METHODS: A randomized controlled trial was carried out in a university hospital in Malaysia. Women with lifestyle-controlled gestational diabetes scheduled to receive clinically indicated antenatal corticosteroids (dexamethasone) were randomized to 12-mg 12 hourly for one day (2 × 12-mg) or 6-mg 12-hourly for two days (4 × 6-mg). 6-point (pre and 2-h postprandial) daily self-monitoring of capillary blood sugar profile for up to 3 consecutive days was started after the first dexamethasone injection. Hyperglycemia is defined as blood glucose pre-meal ≥ 5.3 or 2 h postprandial ≥ 6.7 mmol/L. The primary outcome was a number of hyperglycemic episodes in Day-1 (first 6 BSP points). A sample size of 30 per group (N = 60) was planned.
RESULTS: Median [interquartile range] hyperglycemic episodes 4 [2.5-5] vs. 4 [3-5] p = 0.3 in the first day, 3 [2-4] vs. 1 [0-3] p = 0.01 on the second day, 0 [0-1] vs. 0 [0-1] p = 0.6 on the third day and over the entire 3 trial days 7 [6-9] vs. 6 [4-8] p = 0.17 for 6-mg vs. 12-mg arms, respectively. 2/30 (7%) in each arm received an anti-glycemic agent during the 3-day trial period (capillary glucose exceeded 11 mmol/L). Mean birth weight (2.89 vs. 2.49 kg p
AIM: To investigate the effects of food order on postprandial glucose (PPG) excursion, in Indian adults with normal (NL) and overweight/obese (OW) Body Mass Index.
METHODS: This randomised crossover study was conducted at a Malaysian university among Indian adults without diabetes. The participants consumed isocaloric test meals at three study visits based on randomised food orders: carbohydrate first/protein last (CF); protein first/carbohydrate last (CL); and a composite meal containing carbohydrate and protein (CM). Capillary blood glucose was measured at baseline, 30, 60, 90 and 120 minutes after starting the meal.
RESULTS: The CL food order had a blunting effect on PPG excursion at 30 and 60 minutes (p < 0.01). The CL food order resulted in lower glucose peak when compared with the CF and CM food order (p < 0.001). The CL food order resulted in lower incremental glucose peak (mmol/L) (NL: CF 3.9 ± 0.3, CM 3.0 ± 0.3, CL 2.0 ± 0.2; OW: CF 2.9 ± 0.3, CM 2.5 ± 0.3, CL 1.8 ± 0.2) and iAUC 0-120 min (mmol/Lxmin) (NL: CF 272.4 ± 26.7, CM 206.2 ± 30.3, CL 122.0 ± 14.8; OW: CF 193.2 ± 23.1, CM 160.1 ± 21.7, CL 113.6 ± 15.3) when compared with the CF food order (p < 0.001). The effect of food order on postprandial excursion did not differ between the NL (n = 14) and the OW (n = 17) groups.
CONCLUSION: In participants with normal and overweight/obese BMI, consuming food in the protein first/carbohydrate last order had the biggest effect in reducing PPG excursion.
METHODS: Twenty healthy subjects were enrolled in a randomized, 3-way, blinded cross-over trial. The study was registered under ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier no. NCT00123456. At each test day, the subjects received one of three meals comprising 30 g of starch with 5 g of LD or UP or an energy-adjusted control meal containing pea protein. Fasting and postprandial blood glucose, insulin, C-peptide and glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) concentrations were measured. Subjective appetite sensations were scored using visual analogue scales (VAS).
RESULTS: Linear mixed model (LMM) analysis showed a lower blood glucose, insulin and C-peptide response following the intake of LD and UP, after correction for body weight. Participants weighing ≤ 63 kg had a reduced glucose response compared to control meal between 40 and 90 min both following LD and UP meals. Furthermore, LMM analysis for C-peptide showed a significantly lower response after intake of LD. Compared to the control meal, GLP-1 response was higher after the LD meal, both before and after the body weight adjustment. The VAS scores showed a decreased appetite sensation after intake of the seaweeds. Ad-libitum food intake was not different three hours after the seaweed meals compared to control.
CONCLUSIONS: Concomitant ingestion of brown seaweeds may help improving postprandial glycaemic and appetite control in healthy and normal weight adults, depending on the dose per body weight.
CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRY NUMBER: Clinicaltrials.gov (ID# NCT02608372).
RESULTS: The GI of the calamansi drink tested was calculated as 37, a value within the range of low GI foods. Trial registration Clinical Trials identifier NCT04462016; Retrospectively registered on July 1, 2020.
AIMS: To compare the efficacy of Gaviscon Advance (Reckitt Benckiser, UK) and a non-alginate antacid in post-supper suppression of the acid pocket and post-prandial reflux among obese participants.
METHODS: Participants underwent 48 h wireless and probe-based pH-metry recording of the acid pocket and lower oesophagus, respectively, and were randomised to single post-supper (10 pm) dose of either Gaviscon Advance or a non-alginate antacid on the second night. Primary outcomes were suppression of median pH of acid pocket and lower oesophagus, measured every 10-minutes post-supper for 1 h. Secondary outcomes were suppression of % time pH
METHODS: Ten healthy volunteers were given four different doses of vitamin E formulations (268 mg α-T, 537 mg α-T, 263 mg TRF or 526 mg TRF) in a cross-over postprandial trial. Blood was sampled at 0, 2, 4, 5, 6 and 8 hours after meal consumption and plasma antioxidant status including total glutathione, superoxide dismutase, malondialdehyde (MDA), ferric reducing antioxidant potential and trolox-equivalent antioxidant capacity, was analyzed.
RESULTS: Supplementation with the different doses of either α-T or TRF did not significantly improve overall antioxidant status. There was no significant difference in overall antioxidant status among treatments at the different doses compared. However, a significant dose-response effect was observed for plasma MDA throughout the 8-hour postprandial period. MDA was significantly lower after the 537 mg α-T treatment, compared to the 268 mg α-T treatment; it was also lower after the 526 mg TRF treatment compared to the 263 mg TRF treatment (P
METHODS: Using a randomised double-blind crossover design, 21 (men = 6, women = 15) T2D subjects consumed test meals (3.65 MJ) consisting of a high fat muffin (containing 50 g test fats provided as PO, IPO or HOS) and a milkshake. Postprandial changes in gut hormones, glucose homeostasis, satiety, lipid and inflammatory parameters after meals were analysed. Some of the solid fractions of the IPO were removed and thus the fatty acid composition of the PO and IPO was not entirely equal (PO vs IPO: palmitate 39.8 vs 38.7; oleate 43.6 vs 45.1). PO, IPO and HOS contained 9.7, 38.9 and 0.2 g/100 g total fatty acids of palmitic acid at the sn-2 position, respectively. At 37 °C, IPO contained 4.2% SFC whereas PO and HOS were completely melted.
RESULTS: Our novel observation shows that the incremental area under curve (iAUC) 0-6 h of plasma GIP concentration was on average 16% lower following IPO meal compared with PO and HOS (P
Objective: This review aims to summarize the clinical evidence regarding the use of chia seed for a wide variety of health conditions.
Data Sources: A number of databases, including PubMed and Embase, were searched systematically.
Study Selection: Randomized controlled trials that assessed the clinical effects of chia seed consumption in human participants were included. The quality of trials was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool.
Data Extraction: Data on study design, blinding status, characteristics of participants, chia seed intervention, comparator, clinical assessment, duration of intake, interval of assessment, and study funding status were extracted. Meta-analysis was performed.
Results: Twelve trials were included. Participants included healthy persons, athletes, diabetic patients, and individuals with metabolic syndrome. Pooling of results showed no significant differences except for the following findings of subgroup analysis at higher doses of chia seed: (1) lower postprandial blood glucose level (mean difference [MD] of -33.95 incremental area under the curve [iAUC] [mmol/L × 2 h] [95%CI, -61.85, -6.05] and -51.60 iAUC [mmol/L × 2 h] [95%CI, -79.64, -23.56] at medium doses and high doses, respectively); (2) lower high-density lipoprotein in serum (MD of -0.10 mmol/L [95%CI, -0.20, -0.01]); and (3) lower diastolic blood pressure (MD of -7.14 mmHg [95%CI, -11.08, -3.19]). The quality of all evidence assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was low or very low. All trials employed only surrogate markers as outcomes.
Conclusions: Future trials with improved methodological quality, well-described clinical events, and validated surrogate markers as outcomes are needed to support the potential health benefits of chia seed consumption.
Systematic Review Registration: PROSPERO registration no. CRD42015029990.
METHODS: Using a randomized, crossover and double-blinded design, 15 men and 15 women with metabolic syndrome consumed high-fat meals enriched with SFA, MUFA or n-6 PUFA, or a low-fat/high-sucrose (SUCR) meal. C-peptide, insulin, glucose, gastrointestinal peptides and satiety were measured up to 6 h.
RESULTS: As expected, SUCR meal induced higher C-peptide (45 %), insulin (45 %) and glucose (49 %) responses compared with high-fat meals regardless of types of fatty acids (P < 0.001). Interestingly, incremental area under the curve (AUC0-120min) for glucagon-like peptide-1 was higher after SUCR meal compared with MUFA (27 %) and n-6 PUFA meals (23 %) (P = 0.01). AUC0-120min for glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide was higher after SFA meal compared with MUFA (23 %) and n-6 PUFA meals (20 %) (P = 0.004). Significant meal x time interaction (P = 0.007) was observed for ghrelin, but not cholecystokinin and satiety.
CONCLUSIONS: The amount of fat regardless of the types of fatty acids affects insulin and glycemic responses. Both the amount and types of fatty acids acutely affect the gastrointestinal peptide release in metabolic syndrome subjects, but not satiety.
METHODS: We recruited 54 abdominally obese subjects to participate in a prospective cross-over design, single-blind trial comparing isocaloric 2000 kcal MUFA or carbohydrate-enriched diet with SFA-enriched diet (control). The control diet consisted of 15E% protein, 53E% carbohydrate and 32E% fat (12E% SFA, 13E% MUFA). A total of ∼7E% of MUFA or refined carbohydrate was exchanged with SFA in the MUFA-rich and carbohydrate-rich diets respectively for 6-weeks. Blood samples were collected at fasting upon trial commencement and at week-5 and 6 of each dietary-intervention phase to measure levels of cytokines (IL-6, IL-1β), C-reactive protein (CRP), thrombogenic markers (E-selectin, PAI-1, D-dimer) and lipid subfractions. Radial pulse wave analysis and a 6-h postprandial mixed meal challenge were carried out at week-6 of each dietary intervention. Blood samples were collected at fasting, 15 and 30 min and hourly intervals thereafter till 6 h after a mixed meal challenge (muffin and milkshake) with SFA or MUFA (872.5 kcal, 50 g fat, 88 g carbohydrates) or CARB (881.3 kcal, 20 g fat, 158 g carbohydrates)- enrichment corresponding to the background diets.
RESULTS: No significant differences in fasting inflammatory and thrombogenic factors were noted between diets (P > 0.05). CARB meal was found to increase plasma IL-6 whereas MUFA meal elevated plasma D-dimer postprandially compared with SAFA meal (P
OBJECTIVES: To compare techniques of blood glucose monitoring and their impact on maternal and infant outcomes among pregnant women with pre-existing diabetes.
SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (30 November 2016), searched reference lists of retrieved studies and contacted trial authors.
SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs comparing techniques of blood glucose monitoring including SMBG, continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) or clinic monitoring among pregnant women with pre-existing diabetes mellitus (type 1 or type 2). Trials investigating timing and frequency of monitoring were also included. RCTs using a cluster-randomised design were eligible for inclusion but none were identified.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed study eligibility, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of included studies. Data were checked for accuracy. The quality of the evidence was assessed using the GRADE approach.
MAIN RESULTS: This review update includes at total of 10 trials (538) women (468 women with type 1 diabetes and 70 women with type 2 diabetes). The trials took place in Europe and the USA. Five of the 10 included studies were at moderate risk of bias, four studies were at low to moderate risk of bias, and one study was at high risk of bias. The trials are too small to show differences in important outcomes such as macrosomia, preterm birth, miscarriage or death of baby. Almost all the reported GRADE outcomes were assessed as being very low-quality evidence. This was due to design limitations in the studies, wide confidence intervals, small sample sizes, and few events. In addition, there was high heterogeneity for some outcomes.Various methods of glucose monitoring were compared in the trials. Neither pooled analyses nor individual trial analyses showed any clear advantages of one monitoring technique over another for primary and secondary outcomes. Many important outcomes were not reported.1. Self-monitoring versus standard care (two studies, 43 women): there was no clear difference for caesarean section (risk ratio (RR) 0.78, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.40 to 1.49; one study, 28 women) or glycaemic control (both very low-quality), and not enough evidence to assess perinatal mortality and neonatal mortality and morbidity composite. Hypertensive disorders of pregnancy, large-for-gestational age, neurosensory disability, and preterm birth were not reported in either study.2. Self-monitoring versus hospitalisation (one study, 100 women): there was no clear difference for hypertensive disorders of pregnancy (pre-eclampsia and hypertension) (RR 4.26, 95% CI 0.52 to 35.16; very low-quality: RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.08 to 2.22; very low-quality). There was no clear difference in caesarean section or preterm birth less than 37 weeks' gestation (both very low quality), and the sample size was too small to assess perinatal mortality (very low-quality). Large-for-gestational age, mortality or morbidity composite, neurosensory disability and preterm birth less than 34 weeks were not reported.3. Pre-prandial versus post-prandial glucose monitoring (one study, 61 women): there was no clear difference between groups for caesarean section (RR 1.45, 95% CI 0.92 to 2.28; very low-quality), large-for-gestational age (RR 1.16, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.85; very low-quality) or glycaemic control (very low-quality). The results for hypertensive disorders of pregnancy: pre-eclampsia and perinatal mortality are not meaningful because these outcomes were too rare to show differences in a small sample (all very low-quality). The study did not report the outcomes mortality or morbidity composite, neurosensory disability or preterm birth.4. Automated telemedicine monitoring versus conventional system (three studies, 84 women): there was no clear difference for caesarean section (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.48; one study, 32 women; very low-quality), and mortality or morbidity composite in the one study that reported these outcomes. There were no clear differences for glycaemic control (very low-quality). No studies reported hypertensive disorders of pregnancy, large-for-gestational age, perinatal mortality (stillbirth and neonatal mortality), neurosensory disability or preterm birth.5.CGM versus intermittent monitoring (two studies, 225 women): there was no clear difference for pre-eclampsia (RR 1.37, 95% CI 0.52 to 3.59; low-quality), caesarean section (average RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.54; I² = 62%; very low-quality) and large-for-gestational age (average RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.41 to 1.92; I² = 82%; very low-quality). Glycaemic control indicated by mean maternal HbA1c was lower for women in the continuous monitoring group (mean difference (MD) -0.60 %, 95% CI -0.91 to -0.29; one study, 71 women; moderate-quality). There was not enough evidence to assess perinatal mortality and there were no clear differences for preterm birth less than 37 weeks' gestation (low-quality). Mortality or morbidity composite, neurosensory disability and preterm birth less than 34 weeks were not reported.6. Constant CGM versus intermittent CGM (one study, 25 women): there was no clear difference between groups for caesarean section (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.33 to 1.79; very low-quality), glycaemic control (mean blood glucose in the 3rd trimester) (MD -0.14 mmol/L, 95% CI -2.00 to 1.72; very low-quality) or preterm birth less than 37 weeks' gestation (RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.08 to 15.46; very low-quality). Other primary (hypertensive disorders of pregnancy, large-for-gestational age, perinatal mortality (stillbirth and neonatal mortality), mortality or morbidity composite, and neurosensory disability) or GRADE outcomes (preterm birth less than 34 weeks' gestation) were not reported.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This review found no evidence that any glucose monitoring technique is superior to any other technique among pregnant women with pre-existing type 1 or type 2 diabetes. The evidence base for the effectiveness of monitoring techniques is weak and additional evidence from large well-designed randomised trials is required to inform choices of glucose monitoring techniques.
SUBJECTS/METHODS: Thirty metabolic syndrome subjects (15 men and 15 women) were recruited to a randomized, double-blinded and crossover study. The subjects were administered a single dose of 200 mg or 400 mg γδ-T3 emulsions or placebo incorporated into a glass of strawberry-flavored milkshake, consumed together with a high-fat muffin. Blood samples were collected at 0, 5, 15, 30, 60, 90, 120, 180, 240, 300 and 360 min after meal intake.
RESULTS: Plasma vitamin E levels reflected the absorption of γδ-T3 after treatments. Postprandial changes in serum C-peptide, serum insulin, plasma glucose, triacylglycerol, non-esterified fatty acid and adiponectin did not differ between treatments, with women displaying delayed increase in the aforementioned markers. No significant difference between treatments was observed for plasma cytokines (interleukin-1 beta, interleukin-6 and tumor necrosis factor alpha) and thrombogenic markers (plasminogen activator inhibitor type 1 and D-dimer).
CONCLUSIONS: Supplementation of a single dose of γδ-T3 did not change the insulinemic, anti-inflammatory and anti-thrombogenic responses in metabolic syndrome subjects.
METHODS: In a randomised, controlled crossover trial, ten healthy human subjects (five men, five women) were given 50 g glucose (reference food, twice); buns (0 and 10 % fenugreek seed powder); and flatbreads (0 and 10 % fenugreek seed powder) on six different occasions. Finger prick capillary blood samples were collected at 0, 15, 30, 45, 60, 90 and 120 min after the start of the meal. The palatability of the test meals was scored using Likert scales.
RESULTS: The incremental areas under the glucose curve value of buns and flatbreads with 10 % fenugreek (138 ± 17 mmol × min/L; 121 ± 16 mmol × min/L) were significantly lower than those of 0 % fenugreek bun and flatbreads (227 ± 15 mmol × min/L; 174 ± 14 mmol × min/L, P = <0.01). Adding 10 % fenugreek seed powder reduced the GI of buns from 82 ± 5 to 51 ± 7 (P