| Literature DB >> 31346341 |
María González-Rodríguez1, Marcos Pazos-Couselo1,2, José M García-López1,2, Santiago Rodríguez-Segade3, Javier Rodríguez-García3, Carmen Túñez-Bastida4, Francisco Gude5.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There is a growing interest in the pathopysiological consequences of postprandial hyperglycemia. It is well known that in diabetic patients 2 h plasma glucose is a better risk predictor for coronary heart disease than fasting plasma glucose. Data on the glycemic response in healthy people are scarce.Entities:
Keywords: Continuous glucose monitoring; Healthy population; Non-diabetic population; Postprandial glycemic response
Year: 2019 PMID: 31346341 PMCID: PMC6637571 DOI: 10.1186/s12986-019-0368-1
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nutr Metab (Lond) ISSN: 1743-7075 Impact factor: 4.169
Clinical characteristics (mean ± standard deviation)
| Women ( | Men ( | |
|---|---|---|
| Age (years) | 50 ± 14 | 46 ± 14 |
| Height (cm) | 157 ± 6 | 172 ± 7 |
| Weight (kg) | 70 ± 11 | 85 ± 17 |
| Body Mass Index (kg/m2) | 28.4 ± 5 | 29.0 ± 5 |
| Waist measurement (cm) | 90 ± 13 | 97 ± 14 |
| Systolic blood pressure (mm Hg) | 129 ± 17 | 130 ± 12 |
| Diastolic blood pressure (mm Hg) | 77 ± 8 | 81 ± 8 |
| HbA1c (%) | 5.4 ± 0.4 | 5.4 ± 0.3 |
| Blood glucose (mg/dL) | 89 ± 11 | 92 ± 11 |
| Subjects with Prediabetes (%) | 32.0 | 28.8 |
Mean glycemia during the postprandial period
| Mean glycemia (mg/dL) | ||
|---|---|---|
| Time (min) | Women | Men |
| 0 | 106 | 100 |
| 60 | 122 | 119 |
| 120 | 118 | 114 |
| 180 | 113 | 111 |
| 240 | 108 | 107 |
| 300 | 105 | 104 |
| 360 | 102 | 102 |
Fig. 1Glycemic response curves. Total glycemic response curves (mg/dL glucose) of the population sample (separated by sex) after dinner (6 h – postprandial period). The white line in the middle represents the mean
Multivariable analysis: Postprandial glycemic response in women
| Coefficient | Standard Error | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Basal glycaemia (mg/dL) | 0.0060 | 0.0003 | 0.0000 |
| Carbohydrates (g) | 0.0005 | 0.0002 | 0.0094* |
| Fiber (g) | −0.0028 | 0.0013 | 0.043** |
| Prediabetes (yes) | 0.0692 | 0.0238 | 0.0037 |
The data in the table show the variables whose effect on the postprandial glycemic curve reached statistical significance
*See Fig. 2 for a better understanding
** See Fig. 3 for a better understanding
Multivariable analysis: Postprandial glycemic response in women
| Edf | ||
|---|---|---|
| Time (min) | 8.901 | 0.0000 |
| Fats (g) | 1.731 | 0.04* |
*See Fig. 4 for a better understanding
edf: estimated degrees of freedom
R2 = 0.38
Fig. 2Effect of carbohydrates on the postprandial glycemic curve over time in women. Significantly different glycemic response was observed in those women who consumed more carbohydrates. p < 0.05 using generalized additive mixed-effects models (GAMMs)
Fig. 3Effect of fats on the postprandial glycemic curve over time in women. Significantly different glycemic response was observed in those women who consumed more fats. p < 0.05 using generalized additive mixed-effects models (GAMMs)
Fig. 4Effect of fiber on the postprandial glycemic curve over time in women. Significantly different glycemic response was observed in those women who consumed more fiber. p < 0.05 using generalized additive mixed-effects models (GAMMs)
Multivariable analysis: Postprandial glycemic response in men
| Coefficient | Standard Error | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Basal glycaemia (mg/dL) | 0.0064 | 0.0004 | 0.0000 |
| Carbohydrates (g) | 0.0003 | 0.0001 | 0.0186* |
| Fibra (g) | −0.0004 | 0.0011 | 0.7157 |
| Prediabetes (yes) | 0.0254 | 0.0232 | 0.2726 |
The data in the table show the variables whose effect on the postprandial glycemic curve reached statistical significance
*See Fig. 5 for a better understanding
Multivariable analysis: Postprandial glycemic response in men
| Edf | ||
|---|---|---|
| Time (min) | 8.932 | 0.0000 |
| Fats (g) | 1.000 | 0.553 |
edf: estimated degrees of freedom
R2 = 0.33
Fig. 5Effect of carbohydrates on the postprandial glycemic curve over time in men. Significantly different glycemic response was observed in those men who consumed more carbohydrates. p < 0.05 using generalized additive mixed-effects models (GAMMs)