Effect of transcranial direct current stimulation on homeostatic and hedonic appetite control and mood states in women presenting premenstrual syndrome across menstrual cycle phases.

PURPOSE: This study investigated the acute effect of anodal transcranial direct current stimulation (a-tDCS) over the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) on appetite, energy intake, food preferences, and mood states in the luteal and follicular phases of the menstrual cycle in women presenting premenstrual syndrome. METHODS: Sixteen women (26.5 ± 5.2 years; 1.63 ± 0.1 m; 64.2 ± 12.8 kg; body mass index 24.0 ± 5.0 kg/m2; body fat 27.6 ± 7.5%) with the eumenorrheic menstrual cycle were submitted to a-tDCS and sham-tDCS conditions over their follicular and luteal phases. At pre - and post-tDCS, hunger and desire to eat something tasty, (analogic visual scale), the profile of mood states (POMS), and the psychological components of food preferences (Leeds Food Preference Questionnaire-BR) were assessed. Participants recorded their food intake for the rest of the day using a diary log. RESULTS: There was a trend towards main effect of condition for decreased implicit wanting for low-fat savory food after a-tDCS but not sham-tDCS regardless of menstrual cycle phase (p = 0.062). There was no effect for self-reported hunger, desire to eat, energy and macronutrient intake, and on other components of food preferences (explicit liking and wanting for low- and high-fat savory and sweet foods, implicit wanting for low- and high-fat sweet and high-fat savory food); as well as for mood states. CONCLUSIONS: Although no significant effects of a-tDCS were found, the present investigation provides relevant perspectives for future studies.

Post-exercise energy intake: do the intensity and mode of exercise matter? A systematic review and meta-analysis comparing high-intensity interval with moderate-intensity continuous protocols.

The present systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare the impact of exercise intensity and mode (high-intensity interval exercise-HIIE or sprint interval exercise-SIE versus moderate-intensity continuous exercise-MICE) on post-exercise ad libitum energy intake. The studies were required to have at least two exercise conditions (HIIE or SIE vs MICE). Overall, 642 manuscripts were initially identified and 17 met the eligibility criteria. The random effect meta-analysis did not reveal differences for absolute energy intake (28 pairwise comparisons) between HIIE (p = 0.54; 95% Confidence Interval - CI: -0.14 to 0.26; 22 pairwise comparisons) or SIE (p = 0.08; 95% CI -0.65 to 0.03; 6 pairwise comparisons) versus MICE, neither for relative energy intake (p = 0.97; 95% CI: -0.35 to 0.10 for HIIE; p = 0.28; 95% CI: -1.03 to 0.06 for SIE) with five and one pairwise comparisons, respectively. Subgroup analyses for methods to evaluate ad libitum energy intake, body mass, sex, volume, and timing of exercise were non-significant. Inspecting each study, two pairwise comparisons reported lower post-exercise absolute energy intake in HIIE compared to control (CRTL), and three pairwise comparisons reported lower absolute energy intake after SIE compared to MICE. None pairwise comparison reported differences between protocols (HIIE or SIE versus MICE) for relative energy intake. In conclusion, the meta-analysis did not show differences between protocols for absolute and relative energy intake; five pairwise comparisons from 28 demonstrated lower absolute energy intake in HIIE or SIE compared to CRTL or MICE. Further studies are needed to address the key relevant variables in which exercise intensity and mode may impact energy intake.