AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: Dietary non-oil-seed pulses (chickpeas, beans, peas, lentils, etc.) are a good source of slowly digestible carbohydrate, fibre and vegetable protein and a valuable means of lowering the glycaemic-index (GI) of the diet. To assess the evidence that dietary pulses may benefit glycaemic control, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled experimental trials investigating the effect of pulses, alone or as part of low-GI or high-fibre diets, on markers of glycaemic control in people with and without diabetes. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Library for relevant controlled trials of >or=7 days. Two independent reviewers (A. Esfahani and J. M. W. Wong) extracted information on study design, participants, treatments and outcomes. Data were pooled using the generic inverse variance method and expressed as standardised mean differences (SMD) with 95% CIs. Heterogeneity was assessed by chi (2) and quantified by I (2). Meta-regression models identified independent predictors of effects. RESULTS: A total of 41 trials (39 reports) were included. Pulses alone (11 trials) lowered fasting blood glucose (FBG) (-0.82, 95% CI -1.36 to -0.27) and insulin (-0.49, 95% CI -0.93 to -0.04). Pulses in low-GI diets (19 trials) lowered glycosylated blood proteins (GP), measured as HbA(1c) or fructosamine (-0.28, 95% CI -0.42 to -0.14). Finally, pulses in high-fibre diets (11 trials) lowered FBG (-0.32, 95% CI -0.49 to -0.15) and GP (-0.27, 95% CI -0.45 to -0.09). Inter-study heterogeneity was high and unexplained for most outcomes, with benefits modified or predicted by diabetes status, pulse type, dose, physical form, duration of follow-up, study quality, macronutrient profile of background diets, feeding control and design. CONCLUSIONS/ INTERPRETATION: Pooled analyses demonstrated that pulses, alone or in low-GI or high-fibre diets, improve markers of longer term glycaemic control in humans, with the extent of the improvements subject to significant inter-study heterogeneity. There is a need for further large, well-designed trials.
AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: Dietary non-oil-seed pulses (chickpeas, beans, peas, lentils, etc.) are a good source of slowly digestible carbohydrate, fibre and vegetable protein and a valuable means of lowering the glycaemic-index (GI) of the diet. To assess the evidence that dietary pulses may benefit glycaemic control, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled experimental trials investigating the effect of pulses, alone or as part of low-GI or high-fibre diets, on markers of glycaemic control in people with and without diabetes. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Library for relevant controlled trials of >or=7 days. Two independent reviewers (A. Esfahani and J. M. W. Wong) extracted information on study design, participants, treatments and outcomes. Data were pooled using the generic inverse variance method and expressed as standardised mean differences (SMD) with 95% CIs. Heterogeneity was assessed by chi (2) and quantified by I (2). Meta-regression models identified independent predictors of effects. RESULTS: A total of 41 trials (39 reports) were included. Pulses alone (11 trials) lowered fasting blood glucose (FBG) (-0.82, 95% CI -1.36 to -0.27) and insulin (-0.49, 95% CI -0.93 to -0.04). Pulses in low-GI diets (19 trials) lowered glycosylated blood proteins (GP), measured as HbA(1c) or fructosamine (-0.28, 95% CI -0.42 to -0.14). Finally, pulses in high-fibre diets (11 trials) lowered FBG (-0.32, 95% CI -0.49 to -0.15) and GP (-0.27, 95% CI -0.45 to -0.09). Inter-study heterogeneity was high and unexplained for most outcomes, with benefits modified or predicted by diabetes status, pulse type, dose, physical form, duration of follow-up, study quality, macronutrient profile of background diets, feeding control and design. CONCLUSIONS/ INTERPRETATION: Pooled analyses demonstrated that pulses, alone or in low-GI or high-fibre diets, improve markers of longer term glycaemic control in humans, with the extent of the improvements subject to significant inter-study heterogeneity. There is a need for further large, well-designed trials.
Authors: R Giacco; M Parillo; A A Rivellese; G Lasorella; A Giacco; L D'Episcopo; G Riccardi Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2000-10 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: Alice H Lichtenstein; Lawrence J Appel; Michael Brands; Mercedes Carnethon; Stephen Daniels; Harold A Franch; Barry Franklin; Penny Kris-Etherton; William S Harris; Barbara Howard; Njeri Karanja; Michael Lefevre; Lawrence Rudel; Frank Sacks; Linda Van Horn; Mary Winston; Judith Wylie-Rosett Journal: Circulation Date: 2006-06-19 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: D J Jenkins; T M Wolever; R H Taylor; C Griffiths; K Krzeminska; J A Lawrie; C M Bennett; D V Goff; D L Sarson; S R Bloom Journal: Am J Clin Nutr Date: 1982-06 Impact factor: 7.045
Authors: Pablo Pérez-Martínez; Dimitri P Mikhailidis; Vasilios G Athyros; Mónica Bullo; Patrick Couture; María I Covas; Lawrence de Koning; Javier Delgado-Lista; Andrés Díaz-López; Christian A Drevon; Ramón Estruch; Katherine Esposito; Montserrat Fitó; Marta Garaulet; Dario Giugliano; Antonio García-Ríos; Niki Katsiki; Genovefa Kolovou; Benoît Lamarche; Maria Ida Maiorino; Guillermo Mena-Sánchez; Araceli Muñoz-Garach; Dragana Nikolic; José M Ordovás; Francisco Pérez-Jiménez; Manfredi Rizzo; Jordi Salas-Salvadó; Helmut Schröder; Francisco J Tinahones; Rafael de la Torre; Ben van Ommen; Suzan Wopereis; Emilio Ros; José López-Miranda Journal: Nutr Rev Date: 2017-05-01 Impact factor: 7.110
Authors: Vanessa Ha; John L Sievenpiper; Russell J de Souza; Viranda H Jayalath; Arash Mirrahimi; Arnav Agarwal; Laura Chiavaroli; Sonia Blanco Mejia; Frank M Sacks; Marco Di Buono; Adam M Bernstein; Lawrence A Leiter; Penny M Kris-Etherton; Vladimir Vuksan; Richard P Bazinet; Robert G Josse; Joseph Beyene; Cyril W C Kendall; David J A Jenkins Journal: CMAJ Date: 2014-04-07 Impact factor: 8.262
Authors: Christine P Stewart; Parul Christian; Lee S F Wu; Steven C LeClerq; Subarna K Khatry; Keith P West Journal: Metab Syndr Relat Disord Date: 2013-05-17 Impact factor: 1.894