ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: The primary objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of a low-carbohydrate diet (LCD) compared with a control diet on pain in female patients with lipedema. The secondary objectives were to compare the impact of the two diets on quality of life (QoL) and investigate potential associations of changes in pain with changes in body weight, body composition, and ketosis. METHODS: Adult female patients with lipedema and obesity were randomized to either the LCD or control diet (energy prescription: 1200 kcal/day) for 8 weeks. Body weight and body composition, pain (Brief Pain Inventory measured pain), and QoL (RAND 36-Item Health Survey [RAND-36], Impact of Weight on Quality of Life [IWQOL]-Lite, and Lymphoedema Quality of Life [LYMQOL]) were measured at baseline and at postintervention. RESULTS: A total of 70 female patients (age, mean [SD], 47 [11] years; BMI 37 [5] kg/m2) were included. The LCD group had greater weight loss (-2.8 kg; 95% CI: -4.1 to -1.0; p < 0.001) and larger reduction in pain now (-1.1; 95% CI: -1.9 to -0.3; p = 0.009) compared with the control group. No association was found between changes in pain now and weight loss. Both groups experienced improvements in several QoL dimensions. CONCLUSIONS: Diet-induced weight loss in women with lipedema can improve QoL. An energy-restricted LCD seems to be superior to a standard control diet in reducing pain.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Abdominal pain and postbariatric hypoglycemia (PBH) are common after bariatric surgery. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to explore the potential relationship between abdominal pain, gastrointestinal symptoms, and PBH more than a decade after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) and whether continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) with dietary intervention has an educational role in reducing symptoms. SUBJECTS: At two public hospitals in Norway (one University Hospital) 22 of 46 invited patients who reported abdominal pain more than weekly took part. Recruited from a prospective follow-up study of 546 patients 14.5 years after RYGB. METHODS: They used a CGM for two 14-day periods, with a dietary intervention between periods. The Gastrointestinal Symptom Rating Scale (GSRS) and the Dumping Severity Score (DSS) questionnaires were completed at the start and end of the study. RESULTS: The 22 women had preoperative age 39.6 ± 7.7 years and body mass index (BMI) 42.0 ± 4.0 kg/m2, present age 54.6 ± 7.7 years and BMI 29.8 ± 4.8 kg/m2. The total GSRS score and DSS of early dumping decreased after the diet intervention. The number of events with Level 1 (<3.9 mmol/L) or Level 2 (<3.0 mmol/L) hypoglycemia did not change in the second period. Half of the patients had fewer, three had unchanged, and eight had more frequent events with Level 1 hypoglycemia after the intervention. Ten patients had Level 2 hypoglycemia. CONCLUSION: Though inconclusive findings, a personalized dietary intervention reduces GSRS. This intervention was accompanied by lower mean absolute glucose in patients with recurrent abdominal pain after bariatric surgery. However, further studies are needed to explore the benefits of CGM in this setting.
