| Literature DB >> 23595135 |
João Valentini Neto1, Camila Maria de Melo, Sandra Maria Lima Ribeiro.
Abstract
We hypothesize that improvements in the gut microbiota are capable of ameliorating gut permeability and, consequently, reducing systemic inflammation and the risk of frailty. This study aims to evaluate some effects of synbiotic supplementation on inflammatory markers and the body composition of the elderly at risk of frailty. In a double-blind study that lasted three months, 17 elderly individuals fulfilling one frailty criteria (grip strength) were randomly distributed into two groups: SYN (n = 9), daily intake of synbiotic (6 g Frutooligossacarides, 108 to 109 CFU Lactobacillus paracasei, 108 to 109 CFU Lactobacillus rhamnosus, 108 to 109 CFU Lactobacillus acidophilus and 108 to 109 CFU Bifidobacterium lactis), or placebo (maltodextrin; PLA; n = 8). Subjects were analyzed for anthropometric measurements, bioelectric impedance with vectorial analysis (BIVA), IL-6 and TNF-α. A comparison between groups did not show any difference for the variables investigated. In turn, individual analysis of electrical impedance (BIVA) demonstrated that the majority of SYN individuals maintained or improved their tissue hydration, when compared to the PLA group after supplementation. In conclusion, three months of synbiotic supplementation did not promote any significant changes in inflammatory cytokines or body composition, but demonstrated a trend towards a preservation of hydration status in apparently healthy elderly individuals.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2013 PMID: 23595135 PMCID: PMC3705347 DOI: 10.3390/nu5041276
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nutrients ISSN: 2072-6643 Impact factor: 5.717
Variables evaluated before and after the supplementation.
| Variable | PLA | SYN | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Initial ( | Final ( | Initial ( | Final ( | |
| BM (Kg) | 69.6 ± 22.6 * | 73.5 ± 22.6 * | 64.9 ± 13.6 | 64.3 ± 13.7 |
| BMI (Kg/m2) | 28.5 ± 6.5 | 30.3 ± 6.4 | 27.9 ± 6.9 | 28.1 ± 7.1 |
| TSF (mm) | 21.0 ± 7.2 | 22.8 ± 4.4 | 17.3 ± 7.3 | 17.0 ± 7.1 |
| SsSK (mm) | 20.4 ± 4.2 | 22.5 ± 3.1 | 16.4 ± 6.5 * | 17.9 ± 7.3 * |
| BSF (mm) | 14.1 ± 7.0 | 16.4 ± 5.4 | 10.2 ± 5.5 | 10.3 ± 5.5 |
| SiSF (mm) | 19.7 ± 5.4 * | 24.7 ± 3.4 *,a | 15.4 ± 8.1 | 15.4 ± 9.2 a |
| AbSF (mm) | 26.0 ± 5.4 | 28.0 ± 3.6 | 21.9 ± 9.1 | 22.6 ± 8.6 |
| CSF (mm) | 21.9 ± 11.0 | 21.1 ± 8.9 | 17.1 ± 8.3 | 18.0 ± 8.3 |
| WC (cm) | 98.8 ± 18.3 | 100.5 ± 16.4 | 94.8 ± 15.7 | 93.3 ± 15.3 |
| HC (cm) | 101.6 ± 11.0 | 102.5 ± 8.7 | 101.4 ± 9.3 | 101.3 ± 9.7 |
| CC (cm) | 37.9 ± 5.3 | 39.0 ± 5.0 | 37.5 ± 6.1 | 37.4 ± 5.7 |
| R/Ht (Ω/m) | 358.3 ± 57.0 | 358.6 ± 79.8 ## | 368.0 ± 73.4 | 377.3 ± 67.0 # |
| Xc/Ht (Ω/m) | 31.2 ± 9.7 | 34.7 ± 9.9 ## | 32.7 ± 9.5 | 31.5 ± 7.7 # |
| % BF | 36.0 ± 7.0 | 38.6 ± 6.4 ## | 35.6 ± 10.0 | 36.2 ± 10.7 # |
| FM (Kg) | 26.2 ± 13.3 | 29.3 ± 13.9 ## | 23.9 ± 10.1 | 24.1 ± 10.5 # |
| FFM (kg) | 43.6 ± 10.6 | 44.4 ± 11.7 ## | 41.0 ± 6.9 | 40.2 ± 6.5 # |
| Grip Strength (N) | 15.9 ± 2.7 | 17.2 ± 3.9 | 15.0 ± 5.2 | 15.7 ± 5.3 |
# n = 8; ## n = 7; * significant difference between pre and post values (p < 0.05); a, significant difference between placebo and synbiotic at post values (p < 0.05); ANOVA for repeated measures; TSF, triceps skinfold; SsSF, subscapular skinfold; BSF, biceps skinfold; SiSF, suprailiac skinfold; AbSF, abdominal skinfold; CSF, calf skinfold; WC, waist circumference; HC, hip circumference; CC, calf circumference; R/Ht, resistance divided by height; Xc/H, reactance divided by height; %BF, percentage of body fat; FM, fat mass; FFM, fat free mass.
Figure 1Cytokine concentration before (white columns) and after (green columns) supplementation. (A) IL-6; (B) TNF-α. Group 1 = PLA (n = 8); Group 2 = SYN (n = 9). Repeated measures ANOVA.
Figure 2R/Xc path graph of vector migration. (A) PLA group (n = 7) and (B) SYN group (n = 8). The vectors were plotted on the reference 50th, 75th, and 95th tolerance ellipses of a reference healthy population. The path graph starts with an arrow from the origin ((0.0) point in the graph). When observing the arrow, the first point is the initial value and the second is the final value. To understand the meaning of vector migration, the major axis refers to hydration status (dehydrated individuals tending towards the upper pole). BIVA software (Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences, University of Padova, Padova, Italy, 2002).