| Literature DB >> 30127247 |
Renata C Fernandes1, Vanessa A Araújo2, Bruna M Giglio3, Ana Clara B Marini4, João F Mota5, Kim-Ir-Sen S Teixeira6, Paula A Monteiro7, Fabio S Lira8, Gustavo D Pimentel9.
Abstract
Background: Epigallocatechin 3 Gallate (EGCG) appears to act in appetite control through hormonal modulation. However, there is a lack of elucidation of EGCG's action mechanisms, especially in humans. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of acute EGCG supplementation on gastric emptying and its relation to blood hormones, glucose and appetite perceptions in healthy women.Entities:
Keywords: Camellia sinensis; EGCG; catechin; gastric emptying; satiation; satiety response
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30127247 PMCID: PMC6115961 DOI: 10.3390/nu10081122
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nutrients ISSN: 2072-6643 Impact factor: 5.717
Figure 1Study design.
Figure 2Study flowchart.
Anthropometric, body composition and habitual food intake characteristics.
| Parameters | Mean | SEM |
|---|---|---|
| Anthropometry | ||
| Body weight (kg) | 56.63 | ±1.46 |
| Height (m) | 1.64 | ±0.01 |
| Body mass index (kg/m) | 21.11 | ±0.40 |
| Waist circumference (cm) | 68.81 | ±1.09 |
| Hip circumference (cm) | 93.05 | ±1.88 |
| Sagittal abdominal diameter (cm) | 16.69 | ±0.50 |
| Body composition | ||
| Total fat (%) | 33.51 | ±1.38 |
| Torso fat (%) | 29.55 | ±1.63 |
| Android fat (%) | 34.9 | ±2.04 |
| Gynoid fat (%) | 47.62 | ±1.35 |
| Habitual food intake | ||
| Calories (kcal/day) | 1876.59 | ±117.11 |
| Calories (kcal/kg/day) | 33.71 | ±2.41 |
| Total proteins (g/day) | 82.6 | ±5.84 |
| Total proteins (g/kg/day) | 1.47 | ±0.11 |
| Total proteins (%) | 18.14 | ±1.26 |
| Total carbohydrates (g/day) | 201.82 | ±15.61 |
| Total carbohydrates (%) | 43.07 | ±2.09 |
| Total lipids (g/day) | 82.02 | ±6.83 |
| Total lipids (%) | 38.75 | ±1.82 |
| Dietary fiber (g/day) | 19.1 | ±2.22 |
| Water ingestion—pure water (L/day) | 1.84 | ±0.15 |
The data represented mean ± SEM.
Stomach ultrasound parameters, Visual Analogue Scale and biochemical analysis at baseline (- 5 min).
| Parameters | Placebo Group | EGCG Group | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mean ± SEM | Mean ± SEM | ||
| Absolute gastric value (mL) | 349.58 ± 3.53 | 348.51 ± 3.46 | 0.859 |
| Hunger sensation (mm) | 64.05 ± 6.61 | 61.14 ± 5.33 | 0.628 |
| Desire to eat (mm) | 70.32 ± 6.04 | 68.86 ± 6.50 | 0.817 |
| Fullness-satiation (mm) | 21.23 ± 4.75 | 15.14 ± 3.33 | 0.178 |
| Glycemia (mg/dL) | 87.77 ± 0.79 | 87.91 ± 1.2 | 0.965 |
| Insulin (μU/mL) | 6.49 ± 0.46 | 6.03 ± 0.44 | 0.887 |
| Adiponectin (µg/mL) | 4.14 ± 0.96 | 3.02 ± 0.48 | 0.067 |
| Leptin (pg/mL) | 37.24 ± 5.14 | 37.76 ± 4.95 | 0.840 |
Measured values at starting moment (- 5 min) between treatments (placebo × EGCG) were compared using the two-way ANOVA (adjusted to individual variation). The data represented mean ± SEM.
Figure 3Relative gastric retention (%). Relative gastric retention variations and the area under the curve between treatments (EGCG × placebo) were assessed using the two-way ANOVA (adjusted to individual variation). Values are mean ± SEM. Differences found are highlighted with * (p < 0.05).
Figure 4Variations in hunger sensation (A), desire to eat (B) and satiation (C)—Visual Analogue Scale (VAS). Perception of hunger, desire to eat and satiation variations assessed with VAS and the area under the curve (AUC) between treatments (placebo × EGCG) were evaluated using the two-way ANOVA (adjusted to individual variation). Values are mean ± SEM. Differences found are highlighted with * (p < 0.05).
Figure 5Plasma concentrations of glucose (A), insulin (B), leptin (C) and adiponectin (D). Plasma concentrations of glucose, insulin, leptin and adiponectin between treatments (placebo × EGCG) were assessed using the two-way ANOVA (adjusted to individual variation). Values are mean ± SEM. Differences found are highlighted with * (p < 0.05).