Effect of Calorie-Unrestricted Low-Carbohydrate, High-Fat Diet Versus High-Carbohydrate, Low-Fat Diet on Type 2 Diabetes and Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Disease : A Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: It remains unclear if a low-carbohydrate, high-fat (LCHF) diet is a possible treatment strategy for type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), and the effect on nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) has not been investigated. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effect of a calorie-unrestricted LCHF diet, with no intention of weight loss, on T2DM and NAFLD compared with a high-carbohydrate, low-fat (HCLF) diet. DESIGN: 6-month randomized controlled trial with a 3-month follow-up. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03068078). SETTING: Odense University Hospital in Denmark from November 2016 until June 2020. PARTICIPANTS: 165 participants with T2DM. INTERVENTION: Two calorie-unrestricted diets: LCHF diet with 50 to 60 energy percent (E%) fat, less than 20E% carbohydrates, and 25E% to 30E% proteins and HCLF diet with 50E% to 60E% carbohydrates, 20E% to 30E% fats, and 20E% to 25E% proteins. MEASUREMENTS: Glycemic control, serum lipid levels, metabolic markers, and liver biopsies to assess NAFLD. RESULTS: The mean age was 56 years (SD, 10), and 58% were women. Compared with the HCLF diet, participants on the LCHF diet had greater improvements in hemoglobin A1c (mean difference in change, -6.1 mmol/mol [95% CI, -9.2 to -3.0 mmol/mol] or -0.59% [CI, -0.87% to -0.30%]) and lost more weight (mean difference in change, -3.8 kg [CI, -6.2 to -1.4 kg]). Both groups had higher high-density lipoprotein cholesterol and lower triglycerides at 6 months. Changes in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol were less favorable in the LCHF diet group than in the HCLF diet group (mean difference in change, 0.37 mmol/L [CI, 0.17 to 0.58 mmol/L] or 14.3 mg/dL [CI, 6.6 to 22.4 mg/dL]). No statistically significant between-group changes were detected in the assessment of NAFLD. Changes were not sustained at the 9-month follow-up. LIMITATION: Open-label trial, self-reported adherence, unintended weight loss, and lack of adjustment for multiple comparisons. CONCLUSION: Persons with T2DM on a 6-month, calorie-unrestricted, LCHF diet had greater clinically meaningful improvements in glycemic control and weight compared with those on an HCLF diet, but the changes were not sustained 3 months after intervention. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Novo Nordisk Foundation.

[Low-carbohydrate diet for patients with Type 2 diabetes]. / Lavkulhydratdiæt til patienter med type 2-diabetes.

Recently, low-carbohydrate diets have increased in popularity as a method to achieve glycaemic control and weight loss in Type 2 diabetes patients. However, there is a lack of consistency and long-term results in existing studies on patients with Type 2 diabetes. In this review, we address current knowledge of low-carbohydrate diets and how they affect glycaemic control, diabetic dyslipidaemia, weight and markers of cardiovascular risk, and our aim is to aid medical practitioners in guiding patients with Type 2 diabetes who wish to try a low-carbohydrate diet in order to take control of their disease.

Wireless capsule endoscopy as a tool in diagnosing autoimmune enteropathy.

Autoimmune enteropathy (AE) is an immune mediated illness of the intestinal mucosa. The cause is unknown, and the diagnosis is based on typical characteristics displayed. There is no gold standard for treatment. We present two adult cases of AE and demonstrate the challenges in establishing the diagnosis. The extensive diagnostic work up excluded other more common causes of protracted diarrhoea. Wireless capsule endoscopy (WCE) displayed universal small intestinal mucosal damage with shortened villi that led to the suspicion of AE in both patients. The diagnosis was confirmed with microscopy, showing shortened villi, villous blunting and hyperplasia of crypts in both patients. In one patient, deep crypt lymphocytosis with minimal intraepithelial lymphocytosis was found as well. Both patients were successfully treated with high-dose immunosuppressant therapy to induce and maintain remission. Use of WCE as a diagnostic tool was invaluable in establishing the diagnosis of AE.

Effective risk stratification in patients with moderate cardiovascular risk using albuminuria and atherosclerotic plaques in the carotid arteries.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to investigate whether subclinical vascular damage improved traditional risk prediction, reclassifying individuals with regard to primary prevention. METHODS: Two thousand and fifty-nine healthy individuals aged 41, 51, 61, and 71 years were divided into age, Systematic COronary Risk Evaluation (SCORE), and Framingham risk score (FRS) groups. Subclinical vascular damage was defined as carotid-femoral pulse wave velocity at least 12 m/s, and carotid atherosclerotic plaques or urine albumin/creatinine ratio (UACR) at least 90th percentile of 0.73/1.06 mg/mmol in men/women. The composite endpoint of cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, and hospitalization for ischemic heart disease was recorded (n = 229). RESULTS: Both elevated UACR (P = 0.002) and atherosclerotic plaques (P < 0.0001) identified a subgroup of moderate SCORE risk patients and high-intermediate FRS risk patients with high risk (P = 0.04 and P = 0.001, respectively), whereas elevated carotid-femoral pulse wave velocity did not. Elevated UACR or presence of atherosclerotic plaques reclassified patients from moderate to high SCORE risk [net reclassification improvement of 6.4%; P = 0.025), or from high intermediate to high FRS risk (net reclassification improvement 8.8%; P = 0.002). Assuming primary prevention could reduce the relative cardiovascular risk by 24-27%, on the basis of actual levels of blood pressure and cholesterol, one composite endpoint could be avoided by giving primary prevention to 19 or 24 reclassified patients found by screening 52 or 104 patients with high-intermediate FRS or moderate SCORE risk, respectively. CONCLUSION: Elevated UACR and presence of atherosclerotic plaques could in a potentially cost-effective manner identify patients with moderate SCORE risk or high-intermediate FRS with actual high cardiovascular risk who will benefit from primary prevention.