Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 4 de 4
Filtrar
Más filtros












Base de datos
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
Am J Clin Nutr ; 115(6): 1626-1636, 2022 06 07.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35179193

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Epidemiologic observations suggest increased potato consumption correlates with weight gain, adiposity, and diabetes risk, whereas nut consumption is associated with weight control and metabolic health. Randomized controlled trial (RCT) data indicate humans respond to changes in energy intake in single dietary components and compensate for extra energy consumed. OBJECTIVES: We completed an RCT testing whether increased daily potato consumption influences energy balance [specifically, fat mass (FM)] compared with calorie-matched almond consumption. METHODS: A 30-d RCT of 180 adults prescribed calorie-matched (300 kcal/d, n = 60 participants/group) than consumed 1 of the following: 1) almonds (almond group), 2) French fries (potato group), or 3) French fries with herb/spices mix (potato + herb/spices group). Baseline and 30-d FM were measured by DXA (primary outcome), with secondary outcomes including body weight and carbohydrate metabolism markers [glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c), fasting blood glucose and insulin, HOMA-IR)]. A subset of 5 participants/group participated in a postprandial meal-based tolerance test. RESULTS: A total of 180 participants were randomly assigned [gender: 67.8% female; mean ± SD age: 30.4 ± 8.7 y; BMI (in kg/m2): 26.1 ± 4.2; and weight: 75.6 ± 15.4 kg], with 12 dropouts and 3 terminations. No significantly different FM changes were observed between almond and potato consumption [combined ± herb/spices; mean ± SE almond: 230.87 ± 114.01 g; potato: 123.73 ± 86.09 g; P = 0.443], fasting glucose (P = 0.985), insulin (P = 0.082), HOMA-IR (P = 0.080), or HbA1c (P = 0.269). Body weight change was not significantly different in the potato groups combined compared with the almond group (P = 0.116), but was significantly different among the 3 groups (P = 0.014; almond: 0.49 ± 0.20 kg; potato: -0.24 ± 0.20 kg; potato + herb/spices: 0.47 ± 0.21 kg). In meal tests, significantly lower post-prandial glucose and insulin responses to almonds compared with potatoes were observed (P = 0.046, P = 0.006, respectively), with potato + herb/spices having intermediate effects. CONCLUSION: There were no significant differences in FM or in glucoregulatory biomarkers after 30 d of potato consumption compared with almonds. Results do not support a causal relation between increased French fried potato consumption and the negative health outcomes studied. This trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT03518515.


Asunto(s)
Prunus dulcis , Solanum tuberosum , Adulto , Biomarcadores , Glucemia/metabolismo , Femenino , Glucosa , Hemoglobina Glucada , Humanos , Insulina , Masculino , Obesidad , Prunus dulcis/metabolismo , Adulto Joven
2.
Obesity (Silver Spring) ; 28(4): O1-O58, 2020 04.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32202076

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: The development of these updated clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) was commissioned by the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists (AACE), The Obesity Society (TOS), American Society for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery (ASMBS), Obesity Medicine Association (OMA), and American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) Boards of Directors in adherence with the AACE 2017 protocol for standardized production of CPGs, algorithms, and checklists. METHODS: Each recommendation was evaluated and updated based on new evidence from 2013 to the present and subjective factors provided by experts. RESULTS: New or updated topics in this CPG include: contextualization in an adiposity-based chronic disease complications-centric model, nuance-based and algorithm/checklist-assisted clinical decision-making about procedure selection, novel bariatric procedures, enhanced recovery after bariatric surgery protocols, and logistical concerns (including cost factors) in the current health care arena. There are 85 numbered recommendations that have updated supporting evidence, of which 61 are revised and 12 are new. Noting that there can be multiple recommendation statements within a single numbered recommendation, there are 31 (13%) Grade A, 42 (17%) Grade B, 72 (29%) Grade C, and 101 (41%) Grade D recommendations. There are 858 citations, of which 81 (9.4%) are evidence level (EL) 1 (highest), 562 (65.5%) are EL 2, 72 (8.4%) are EL 3, and 143 (16.7%) are EL 4 (lowest). CONCLUSIONS: Bariatric procedures remain a safe and effective intervention for higher-risk patients with obesity. Clinical decision-making should be evidence based within the context of a chronic disease. A team approach to perioperative care is mandatory, with special attention to nutritional and metabolic issues.


Asunto(s)
Cirugía Bariátrica/normas , Bariatria/normas , Obesidad/terapia , Cirugía Bariátrica/métodos , Bariatria/métodos , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino
3.
Surg Obes Relat Dis ; 16(2): 175-247, 2020 Feb.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31917200

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: The development of these updated clinical practice guidelines (CPG) was commissioned by the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists, The Obesity Society, the American Society of Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery, the Obesity Medicine Association, and the American Society of Anesthesiologists boards of directors in adherence to the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists 2017 protocol for standardized production of CPG, algorithms, and checklists. METHODS: Each recommendation was evaluated and updated based on new evidence from 2013 to the present and subjective factors provided by experts. RESULTS: New or updated topics in this CPG include contextualization in an adiposity-based, chronic disease complications-centric model, nuance-based, and algorithm/checklist-assisted clinical decision-making about procedure selection, novel bariatric procedures, enhanced recovery after bariatric surgery protocols, and logistical concerns (including cost factors) in the current healthcare arena. There are 85 numbered recommendations that have updated supporting evidence, of which 61 are revised and 12 are new. Noting that there can be multiple recommendation statements within a single numbered recommendation, there are 31 (13%) Grade A, 42 (17%) Grade B, 72 (29%) Grade C, and 101 (41%) Grade D recommendations. There are 858 citations, of which 81 (9.4%) are evidence level (EL) 1 (highest), 562 (65.5%) are EL 2, 72 (8.4%) are EL 3, and 143 (16.7%) are EL 4 (lowest). CONCLUSIONS: Bariatric procedures remain a safe and effective intervention for higher-risk patients with obesity. Clinical decision-making should be evidence-based within the context of a chronic disease. A team approach to perioperative care is mandatory with special attention to nutritional and metabolic issues.


Asunto(s)
Cirugía Bariátrica , Bariatria , Anestesiólogos , Endocrinólogos , Humanos , Obesidad/cirugía , Estados Unidos
4.
Endocr Pract ; 25(12): 1346-1359, 2019 Dec.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31682518

RESUMEN

Objective: The development of these updated clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) was commissioned by the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists (AACE), The Obesity Society, American Society of Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery, Obesity Medicine Association, and American Society of Anesthesiologists Boards of Directors in adherence with the AACE 2017 protocol for standardized production of CPGs, algorithms, and checklists. Methods: Each recommendation was evaluated and updated based on new evidence from 2013 to the present and subjective factors provided by experts. Results: New or updated topics in this CPG include: contextualization in an adiposity-based chronic disease complications-centric model, nuance-based and algorithm/checklist-assisted clinical decision-making about procedure selection, novel bariatric procedures, enhanced recovery after bariatric surgery protocols, and logistical concerns (including cost factors) in the current health-care arena. There are 85 numbered recommendations that have updated supporting evidence, of which 61 are revised and 12 are new. Noting that there can be multiple recommendation statements within a single numbered recommendation, there are 31 (13%) Grade A, 42 (17%) Grade B, 72 (29%) Grade C, and 101 (41%) Grade D recommendations. There are 858 citations, of which 81 (9.4%) are evidence level (EL) 1 (highest), 562 (65.5%) are EL 2, 72 (8.4%) are EL 3, and 143 (16.7%) are EL 4 (lowest). Conclusion: Bariatric procedures remain a safe and effective intervention for higher-risk patients with obesity. Clinical decision-making should be evidence based within the context of a chronic disease. A team approach to perioperative care is mandatory, with special attention to nutritional and metabolic issues. A1C = hemoglobin A1c; AACE = American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists; ABCD = adiposity-based chronic disease; ACE = American College of Endocrinology; ADA = American Diabetes Association; AHI = Apnea-Hypopnea Index; ASA = American Society of Anesthesiologists; ASMBS = American Society of Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery; BMI = body mass index; BPD = biliopancreatic diversion; BPD/DS = biliopancreatic diversion with duodenal switch; CI = confidence interval; CPAP = continuous positive airway pressure; CPG = clinical practice guideline; CRP = C-reactive protein; CT = computed tomography; CVD = cardiovascular disease; DBCD = dysglycemia-based chronic disease; DS = duodenal switch; DVT = deep venous thrombosis; DXA = dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry; EFA = essential fatty acid; EL = evidence level; EN = enteral nutrition; ERABS = enhanced recovery after bariatric surgery; FDA = U.S. Food and Drug Administration; G4G = Guidelines for Guidelines; GERD = gastroesophageal reflux disease; GI = gastrointestinal; HCP = health-care professional(s); HTN = hypertension; ICU = intensive care unit; IGB = intragastric balloon(s); IV = intravenous; LAGB = laparoscopic adjustable gastric band; LAGBP = laparoscopic adjustable gastric banded plication; LGP = laparoscopic greater curvature (gastric) plication; LRYGB = laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass; LSG = laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy; MetS = metabolic syndrome; NAFLD = nonalcoholic fatty liver disease; NASH = nonalcoholic steatohepatitis; NSAID = nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug; OA = osteoarthritis; OAGB = one-anastomosis gastric bypass; OMA = Obesity Medicine Association; OR = odds ratio; ORC = obesity-related complication(s); OSA = obstructive sleep apnea; PE = pulmonary embolism; PN = parenteral nutrition; PRM = pulmonary recruitment maneuver; RCT = randomized controlled trial; RD = registered dietician; RDA = recommended daily allowance; RYGB = Roux-en-Y gastric bypass; SG = sleeve gastrectomy; SIBO = small intestinal bacterial overgrowth; TOS = The Obesity Society; TSH = thyroid-stimulating hormone; T1D = type 1 diabetes; T2D = type 2 diabetes; VTE = venous thromboembolism; WE = Wernicke encephalopathy; WHO = World Health Organization.


Asunto(s)
Cirugía Bariátrica , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2 , Balón Gástrico , Derivación Gástrica , Laparoscopía , Obesidad , Anestesiólogos , Endocrinólogos , Humanos , Estados Unidos
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA
...