 1.32), preterm delivery (1.51, 1.26 to 1.80), low one minute Apgar score (1.43, 1.01 to 2.03), macrosomia (1.70, 1.23 to 2.36), and infant born large for gestational age (1.57, 1.25 to 1.97). In studies with insulin use, when adjusted for confounders, the odds of having an infant large for gestational age (odds ratio 1.61, 1.09 to 2.37), or with respiratory distress syndrome (1.57, 1.19 to 2.08) or neonatal jaundice (1.28, 1.02 to 1.62), or requiring admission to the neonatal intensive care unit (2.29, 1.59 to 3.31), were higher in women with gestational diabetes mellitus than in those without diabetes. No clear evidence was found for differences in the odds of instrumental delivery, shoulder dystocia, postpartum haemorrhage, stillbirth, neonatal death, low five minute Apgar score, low birth weight, and small for gestational age between women with and without gestational diabetes mellitus after adjusting for confounders. Country status, adjustment for body mass index, and screening methods significantly contributed to heterogeneity between studies for several adverse outcomes of pregnancy.
CONCLUSIONS
When adjusted for confounders, gestational diabetes mellitus was significantly associated with pregnancy complications. The findings contribute to a more comprehensive understanding of the adverse outcomes of pregnancy related to gestational diabetes mellitus. Future primary studies should routinely consider adjusting for a more complete set of prognostic factors.
REVIEW REGISTRATION
PROSPERO CRD42021265837.
Topics: Cesarean Section; Diabetes, Gestational; Female; Fetal Macrosomia; Humans; Infant, Newborn; Insulin; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Complications; Pregnancy Outcome
PubMed: 35613728
DOI: 10.1136/bmj-2021-067946 -
Reproductive Biology and Endocrinology... Jan 2023Metformin is the gold standard insulin sensitizer, which is widely used to treat insulin resistance in polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS). However, metformin may induce... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Metformin is the gold standard insulin sensitizer, which is widely used to treat insulin resistance in polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS). However, metformin may induce gastrointestinal side effects.
OBJECTIVE
Inositols have long been debated as a potential alternative for metformin in treating PCOS. Therefore, the present systematic review aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of inositols in treating PCOS.
METHODS
The present systematic search was performed in CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and Embase from the inception until October 20th, 2021. Eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs) included women diagnosed with PCOS and compared any inositols with metformin or placebo. Our primary outcome was cycle normalization, whereas secondary outcomes were body mass index (BMI), parameters of carbohydrate metabolism and clinical and laboratory hyperandrogenism. Results are reported as risk ratios or mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).
RESULTS
Twenty-six RCTs were identified, including data of 1691 patients (806 inositol, 311 with placebo, and 509 metformin groups). In patients treated with inositols, the risk (CI: 1.13; 2.85) of having a regular menstrual cycle was found by 1.79 higher than in the case of placebo. Moreover, the inositols showed non-inferiority compared to metformin in this outcome. In the case of BMI (MD = -0.45; CI: -0.89; -0.02), free testosterone (MD = -0,41, CI: -0.69; -0.13), total testosterone (MD = -20.39, CI: -40.12; -0.66), androstenedione (MD = -0.69, CI: -1,16; -0.22), glucose (MD = -3.14; CI: -5.75; -0.54) levels and AUC insulin (MD = -2081.05, CI: -2745.32; -1416.78) inositol treatment induced greater decrease compared to placebo. Inositol increased sex-hormone-binding globulin significantly compared to placebo (MD = 32.06, CI:1.27; 62.85).
CONCLUSION
Inositol is an effective and safe treatment in PCOS. Moreover, inositols showed non-inferiority in most outcomes compared to the gold standard treatment; metformin.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
PROSPERO registration number: CRD42021283275.
Topics: Female; Humans; Polycystic Ovary Syndrome; Inositol; Hypoglycemic Agents; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Metformin; Testosterone; Insulins
PubMed: 36703143
DOI: 10.1186/s12958-023-01055-z -
BMC Complementary Medicine and Therapies Jun 2021Elevated lipid profiles and impaired glucose homeostasis are risk factors for several cardiovascular diseases (CVDs), which, subsequently, represent a leading cause of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Elevated lipid profiles and impaired glucose homeostasis are risk factors for several cardiovascular diseases (CVDs), which, subsequently, represent a leading cause of early mortality, worldwide. The aim of the current study was to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of the effect of apple cider vinegar (ACV) on lipid profiles and glycemic parameters in adults.
METHODS
A systematic search was conducted in electronic databases, including Medline, Scopus, Cochrane Library, and Web of Knowledge, from database inception to January 2020. All clinical trials which investigated the effect of ACV on lipid profiles and glycemic indicators were included. Studies were excluded if ACV was used in combination with other interventions or when the duration of intervention was < 2 weeks. To account for between-study heterogeneity, we performed meta-analysis using a random-effects model.
RESULTS
Overall, nine studies, including 10 study arms, were included in this meta-analysis. We found that ACV consumption significantly decreased serum total cholesterol (- 6.06 mg/dL; 95% CI: - 10.95, - 1.17; I: 39%), fasting plasma glucose (- 7.97 mg/dL; 95% CI: - 13.74, - 2.21; I: 75%), and HbA1C concentrations (- 0.50; 95% CI: - 0.90, - 0.09; I: 91%). No significant effect of ACV consumption was found on serum LDL-C, HDL-C, fasting insulin concentrations, or HOMA-IR. The stratified analysis revealed a significant reduction of serum TC and TG in a subgroup of patients with type 2 diabetes, those who took ≤15 mL/day of ACV, and those who consumed ACV for > 8-weeks, respectively. Furthermore, ACV consumption significantly decreased FPG levels in a subgroup of studies that administered ACV for > 8-weeks. Further, ACV intake appeared to elicit an increase in FPG and HDL-C concentrations in apparently healthy participants.
CONCLUSION
We found a significant favorable effect of ACV consumption on FPG and blood lipid levels.
Topics: Acetic Acid; Blood Glucose; Cholesterol; Cholesterol, HDL; Cholesterol, LDL; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Glycated Hemoglobin; Humans; Insulin; Malus; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 34187442
DOI: 10.1186/s12906-021-03351-w -
Diabetologia Aug 2022Tirzepatide is a novel dual glucose-dependent insulinotropic peptide (GIP) and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1 RA) currently under review for marketing... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
AIMS/HYPOTHESIS
Tirzepatide is a novel dual glucose-dependent insulinotropic peptide (GIP) and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1 RA) currently under review for marketing approval. Individual trials have assessed the clinical profile of tirzepatide vs different comparators. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the efficacy and safety of tirzepatide for type 2 diabetes.
METHODS
We searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane and ClinicalTrials.gov up until 27 October 2021 for randomised controlled trials with a duration of at least 12 weeks that compared once-weekly tirzepatide 5, 10 or 15 mg with placebo or other glucose-lowering drugs in adults with type 2 diabetes irrespective of their background glucose-lowering treatment. The primary outcome was change in HbA from baseline. Secondary efficacy outcomes included change in body weight, proportion of individuals reaching the HbA target of <53 mmol/mol (<7.0%), ≤48 mmol/mol (≤6.5%) or <39 mmol/mol (<5.7%), and proportion of individuals with body weight loss of at least 5%, 10% or 15%. Safety outcomes included hypoglycaemia, gastrointestinal adverse events, treatment discontinuation due to adverse events, serious adverse events, and mortality. We used version 2 of the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomised trials to assess risk of bias for the primary outcome.
RESULTS
Seven trials (6609 participants) were included. A dose-dependent superiority in lowering HbA was evident with all three tirzepatide doses vs all comparators, with mean differences ranging from -17.71 mmol/mol (-1.62%) to -22.35 mmol/mol (-2.06%) vs placebo, -3.22 mmol/mol (-0.29%) to -10.06 mmol/mol (-0.92%) vs GLP-1 RAs, and -7.66 mmol/mol (-0.70%) to -12.02 mmol/mol (-1.09%) vs basal insulin regimens. Tirzepatide was more efficacious in reducing body weight; reductions vs GLP-1 RAs ranged from 1.68 kg with tirzepatide 5 mg to 7.16 kg with tirzepatide 15 mg. Incidence of hypoglycaemia with tirzepatide was similar vs placebo and lower vs basal insulin. Nausea was more frequent with tirzepatide vs placebo, especially with tirzepatide 15 mg (OR 5.60 [95% CI 3.12, 10.06]), associated with higher incidence of vomiting (OR 5.50 [95% CI 2.40, 12.59]) and diarrhoea (OR 3.31 [95% CI 1.40, 7.85]). Odds of gastrointestinal events were similar between tirzepatide and GLP-1 RAs, except for diarrhoea with tirzepatide 10 mg (OR 1.51 [95% CI 1.07, 2.15]). Tirzepatide 15 mg led to higher discontinuation rate of study medication due to adverse events regardless of comparator, while all tirzepatide doses were safe in terms of serious adverse events and mortality.
CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION
A dose-dependent superiority on glycaemic efficacy and body weight reduction was evident with tirzepatide vs placebo, GLP-1 RAs and basal insulin. Tirzepatide did not increase the odds of hypoglycaemia but was associated with increased incidence of gastrointestinal adverse events. Study limitations include presence of statistical heterogeneity in the meta-analyses for change in HbA and body weight, assessment of risk of bias solely for the primary outcome, and generalisation of findings mainly to individuals who are overweight or obese and already on metformin-based background therapy. PROSPERO registration no. CRD42021283449.
Topics: Blood Glucose; Body Weight; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Diarrhea; Gastric Inhibitory Polypeptide; Glucagon-Like Peptide 1; Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 Receptor; Glycated Hemoglobin; Humans; Hypoglycemia; Hypoglycemic Agents; Insulins; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 35579691
DOI: 10.1007/s00125-022-05715-4 -
Nutrients Feb 2023There has been an emerging concern that non-nutritive sweeteners (NNS) can increase the risk of cardiometabolic disease. Much of the attention has focused on acute... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
There has been an emerging concern that non-nutritive sweeteners (NNS) can increase the risk of cardiometabolic disease. Much of the attention has focused on acute metabolic and endocrine responses to NNS. To examine whether these mechanisms are operational under real-world scenarios, we conducted a systematic review and network meta-analysis of acute trials comparing the effects of non-nutritive sweetened beverages (NNS beverages) with water and sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs) in humans. MEDLINE, EMBASE, and The Cochrane Library were searched through to January 15, 2022. We included acute, single-exposure, randomized, and non-randomized, clinical trials in humans, regardless of health status. Three patterns of intake were examined: (1) uncoupling interventions, where NNS beverages were consumed alone without added energy or nutrients; (2) coupling interventions, where NNS beverages were consumed together with added energy and nutrients as carbohydrates; and (3) delayed coupling interventions, where NNS beverages were consumed as a preload prior to added energy and nutrients as carbohydrates. The primary outcome was a 2 h incremental area under the curve (iAUC) for blood glucose concentration. Secondary outcomes included 2 h iAUC for insulin, glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP-1), gastric inhibitory polypeptide (GIP), peptide YY (PYY), ghrelin, leptin, and glucagon concentrations. Network meta-analysis and confidence in the network meta-analysis (CINeMA) were conducted in R-studio and CINeMA, respectively. Thirty-six trials involving 472 predominantly healthy participants were included. Trials examined a variety of single NNS (acesulfame potassium, aspartame, cyclamate, saccharin, stevia, and sucralose) and NNS blends (acesulfame potassium + aspartame, acesulfame potassium + sucralose, acesulfame potassium + aspartame + cyclamate, and acesulfame potassium + aspartame + sucralose), along with matched water/unsweetened controls and SSBs sweetened with various caloric sugars (glucose, sucrose, and fructose). In uncoupling interventions, NNS beverages (single or blends) had no effect on postprandial glucose, insulin, GLP-1, GIP, PYY, ghrelin, and glucagon responses similar to water controls (generally, low to moderate confidence), whereas SSBs sweetened with caloric sugars (glucose and sucrose) increased postprandial glucose, insulin, GLP-1, and GIP responses with no differences in postprandial ghrelin and glucagon responses (generally, low to moderate confidence). In coupling and delayed coupling interventions, NNS beverages had no postprandial glucose and endocrine effects similar to controls (generally, low to moderate confidence). The available evidence suggests that NNS beverages sweetened with single or blends of NNS have no acute metabolic and endocrine effects, similar to water. These findings provide support for NNS beverages as an alternative replacement strategy for SSBs in the acute postprandial setting.
Topics: Humans; Sugar-Sweetened Beverages; Aspartame; Ghrelin; Glucagon; Cyclamates; Network Meta-Analysis; Blood Glucose; Glucose; Non-Nutritive Sweeteners; Beverages; Sucrose; Insulin; Sugars; Glucagon-Like Peptide 1; Water
PubMed: 36839408
DOI: 10.3390/nu15041050 -
BMJ (Clinical Research Ed.) Jan 2015To summarize short term outcomes in randomized controlled trials comparing glibenclamide or metformin versus insulin or versus each other in women with gestational... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
To summarize short term outcomes in randomized controlled trials comparing glibenclamide or metformin versus insulin or versus each other in women with gestational diabetes requiring drug treatment.
DESIGN
Systematic review and meta-analysis.
ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES
Randomized controlled trials that fulfilled all the following: (1) published as full text; (2) addressed women with gestational diabetes requiring drug treatment; (3) compared glibenclamide v insulin, metformin v insulin, or metformin v glibenclamide; and (4) provided information on maternal or fetal outcomes.
DATA SOURCES
Medline, CENTRAL, and Embase were searched up to 20 May 2014.
OUTCOMES MEASURES
We considered 14 primary outcomes (6 maternal, 8 fetal) and 16 secondary (5 maternal, 11 fetal) outcomes.
RESULTS
We analyzed 15 articles, including 2509 subjects. Significant differences for primary outcomes in glibenclamide v insulin were obtained in birth weight (mean difference 109 g (95% confidence interval 35.9 to 181)), macrosomia (risk ratio 2.62 (1.35 to 5.08)), and neonatal hypoglycaemia (risk ratio 2.04 (1.30 to 3.20)). In metformin v insulin, significance was reached for maternal weight gain (mean difference -1.14 kg (-2.22 to -0.06)), gestational age at delivery (mean difference -0.16 weeks (-0.30 to -0.02)), and preterm birth (risk ratio 1.50 (1.04 to 2.16)), with a trend for neonatal hypoglycaemia (risk ratio 0.78 (0.60 to 1.01)). In metformin v glibenclamide, significance was reached for maternal weight gain (mean difference -2.06 kg (-3.98 to -0.14)), birth weight (mean difference -209 g (-314 to -104)), macrosomia (risk ratio 0.33 (0.13 to 0.81)), and large for gestational age newborn (risk ratio 0.44 (0.21 to 0.92)). Four secondary outcomes were better for metformin in metformin v insulin, and one was worse for metformin in metformin v glibenclamide. Treatment failure was higher with metformin than with glibenclamide.
CONCLUSIONS
At short term, in women with gestational diabetes requiring drug treatment, glibenclamide is clearly inferior to both insulin and metformin, while metformin (plus insulin when required) performs slightly better than insulin. According to these results, glibenclamide should not be used for the treatment of women with gestational diabetes if insulin or metformin is available.Systematic review registration NCT01998113.
Topics: Adult; Birth Weight; Diabetes, Gestational; Female; Fetal Macrosomia; Glyburide; Humans; Hypoglycemia; Hypoglycemic Agents; Infant, Newborn; Insulin; Metformin; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Outcome; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Regression Analysis
PubMed: 25609400
DOI: 10.1136/bmj.h102 -
Sports Medicine (Auckland, N.Z.) Jun 2022Ageing is accompanied by decreases in physical capacity and physiological regulatory mechanisms including altered hormonal regulation compared with age-matched sedentary...
BACKGROUND
Ageing is accompanied by decreases in physical capacity and physiological regulatory mechanisms including altered hormonal regulation compared with age-matched sedentary people. The potential benefits of exercise in restoring such altered hormone production and secretion compared to age-matched physically inactive individuals who are ageing remains unclear.
OBJECTIVES
The aim of this systematic review was to summarise the findings of exercise training in modulating levels of ostensibly anabolic and catabolic hormones in adults aged > 40 years.
METHODS
We searched the following electronic databases (to July 2021) without a period limit: Cochrane Library, PubMed, Science Direct, Scopus, SPORTDiscus and Web of Science. Additionally, a manual search for published studies in Google Scholar was conducted for analysis of the 'grey literature' (information produced outside of traditional commercial or academic publishing and distribution channels). The initial search used the terms 'ageing' OR 'advanced age' OR 'old people' OR 'older' OR elderly' AND 'anabolic hormones' OR 'catabolic hormones' OR 'steroid hormones' OR 'sex hormones' OR 'testosterone' OR 'cortisol' OR 'insulin' OR 'insulin-like growth factor-1' OR 'IGF-1' OR 'sex hormone-binding globulin' OR 'SHBG' OR 'growth hormone' OR 'hGH' OR 'dehydroepiandrosterone' OR 'DHEA' OR 'dehydroepiandrosterone sulfate (DHEA-S)' AND 'exercise training' OR 'endurance training' OR 'resistance training' OR ' strength training' OR 'weight-lifting' OR 'high-intensity interval training' OR 'high-intensity interval exercise' OR 'high-intensity intermittent training' OR 'high-intensity intermittent exercise' OR 'interval aerobic training' OR 'interval aerobic exercise' OR 'intermittent aerobic training' OR 'intermittent aerobic exercise' OR 'high-intensity training' OR 'high-intensity exercise' OR 'sprint interval training' OR 'sprint interval exercise' OR 'combined exercise training' OR 'anaerobic training'. Only eligible full texts in English or French were considered for analysis.
RESULTS
Our search identified 484 records, which led to 33 studies for inclusion in the analysis. Different exercise training programs were used with nine studies using endurance training programs, ten studies examining the effects of high-intensity interval training, and 14 studies investigating the effects of resistance training. Most training programs lasted ≥ 2 weeks. Studies, regardless of the design, duration or intensity of exercise training, reported increases in testosterone, sex hormone-binding globulin (SHBG), insulin-like growth factor-1 (IGF-1), human growth hormone (hGH) or dehydroepiandrosterone (DHEA) (effect size: 0.19 < d < 3.37, small to very large) in both older males and females. However, there was no consensus on the effects of exercise on changes in cortisol and insulin in older adults.
CONCLUSION
In conclusion, findings from this systematic review suggest that exercise training increases basal levels of testosterone, IGF-1, SHBG, hGH and DHEA in both male and females over 40 years of age. The increases in blood levels of these hormones were independent of the mode, duration and intensity of the training programs. However, the effects of long-term exercise training on cortisol and insulin levels in elderly people are less clear.
Topics: Adult; Aged; Aging; Dehydroepiandrosterone; Exercise; Female; Hormones; Humans; Hydrocortisone; Insulin-Like Growth Factor I; Insulins; Male; Middle Aged; Sex Hormone-Binding Globulin; Testosterone
PubMed: 34936049
DOI: 10.1007/s40279-021-01612-9 -
International Journal of Molecular... Nov 2022The prevalence of type 1 diabetes (T1D) is rising steadily. A potential contributor to the rise is vitamin D. In this systematic review, we examined the literature... (Review)
Review
The prevalence of type 1 diabetes (T1D) is rising steadily. A potential contributor to the rise is vitamin D. In this systematic review, we examined the literature around vitamin D and T1D. We identified 22 papers examining the role of vitamin D in cultured β-cell lines, islets, or perfused pancreas, and 28 papers examining vitamin D in humans or human islets. The literature reports strong associations between T1D and low circulating vitamin D. There is also high-level (systematic reviews, meta-analyses) evidence that adequate vitamin D status in early life reduces T1D risk. Several animal studies, particularly in NOD mice, show harm from D-deficiency and benefit in most studies from vitamin D treatment/supplementation. Short-term streptozotocin studies show a β-cell survival effect with supplementation. Human studies report associations between VDR polymorphisms and T1D risk and β-cell function, as assessed by C-peptide. In view of those outcomes, the variable results in human trials are generally disappointing. Most studies using 1,25D, the active form of vitamin D were ineffective. Similarly, studies using other forms of vitamin D were predominantly ineffective. However, it is interesting to note that all but one of the studies testing 25D reported benefit. Together, this suggests that maintenance of optimal circulating 25D levels may reduce the risk of T1D and that it may have potential for benefits in delaying the development of absolute or near-absolute C-peptide deficiency. Given the near-complete loss of β-cells by the time of clinical diagnosis, vitamin D is much less likely to be useful after disease-onset. However, given the very low toxicity of 25D, and the known benefits of preservation of C-peptide positivity for long-term complications risk, we recommend considering daily cholecalciferol supplementation in people with T1D and people at high risk of T1D, especially if they have vitamin D insufficiency.
Topics: Mice; Animals; Humans; Vitamin D; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1; C-Peptide; Mice, Inbred NOD; Vitamins
PubMed: 36430915
DOI: 10.3390/ijms232214434 -
Brazilian Journal of Physical Therapy 2017Physical exercise has been used to mitigate the metabolic effects of diabetes mellitus. (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Physical exercise has been used to mitigate the metabolic effects of diabetes mellitus.
OBJECTIVE
To evaluate the effect of resistance exercise when compared to aerobic exercise without insulin therapy on metabolic and clinical outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.
METHODS
Papers were searched on the databases MEDLINE/PubMed, CINAHL, SPORTDiscus, LILACS, and SCIELO, without language or date of publication limits. Clinical trials that compared resistance exercise to aerobic exercise in adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus who did not use insulin therapy were included. The quality of evidence and risk of bias were assessed using the GRADE system and the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool, respectively. Meta-analysis was also used, whenever possible. Two reviewers extracted the data independently. Eight eligible articles were included in this study, with a total of 336 individuals, with a mean age of 48-58 years. The protocols of aerobic and resistance exercise varied in duration from eight to 22 weeks, 30-60min/day, three to five times/week.
RESULTS
Overall the available evidence came from a very low quality of evidence and there was an increase in Maximal oxygen consumption (mean difference: -2.86; 95% CI: -3.90 to -1.81; random effect) for the resistance exercise and no difference was found in Glycated hemoglobin, Body mass index, High-density lipoprotein cholesterol, Low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, triglycerides, and total cholesterol.
CONCLUSIONS
Resistance exercise appears to be more effective in promoting an increase in Maximal oxygen consumption in protocols longer than 12 weeks and there is no difference in the control of glycemic and lipid levels between the two types of exercise.
Topics: Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Exercise; Exercise Therapy; Humans; Insulin; Oxygen Consumption; Resistance Training
PubMed: 28728958
DOI: 10.1016/j.bjpt.2017.06.004 -
The American Journal of Clinical... Oct 2019Low-glycemic index (GI) diets are thought to reduce postprandial glycemia, resulting in more stable blood glucose concentrations. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Low-glycemic index (GI) diets are thought to reduce postprandial glycemia, resulting in more stable blood glucose concentrations.
OBJECTIVE
We hypothesized that low-GI diets would be superior to other diet types in lowering measures of blood glucose control in people with type 1 or type 2 diabetes, or impaired glucose tolerance.
METHODS
We searched PubMed, the Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and clinical trials registries for published and unpublished studies up until 1 March, 2019. We included 54 randomized controlled trials in adults or children with impaired glucose tolerance, type 1 diabetes, or type 2 diabetes. Continuous data were synthesized using a random effects, inverse variance model, and presented as standardized mean differences with 95% CIs.
RESULTS
Low-GI diets were effective at reducing glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c), fasting glucose, BMI, total cholesterol, and LDL, but had no effect on fasting insulin, HOMA-IR, HDL, triglycerides, or insulin requirements. The reduction in fasting glucose and HbA1c was inversely correlated with body weight. The greatest reduction in fasting blood glucose was seen in the studies of the longest duration.
CONCLUSIONS
Low-GI diets may be useful for glycemic control and may reduce body weight in people with prediabetes or diabetes.
Topics: Blood Glucose; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Diet; Glycemic Index; Humans; Insulin
PubMed: 31374573
DOI: 10.1093/ajcn/nqz149