ABSTRACT
The most effective type of training to improve cardiometabolic parameters in overweight subjects is unknown. This meta-analysis compared the effect of endurance, strength and combined training on glucose, insulin metabolism and the lipid profile of overweight and obese adults. The Cochrane, PubMed, Scopus and Web of Science databases were searched to identify randomised trials assessing the effect of training intervention on fasting and 2 h glucose and insulin levels, glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c), homeostatic model assessment of insulin resistance (HOMA), C-peptide, total cholesterol (TC), low- (LDL-C) and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol and triglycerides (TG). Forty-six studies were included showing that endurance training more favourably reduced HbA1c (p = 0.044), and LDL-C (p = 0.021) than strength training. Endurance-strength training more effectively decreased glucose (p = 0.002), HbA1c (p = 0.032), HOMA (p = 0.002), TC (p = 0.039), LDL-C (p = 0.046), HDL (p = 0.036) and TG levels (p = 0.025) than strength training. Combined training significantly reduced the HOMA index (p = 0.009) and TG levels (p = 0.039) compared with endurance training. Endurance and endurance-strength training have a more favourable effect on glucose and insulin homeostasis and lipid profile than strength training in overweight and obese adults. However, the results from this meta-analysis should be interpreted cautiously due to significant heterogeneity among included studies.
Subject(s)
Endurance Training , Resistance Training , Adult , Humans , Overweight/therapy , Insulin , Resistance Training/methods , Glucose , Cholesterol, LDL , Glycated Hemoglobin , Obesity/therapy , HomeostasisABSTRACT
The aim of this meta-analysis was to compare the effects of endurance, strength, and combined training on inflammatory markers and adipokine concentrations in overweight and obese adults. We performed a literature search of the Cochrane Library, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases and identified 24 randomised control trials published prior to June 2021. Our findings indicate that endurance training was significantly more beneficial than strength training in reducing C-reactive protein (CRP) (standard mean difference (SMD): -1.317, 95% confidence intervals (CI): -2.565, -0.070, p = 0.0385), interleukin 6 (IL-6) (SMD: -0.363, 95% CI: -0.648, -0.078, p = 0.0126), and visfatin (SMD: -0.618, 95% CI: -1.015, -0.222, p = 0.0023) concentrations. Moreover, combined training was more beneficial than strength training alone in lowering tumour necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-α) levels (SMD: 0.890, 95% CI: -0.301, 1.478, p = 0.0030). There were no differences between the effects of different types of training programmes on adiponectin and leptin concentrations. In conclusion, compared with strength training, endurance training is more effective in lowering CRP, IL-6, and visfatin concentrations, while combined training is more beneficial in reducing TNF-α levels in overweight and obese adults. Further studies are needed to determine which type of training has a better effect on adiponectin and leptin concentrations in this population.
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Administration of butyrate enemas might improve the health status of patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). However, the results seem equivocal. Therefore, this systematic review aimed to assess the effect of sodium butyrate enemas on disease activity index (DAI), endoscopic scores, as well as histological and inflammatory parameters in IBD patients. METHODS: The PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases were searched. Randomised controlled trials published in English that assessed the effect of butyrate enemas on DAI, clinical symptoms, inflammatory markers, as well as histological and endoscopic scores in patients with Crohn's disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC) were included in the analysis. RESULTS: Eight studies involving 227 UC patients were included in this analysis. Only one study reported significant differences in DAI between groups. Besides, butyrate treatment groups did not differ significantly from controls concerning the effect on endoscopic and histological scores. Moreover, butyrate enemas exerted a significant effect on few inflammatory parameters measured in colonic mucosal biopsies. CONCLUSION: The current evidence is limited and does not support the application of butyrate enemas in UC. There are no reliable data regarding the efficacy of butyrate enemas in CD. The systematic review protocol was registered in the PROSPERO database (CRD42020163654).
