| Literature DB >> 35020762 |
Thiago Henrique Annibale Vendramini1, Rodrigo Fernando Gomes Olivindo2, Rafael Vessecchi Amorim Zafalon1, Mariana Fragoso Rentas1, Lucca Denuci Zanini1, Andressa Rodrigues Amaral2, Vivian Pedrinelli2, Vinicius Vasques de Oliveira2, Larissa Wünsche Risolia1, Fabio Alves Teixeira2, Márcio Antonio Brunetto1,2.
Abstract
Obesity is the most common nutritional disorder in dogs and it is associated with many comorbidities. Some obesity risk factors have already been established, however, the evaluation of the effect of different individual variables on weight loss induced by calorie restriction, although very important, is still poorly explored. The weight loss protocol can be updated and improved by more precise and adjusted equations throughout the weight loss program in the clinical routine practice. Therefore, the objective of this study was to analyze weight loss program dynamics in groups according to reproductive status, age, body size, and breed, as well as to define more accurately the amount of calories per target metabolic weight throughout the program. Data of 1,053 cases, presented between 2012 and 2019 at the Veterinary Hospital of the School of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Science of the University of São Paulo (FMVZ-USP) were retrospectively analyzed. A total of 77 obese dogs (body condition scores 8/9 or 9/9) of different ages, breeds, sizes, and reproductive status were selected. These dogs did not have any concomitant illnesses and successfully completed the weight loss program. Statistical analysis was performed and values of p≤0.05 were considered significant. The proposed weight loss program was based on an energy restriction protocol where daily energy intake (in kcal) was estimated as 70 kcal × target weight0.75. The target weight (TW) was defined as 80% of the animal's current weight. The average calorie intake for weight loss (calories x target weight0.75) was lower for spayed females (62.36), differing from intact males (66.14) and neutered males (65.41), while intact females (63.66) showed intermediate values without differing between groups (p = 0.015). There were no differences between weight loss calories according to age (p = 0.473) or body size (p = 0.084), allowing the use of the same mathematical equation for intact and neutered dogs; for dogs older than 1 year and of different body sizes. Regarding the breed, the average calorie intake was lower (p = 0.002) in mixed breed dogs (61.54xTW0.75) when compared to obesity-prone purebred dogs (64.17xTW0.75) and other purebreds (65.27xTW0.75). It was concluded that spayed females and mixed breed dogs have greater difficulty in losing weight, that is, they need fewer calories per metabolic body weight for the weight loss program to succeed. A more accurate equation for energy requirement for weight loss can improve chances of success, therefore improving compliance and helping clinical management of obesity in dogs.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35020762 PMCID: PMC8754318 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0261946
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Calorie intake per target weight0.75 according with reproductive status.
| Variable | Spayed female | Intact female | Neutered male | Intact male | Average | SEM |
| ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (n = 38) | (n = 17) | (n = 14) | (n = 8) |
|
|
| |||
| Total weight loss | 62.36 | 63.66 | 65.41 | 66.14A | 64.77 | 0.333 |
|
| 0.5282 |
| Beginning of weight loss | 70 | 70 | 70 | 70 | 70 | 0 | - | - | - |
| 30 days | 66.39 | 67.16 | 68.19 | 67.66 | 67.03 | 0.491 | - | - | - |
| 60 days | 62.61 | 64.48 | 65.90 | 66.00 | 63.99 | 0.617 | - | - | - |
| 90 days | 60.86 | 62.99 | 65.27 | 63.93 | 62.53 | 0.799 | - | - | - |
| 120 days | 58.23 | 60.59 | 62.09 | 65.22 | 59.96 | 1.028 | - | - | - |
| 150 days | 57.37 | 57.56 | 60.25 | 69.94 | 58.29 | 1.224 | - | - | - |
A-BAverages in the same line followed by different letters differed by 5% in the Tukey test adjusted by PROC MIXED.
1Probability for reproductive status, time, and reproductive status*time interaction.
Calorie intake per target weight0.75 according with age.
| Variable | 1 to 8 years (n = 40) | > 8 years (n = 37) | Average | SEM |
| ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
| |||||
| Total weight loss | 64.60 | 64.95 | 64.76 | 0.333 | 0.473 |
| 0.587 |
| Beginning of weight loss | 70.00 | 70.00 | 70.00 | 0.000 | - | - | - |
| 30 days | 66.59 | 67.50 | 67.03 | 0.491 | - | - | - |
| 60 days | 63.10 | 64.94 | 63.98 | 0.617 | - | - | - |
| 90 days | 62.56 | 62.50 | 62.53 | 0.799 | - | - | - |
| 120 days | 60.37 | 59.48 | 59.96 | 1.028 | - | - | - |
| 150 days | 59.17 | 57.22 | 58.29 | 1.225 | - | - | - |
1Probability for effect of age, time, and age*time interaction.
Calorie intake per target weight0.75 according with body size.
| Variable | Small | Medium | Large and giant | Average | SEM |
| ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
| ||||||
| Total weight loss | 64.82 | 62.51 | 62.92 | 64.76 | 0.333 | 0.084 |
| 0.476 |
| Beginning of weight loss | 70.00 | 70.00 | 70.00 | 70.00 | 0.000 | - | - | - |
| 30 days | 67.41 | 65.34 | 67.19 | 67.03 | 0.491 | - | - | - |
| 60 days | 65.53 | 62.60 | 63.32 | 63.99 | 0.617 | - | - | - |
| 90 days | 64.96 | 63.22 | 60.75 | 62.53 | 0.799 | - | - | - |
| 120 days | 61.70 | 59.37 | 58.98 | 59.96 | 1.028 | - | - | - |
| 150 days | 59.59 | 60.23 | 57.11 | 58.29 | 1.225 | - | - | - |
1Small sized animals (up to 15 kg)
2Medium sized animals (15 to 25 kg)
3Large or giant animals (over 25 kg)
4Probability for effect of size, time and interaction size*time.
Calorie intake per target weight0.75 according with breed.
| Variable | Predisposition to obesity | Mixed breed (n = 26) | Other purebreds | Average | SEM |
| ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
| ||||||
| Total weight loss | 64.17 | 61.54 | 65.27 | 64.77 | 0.333 |
|
| 0.078 |
| Beginning of weight loss | 70.00 | 70.00 | 70.00 | 70.00 | 0.000 | - | - | - |
| 30 days | 66.85 | 66.32 | 68.38 | 67.03 | 0.491 | - | - | - |
| 60 days | 64.64 | 62.83 | 64.63 | 63.99 | 0.617 | - | - | - |
| 90 days | 63.08 | 60.08 | 64.6 | 62.53 | 0.799 | - | - | - |
| 120 days | 61.61 | 56.26 | 62.06 | 59.96 | 1.028 | - | - | - |
| 150 days | 60.68 | 53.95 | 62.00 | 58.29 | 1.224 | - | - | - |
A-BAverages in the same line followed by different letters differed by 5% in the Tukey test adjusted by PROC MIXED.
1Breeds popularly classified as prone to obesity [Golden Retriever (n = 6), Labrador (n = 17), Beagle (n = 2), English Bulldog (n = 2), Pug (n = 2), Cavalier King (n = 1), Cocker Spaniel (n = 1), Dachshund (n = 2)]
2Other breeds [Weimaraner (n = 1), Yorkshire (n = 1), Schnauzer (n = 1), Lhasa Apso (n = 2), German Shepherd (n = 1), Shetland Shepherd (n = 1), Pinscher (n = 4), Poodle (n = 7)]
3Probability for effect of breed, time and breed*time interaction.
Fig 1Regression analysis and complete distribution of the general weight loss equation [kcal x (TW0.75)] adjusted during the weight loss period.
Fig 2Regression analysis and complete distribution of the calories (kcal) applied to the weight loss equation [kcal x (TW0.75)] according with reproductive status.
Fig 3Regression analysis and complete distribution of the calories (kcal) applied to the weight loss equation [kcal x (TW0.75)] according with age.
Fig 4Regression analysis and complete distribution of the calories (kcal) applied to the weight loss equation [kcal x (TW0.75)] according with body size.
Fig 5Regression analysis and complete distribution of the calories (kcal) applied to the weight loss equation [kcal x (TW0.75)] according with breed.