METHODS: A total of 33 sedentary men with metabolic syndrome (age: 46.2 ± 4.6 years; body mass index: 35.4 ± 1.9 kg.m2) were randomly assigned to one of 3 groups: aerobic interval training (n = 12), resistance training (n = 10), or control (n = 11). Participants in the exercise groups completed a 12-week training program, 3 sessions per week, while those in the control group maintained their sedentary lifestyle. The levels of high sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP), omentin-1, adiponectin, lipid profiles, blood pressure, glucose metabolism, body composition, and peak oxygen uptake (VO2peak) were measured at baseline and after the intervention.

RESULTS: Both aerobic interval training and resistance training significantly improved the levels of omentin-1 and adiponectin, as well as reduced inflammation, as indicated by a decrease in hs-CRP levels. Exercise training also led to significant improvements in lipid profiles, blood pressure, glucose metabolism, and body composition. Specifically, the aerobic interval training group had significantly greater increases in high-density lipoprotein cholesterol and VO2peak, as well as greater reductions in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, triglycerides, and total cholesterol compared to the resistance training group.

METHODS: GBR were extracted separately by employing different solvents with ultrasound-assisted. Pancreatic lipase activity was determined spectrophotometrically by measuring the hydrolysis of p-nitrophenyl butyrate (p-NPB) to p-nitrophenol at 405 nm. Adipogenesis and lipolysis were assayed in fully differentiated 3T3-L1 adipocytes by using Oil Red O staining and glycerol release measurement.

METHODOLOGY: The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) and PubMed (1985-January 2022) and trial registries for relevant randomised clinical trials were used. Relevant and published randomised clinical trials were reviewed and evaluated. The primary outcomes were anthropometry measurements, which were weight, waist circumference, body mass index (BMI), and body fat percentages. The secondary outcomes were changes in quality of life, psychological impact, lipid profile measurement, presence of adverse events, and changes in blood pressure and blood glucose. We assessed the data for risk of bias, heterogeneity, sensitivity, reporting bias, and quality of evidence.

RESULTS: 15 studies are included, involving 1161 participants. The analysis performed is based on three comparisons. For the first comparison between yoga and control, yoga reduces the waist circumference (MD -0.84, 95% CI [-5.12 to 3.44]), while there is no difference in body weight, BMI, or body fat percentages. In the second comparison between yoga and calorie restriction, yoga reduces body weight (MD -3.47, 95% CI [-6.20 to -0.74]), while there is no difference in waist circumference, BMI, or body fat percentage. In the third comparison between yoga and exercise, yoga reduces the body weight (MD -7.58, 95% CI [-11.51 to -3.65]), while there is no difference in waist circumference or BMI. For the secondary outcomes, yoga intervention reduces total cholesterol (MD -17.12, 95% CI [-32.24 to -2.00]) and triglycerides (MD -21.75, 95% CI [-38.77 to -4.73]) compared to the control group, but there is no difference compared to the calorie restriction and exercise group. There is no difference in the rest of the outcomes, which are LDL, HDL, quality of life, psychological impact, adverse events, blood pressure, and blood glucose. However, findings are not robust due to a high risk of bias and low-quality evidence.