| Literature DB >> 34205359 |
Yutaka Inoue1,2, Yukari Kitani1,2, Satoshi Osakabe1,2, Yukitoshi Yamamoto1,2, Isamu Murata1, Ikuo Kanamoto1.
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to examine how gold kiwifruit pericarp (pericarp is defined as the skin of the fruit) consumption and the timing thereof affect the postprandial blood glucose profile. The study was conducted on twelve healthy volunteers (six men and six women). According to our results, the simultaneous intake of gold kiwifruit with bread and the prior intake of gold kiwifruit evidently suppressed the postprandial blood glucose elevation compared with exclusive bread intake. There was no significant difference in postprandial blood glucose changes between the ingestion of gold kiwifruit pericarp and pulp and that of gold kiwifruit pulp only. The highest postprandial blood glucose elevation was suppressed by 27.6% and the area under the blood glucose elevation curve by 29.3%, even with the exclusive ingestion of gold kiwifruit pulp. We predicted that the ingestion of both the pericarp and pulp of gold kiwifruit would reduce the postprandial blood glucose elevation to a greater extent than that of gold kiwifruit pulp only; however, there was no significant difference between the two. These results indicate that gold kiwifruit consumption significantly suppresses the postprandial blood glucose elevation regardless of pericarp presence or absence and the timing of ingestion.Entities:
Keywords: gold kiwifruit; intake timing; pericarp; postprandial blood glucose
Year: 2021 PMID: 34205359 PMCID: PMC8235107 DOI: 10.3390/nu13062103
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nutrients ISSN: 2072-6643 Impact factor: 5.717
Subject characteristics.
| Total ( | Male ( | Female ( | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age (year) | 24.8 ± 8.2 | 22.5 ± 0.8 | 27.0 ± 11.2 |
| Height (cm) | 165.6 ± 8.9 | 172.3 ± 4.6 | 158.9 ± 6.9 |
| Weight (kg) | 56.8 ± 6.9 | 60.7 ± 4.6 | 52.8 ± 6.4 |
| BMI (kg/m2) | 20.7 ± 1.9 | 20.5 ± 1.3 | 20.9 ± 2.0 |
| Hb Alc (%) | 5.2 ± 0.2 | 5.3 ± 0.2 | 5.2 ± 0.2 |
Values are shown as mean ± S.D.
Nutritional components and test-food amounts.
| B | PK | WK | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Weight (g) | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
| Height (cm) | 250.7 | 62.2 | 68.0 |
| Protein (g) | 8.5 | 0.9 | 0.9 |
| Fat (g) | 2.8 | 0.2 | 0.2 |
| CHO A vail. (g) | 45.9 | 13.4 | 14.5 |
| Fiber (g) | (2.3) | 1.4 | 2.2 |
B: Bread, PK: Pulp of Kiwi, WK: Whole Kiwi. B: Bread * URL: https://www.fujipan.co.jp/component/02.html (japanese) (accessed on 19 June 2021). K: kiwi * URL: https://www.zespri.com/ja-JP/blogdetail/8-important-nutrients (accessed on 19 June 2021).
Figure 1Mean difference between groups in ΔBlood Glucose. Data are shown as mean ± SEM (n = 12). No significant difference: Each treatment group. p < 0.05 vs. Bread, 30–180 min (Dunnett’s test).
Kinetic parameters of ΔBlood Glucose levels. Values are presented as mean ± SEM (n = 12).
| ΔBGmax (mg/dL) | ΔTmax (min) | IAUC (mg·min/dL) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| B | 67.4 ± 4.2 | 48.8 ± 4.4 | 4267.0 ± 397.5 |
| BPK | 49.3 ± 5.5 * | 39.6 ± 2.9 | 2955.9 ± 326.3 * |
| BWK | 49.6 ± 5.2 * | 38.8 ± 3.3 | 2074.1 ± 288.6 ** |
| B30B | 43.5 ± 4.6 ** | 70.0 ± 7.4 | 3194.8 ± 426.6 |
| PK30B | 40.2 ± 2.9 ** | 70.0 ± 6.9 | 2259.4 ± 288.8 ** |
| WK30B | 44.3 ± 4.0 ** | 76.3 ± 6.0 | 3256.9 ± 403.5 |
Values are shown as mean ± SEM (n = 12). *: p < 0.05 vs. B, **: p < 0.01 vs. B (Dunnett’s test).
Suppression rate of ΔBlood Glucose levels.
| ΔBGmax | IAUC | |
|---|---|---|
| BPK | −27.6% ± 4.8 | −29.3% ± 5.8 |
| BWK | −25.1% ± 7.0 | −46.2% ± 7.4 |
| B30B | −35.2% ± 5.6 | −19.4% ± 10.8 |
| PK30B | −39.0% ± 4.3 | −45.0% ± 7.3 |
| WK30B | −33.4% ± 6.1 | −15.6% ± 14.4 |
Values are shown mean ± SEM, n =12.
Figure 2Changes in satiety score. Data are presented as mean ± SEM.
Glucose releasing rate of test foods. Values are presented as mean ± SEM (n = 6).
| Materials | Glucose Concentration (µg/mL) | GR | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 20 min | 16 h | ||
| PK | 151.2 ± 2.3 | 153.9 ± 2.4 | 984 ± 2.6 |
| WK | 147.5 ± 1.4 | 145.5 ± 1.3 | 101.3 ± 1.7 |
| B | 265.4 ± 5.9 | 338.7 ± 4.8 | 78.3 ± 1.0 |
| BPK | 332.9 ± 8.9 | 430.0 ± 5.6 | 77.5 ± 2.0 |
| BWK | 282.8 ± 4.1 | 337.7 ± 1.8 | 83.8 ± 1.5 |
Values are shown as mean ± SEM (n = 6). There was no significant difference in each sample (Dunnett’s test).