Jia-Yu Zhang1,2, Yu-Ting Jiang1,2, Ya-Shu Liu1,2, Qing Chang1,2, Yu-Hong Zhao1,2, Qi-Jun Wu3,4. 1. Department of Clinical Epidemiology, Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University, No. 36, San Hao Street, Shenyang, 110004, Liaoning, People's Republic of China. 2. Clinical Research Center, Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, China. 3. Department of Clinical Epidemiology, Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University, No. 36, San Hao Street, Shenyang, 110004, Liaoning, People's Republic of China. wuqj@sj-hospital.org. 4. Clinical Research Center, Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, China. wuqj@sj-hospital.org.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The association of glycemic index (GI) and glycemic load (GL) with metabolic syndrome (MetS) is controversial. Therefore, we conducted this first systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis of observational studies to quantify these associations. METHODS: We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library for relevant studies up to 1 April 2019. Summary odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated by a random-effects model. This study was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42019131788). RESULTS: We included eight high-quality (n = 5) or medium-quality (n = 3) cross-sectional studies in the final meta-analysis, comprising 6058 MetS events and 28,998 participants. The summary ORs of MetS for the highest versus lowest categories were 1.23 (95% CI 1.10-1.38, I2 = 0, tau2 = 0, n = 5) for dietary GI, 1.06 (95% CI 0.89-1.25, I2 = 36.2%, tau2 = 0.0151, n = 6) for dietary GL. The summary OR was 1.12 (95% CI 1.00-1.26, I2 = 0, tau2 = 0, n = 3) per 5 GI units, 0.96 (95% CI 0.83-1.10, I2 = 33.4%, tau2 = 0.0059, n = 2) per 20 GL units. CONCLUSIONS: Dietary GI was positively associated with the prevalence of MetS. However, no significant association was found between dietary GL and the prevalence of MetS. Further studies with prospective design are needed to establish potential causal relationship between dietary GI and the MetS.
PURPOSE: The association of glycemic index (GI) and glycemic load (GL) with metabolic syndrome (MetS) is controversial. Therefore, we conducted this first systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis of observational studies to quantify these associations. METHODS: We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library for relevant studies up to 1 April 2019. Summary odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated by a random-effects model. This study was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42019131788). RESULTS: We included eight high-quality (n = 5) or medium-quality (n = 3) cross-sectional studies in the final meta-analysis, comprising 6058 MetS events and 28,998 participants. The summary ORs of MetS for the highest versus lowest categories were 1.23 (95% CI 1.10-1.38, I2 = 0, tau2 = 0, n = 5) for dietary GI, 1.06 (95% CI 0.89-1.25, I2 = 36.2%, tau2 = 0.0151, n = 6) for dietary GL. The summary OR was 1.12 (95% CI 1.00-1.26, I2 = 0, tau2 = 0, n = 3) per 5 GI units, 0.96 (95% CI 0.83-1.10, I2 = 33.4%, tau2 = 0.0059, n = 2) per 20 GL units. CONCLUSIONS: Dietary GI was positively associated with the prevalence of MetS. However, no significant association was found between dietary GL and the prevalence of MetS. Further studies with prospective design are needed to establish potential causal relationship between dietary GI and the MetS.
Authors: Anna Kordowski; Axel Künstner; Lisa Schweitzer; Stephan Theis; Torsten Schröder; Hauke Busch; Christian Sina; Martin Smollich Journal: Front Nutr Date: 2022-03-07
Authors: Belinda S Lennerz; Andrew P Koutnik; Svetlana Azova; Joseph I Wolfsdorf; David S Ludwig Journal: J Clin Invest Date: 2021-01-04 Impact factor: 14.808