| Literature DB >> 30513768 |
Renate Luzía Barbosa-Yañez1,2,3, Ulrike Dambeck4,5,6, Linna Li7, Jürgen Machann8,9,10, Stefan Kabisch11,12,13, Andreas F H Pfeiffer14,15,16.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Cardiovascular diseases (CVD) are the major cause of mortality in type 2 diabetes patients (T2DM). The causes are embedded in a complex interplay between excess body fat, insulin resistance and serum lipid anomalies. Endothelial homeostasis is strongly affected by this pathogenic network. Even though metabolic changes and weight loss improve vascular endothelial function, the effect of different dietary approaches is still uncertain for type 2 diabetes patients.Entities:
Keywords: endothelial function; intrahepatic lipids; low carbohydrate diet; low fat diet; protein intake; type 2 diabetes
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30513768 PMCID: PMC6316067 DOI: 10.3390/nu10121859
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nutrients ISSN: 2072-6643 Impact factor: 5.717
Figure 1Flow diagram of the subjects included in this study. Adapted version of “CONSORT flow diagram for individual randomized controlled trials of nonpharmacological treatments” [26] illustrating participants inclusion to the FMD sub-group. FMD: Flow mediated dilation; VLC: Very low carbohydrate diet; LF: Low fat diet.
Baseline characteristics of subjects.
| General Parameters | Subset | Mean | ±SD |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| 63 | (±8) | |
|
| % | ||
|
| ♀ | 22 | 60 |
| ♂ | 14 | 40 | |
| VLC | ♀ | 11 | 69 |
| ♂ | 5 | 31 | |
| LF | ♀ | 10 | 53 |
| ♂ | 9 | 47 | |
|
|
| (%) | |
| Smoking Status | Never smoked | 14 | 39 |
| Smoker | 5 | 14 | |
| Ex-smoker | 17 | 47 | |
|
| |||
| Oral antihyperglycemic agents | 0 | 13 | 37 |
| 1 | 16 | 45 | |
| 2 | 4 | 11 | |
| Insulin | 0 | 30 | 86 |
| 1 | 3 | 9 | |
| Lipid lowering agents | 0 | 20 | 57 |
| 1 | 13 | 37 | |
| Blood pressure lowering agents | 0 | 6 | 18 |
| 1 | 15 | 46 | |
| 2 | 7 | 21 | |
| 3 | 4 | 12 | |
| 4 | 1 | 3 | |
| Bradycardic antihypertensive agents | 0 | 19 | 54 |
| 1 | 12 | 34 | |
| 2 | 2 | 6 |
Values are presented as mean (±SD) 1 or as frequency (%) 2. n = 36. VLC: Very low carbohydrate diet, LF: Low fat diet. Medication: 1 = 1 agent, 2 = 2 different agents, 3 = 3 different agents, 4 = 4 different agents.
Anthropometric differences within and between diet groups.
| V1 vs V2 | VLC vs LF | |||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Anthropometry | VLC | Δ | LF | Δ | VLC | LF | Δ | V1 | V2 | |||||||
| Visit |
| Mean | ±SD |
| Mean | ±SD | ||||||||||
| Weight (kg) | V1 | 16 | 93.9 | 20.7 | −4.1 | 20 | 97.6 | 22.6 | −5.2 |
|
| ns | ns | ns | ||
| V2 | 16 | 89.8 | 19.7 | 20 | 92.5 | 20.9 | ||||||||||
| BMI (kg/m2) | V1 | 16 | 32.1 | 4.5 | −1.3 | 20 | 32.7 | 4.9 | −1.6 |
|
| ns | ns | ns | ||
| V2 | 16 | 30.8 | 4.3 | 20 | 31.1 | 4.6 | ||||||||||
| TAT [l] | V1 | 14 | 23.4 | 6.9 | −1.7 | 18 | 22.9 | 5.3 | −1.7 |
|
| ns | ns | ns | ||
| V2 | 14 | 21.7 | 5.9 | 18 | 21.2 | 5.1 | ||||||||||
| VAT [l] | V1 | 14 | 5.3 | 1.4 | −0.4 | 18 | 6.8 | 2.5 | −0.7 |
|
| ns |
| ns | ||
| V2 | 14 | 4.9 | 1 | 18 | 6.1 | 2.3 | ||||||||||
| IHL (%) | V1 | 14 | 10.8 | 6.3 | −3.8 | 17 | 14.5 | 11.3 | −5.2 |
|
| ns | ns | ns | ||
| V2 | 14 | 7 | 4.9 | 17 | 9.3 | 8.4 | ||||||||||
Values are presented as mean (±SD), p-values of mean from t-test for analyzing the difference within each group are presented. Difference significant at p < 0.05. BMI = body mass index, TAT = total body fat, VAT = visceral adipose tissue, IHL = intra hepatic lipids. V1 = Visit 1, V2 = Visit 2. Δ = V2 − V1. ns = Not significant.
Figure 2Acute effects on FMD and IHL after 3 weeks diet. Boxplots and individual changes in endothelial function (A) and intra hepatic lipids (C) post-intervention on the very low carbohydrate (VLC) diet; changes in endothelial function (B) and intra hepatic lipids (D) after 3 weeks on the low fat (LF) diet. FMD = flow mediated dilation, IHL = intra hepatic lipids, NVLC = 16, NLF = 20, V1 = Visit 1, V2 = Visit 2, * p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01; *** p < 0.001.
Clinical parameter differences within and between diet groups.
| V1 vs V2 | VLC vs LF | |||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Clinical Parameters | VLC | Δ | LF | Δ | VLC | LF | Δ | V1 | V2 | |||||||
| Visit |
| Mean | ±SD |
| Mean | ±SD | ||||||||||
| HbA1c (%) | V1 | 16 | 6.7 | 1 | −0.6 | 20 | 6.2 | 0.6 | −0.2 |
| ns |
| ns | ns | ||
| V2 | 16 | 6.1 | 0.7 | 20 | 6.1 | 0.6 | ||||||||||
| CRP (mg/L) | V1 | 16 | 3.1 | 4.1 | −1.3 | 20 | 3.1 | 2.7 | −1.1 |
|
| ns * | ns * | ns * | ||
| V2 | 16 | 1.7 | 1.5 | 20 | 2 | 2.8 | ||||||||||
| T. CHO (mg/dL) | V1 | 16 | 200 | 39 | −27 | 20 | 178 | 33 | −31 |
|
| ns | ns |
| ||
| V2 | 16 | 173 | 39 | 20 | 147 | 36 | ||||||||||
| HDL (mg/dL) | V1 | 16 | 56 | 16 | −2 | 20 | 49 | 18 | −4 | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ||
| V2 | 16 | 54 | 12 | 20 | 45 | 14 | ||||||||||
| LDL (mg/dL) | V1 | 16 | 127 | 36 | −21 | 20 | 109 | 28 | −26 |
|
| ns | ns |
| ||
| V2 | 16 | 106 | 31 | 20 | 83 | 31 | ||||||||||
| TAG (mg/dL) | V1 | 16 | 133 | 65 | −30 | 20 | 161 | 65 | −35 |
|
| ns | ns | ns | ||
| V2 | 16 | 103 | 72 | 20 | 127 | 77 | ||||||||||
| SBP (mmHg) | V1 | 15 | 134 | 17 | −9 | 19 | 134 | 21 | −6 | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ||
| V2 | 15 | 126 | 10 | 19 | 128 | 19 | ||||||||||
| DBP (mmHg) | V1 | 15 | 85 | 11 | −5 | 19 | 84 | 13 | −6 | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ||
| V2 | 15 | 80 | 9 | 19 | 78 | 11 | ||||||||||
Values are presented as mean (±SD), p-values of mean from t-test for analyzing differences within each group, which are presented (* = non-parametric test in the case of a missing normal distribution). TCHO= total cholesterol, HDL = high-density cholesterol, LDL= low-density cholesterol, TAG = triacylglycerides, CRP = c-reactive protein, HbA1c = glycated hemoglobin, SBP = systolic blood pressure in the right arm, DBP = diastolic blood pressure in the right arm, V1 = Visit 1, V2 = Visit 2 and Δ = V2 − V1.
Macronutrient intake differences within and between diet groups.
| VLC | Δ | LF | Δ | VLC | LF | Δ | V1 | V2 | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Macronutrient Intake | Visit |
| Mean | ±SD |
| Mean | ±SD | |||||||||
| Calories (kcal) | V1 | 14 | 2035 | 663 | −717 | 15 | 2022 | 790 | −1098 |
|
|
| ns |
| ||
| V2 | 14 | 1318 | 220 | 15 | 925 | 61 | ||||||||||
| Protein (g/kg bw) | V1 | 14 | 0.95 | 0.15 | 0.21 | 15 | 0.94 | 0.2 | −0.26 |
|
|
| ns |
| ||
| V2 | 14 | 1.16 | 0.26 | 15 | 0.67 | 0.18 | ||||||||||
| Carbohydrate (g) | V1 | 14 | 196 | 69 | −157 | 15 | 203 | 93 | −85 |
|
|
| ns |
| ||
| V2 | 14 | 39 | 10 | 15 | 118 | 11 | ||||||||||
| Fat (%) | V1 | 14 | 40 | 9 | 14 | 15 | 38 | 6 | −16 | ns |
|
| ns |
| ||
| V2 | 14 | 54 | 6 | 15 | 21 | 2 | ||||||||||
Values are presented as mean (±SD), p-values of mean from t-test for analyzing difference within each group are presented. Difference significant at p < 0.05. V1 = Visit 1, V2 = Visit 2 and Δ = V2 − V1. Macronutrients (and energy) p-value was based on g per kg BW calculations. Results are shown as mean ± SD.
Differences within diet groups and diet interaction effect on FMD.
| VLC | Δ | LF | Δ | VLC | LF | Visit | Visit x Time | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Endothelial Function | Visit |
| Mean | ±SD |
| Mean | ±SD | ||||||||
| FMD (%) | V1 | 16 | 5.74 | 4.06 | −0.26 | 20 | 4.32 | 3.5 | 2.27 | ns |
| ns |
| ||
| V2 | 16 | 5.48 | 3.21 | 20 | 6.59 | 4.69 | |||||||||
Values are presented as mean (±SD), p-values of mean from t-test for analyzing differences within each group are presented. FMD was calculated using ANOVA for repeated measurements adjusted for kilocalories intake changes per kg BW. Difference significant at p < 0.05. FMD = flow mediated dilation V1 = Visit 1, V2 = Visit 2 and Δ = V2 − V1.
Figure 3Correlations between flow mediated dilation (FMD) and macronutrient intake after 3 weeks diet. (A) Protein intake at Visit 2 (V2) in the very low carbohydrate (VLC) diet, n = 15, (B) protein intake at V2 in the low fat (LF) diet, n = 18, (C) carbohydrate intake at V2 in the VLC diet, n = 15 (D) carbohydrate intake at V2 in the LF diet, n = 18, (E) fat intake at V2 in the VLC diet, n = 15 (F), fat intake at V2 in the LF diet, n = 18. A–F show data after macronutrient intake correction for body weight at V2.