A network meta-analysis of the comparative efficacy of different dietary approaches on glycaemic control and weight loss in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and overweight or obesity.

IF 5.1 1区 农林科学 Q1 BIOCHEMISTRY & MOLECULAR BIOLOGY Food & Function Pub Date : 2024-11-18 DOI:10.1039/d4fo00337c
Yahui Yuan, Chun Chen, Qiaoyun Liu, Yehao Luo, Zhaojun Yang, YuPing Lin, Lu Sun, Guanjie Fan
{"title":"A network meta-analysis of the comparative efficacy of different dietary approaches on glycaemic control and weight loss in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and overweight or obesity.","authors":"Yahui Yuan, Chun Chen, Qiaoyun Liu, Yehao Luo, Zhaojun Yang, YuPing Lin, Lu Sun, Guanjie Fan","doi":"10.1039/d4fo00337c","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><i>Background</i>: Despite considerable literature supporting the benefit of dietary interventions in individuals with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and overweight/obesity, which diet works best is currently unknown. We conducted a systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) to evaluate the comparative effectiveness of different dietary approaches in overweight or obese adults with T2DM. <i>Methods</i>: We searched EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) and PubMed up till July 2023 for controlled studies using different dietary approaches. Next, we updated the literature search to September 2024 but found no new relevant studies. Glycated hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) levels and body weight were used as primary outcomes. For each outcome, a pooled effect was determined for each intervention compared with other interventions. Mean differences (MDs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) were computed. The surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) was used for ranking the dietary approaches. Moreover, confidence was assessed using the CINeMA (confidence in network meta-analysis) framework. <i>Results</i>: Overall, 31 trials that compared eight diet interventions (Mediterranean, moderate-carbohydrate, low-carbohydrate, vegetarian, low-glycaemic index/load, low-fat, high-protein and control diets) and involved 3096 people were included. In terms of glycemic control, the Mediterranean diet yielded the best ranking (SUCRA: 88.15%), followed by the moderate-carbohydrate diet (SUCRA: 83.3%) and low-carbohydrate (LC) diet (SUCRA: 55.7%). In terms of anthropometric measurements, the LC diet (SUCRA: 74.6%) ranked first, followed by the moderate-carbohydrate diet (SUCRA: 68.7%) and vegetarian diet (SUCRA: 57%). These results also showed that the differences in almost all dietary patterns regarding anthropometric measurements were mostly small and often trivial. <i>Conclusions</i>: In summary, the Mediterranean diet was the most efficient dietary intervention for the improvement of glycaemic control, and the LC diet obtained the highest score for anthropometric measurements in individuals with T2DM and concurrent overweight/obesity.</p>","PeriodicalId":77,"journal":{"name":"Food & Function","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Food & Function","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1039/d4fo00337c","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BIOCHEMISTRY & MOLECULAR BIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Despite considerable literature supporting the benefit of dietary interventions in individuals with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and overweight/obesity, which diet works best is currently unknown. We conducted a systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) to evaluate the comparative effectiveness of different dietary approaches in overweight or obese adults with T2DM. Methods: We searched EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) and PubMed up till July 2023 for controlled studies using different dietary approaches. Next, we updated the literature search to September 2024 but found no new relevant studies. Glycated hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) levels and body weight were used as primary outcomes. For each outcome, a pooled effect was determined for each intervention compared with other interventions. Mean differences (MDs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) were computed. The surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) was used for ranking the dietary approaches. Moreover, confidence was assessed using the CINeMA (confidence in network meta-analysis) framework. Results: Overall, 31 trials that compared eight diet interventions (Mediterranean, moderate-carbohydrate, low-carbohydrate, vegetarian, low-glycaemic index/load, low-fat, high-protein and control diets) and involved 3096 people were included. In terms of glycemic control, the Mediterranean diet yielded the best ranking (SUCRA: 88.15%), followed by the moderate-carbohydrate diet (SUCRA: 83.3%) and low-carbohydrate (LC) diet (SUCRA: 55.7%). In terms of anthropometric measurements, the LC diet (SUCRA: 74.6%) ranked first, followed by the moderate-carbohydrate diet (SUCRA: 68.7%) and vegetarian diet (SUCRA: 57%). These results also showed that the differences in almost all dietary patterns regarding anthropometric measurements were mostly small and often trivial. Conclusions: In summary, the Mediterranean diet was the most efficient dietary intervention for the improvement of glycaemic control, and the LC diet obtained the highest score for anthropometric measurements in individuals with T2DM and concurrent overweight/obesity.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
不同饮食方法对 2 型糖尿病和超重或肥胖症患者控制血糖和减轻体重疗效的网络荟萃分析。
背景:尽管有大量文献支持饮食干预对 2 型糖尿病(T2DM)和超重/肥胖症患者有益,但目前还不知道哪种饮食最有效。我们进行了一项系统综述和网络荟萃分析(NMA),以评估不同饮食方法对超重或肥胖成人 T2DM 患者的比较效果。方法:我们检索了 EMBASE、Cochrane 对照试验中央注册中心 (CENTRAL) 和 PubMed(截至 2023 年 7 月)中使用不同饮食方法的对照研究。随后,我们将文献检索更新至 2024 年 9 月,但未发现新的相关研究。我们将糖化血红蛋白 A1c (HbA1c) 水平和体重作为主要结果。对于每种结果,确定每种干预措施与其他干预措施相比的集合效应。计算了平均差 (MD) 和 95% 置信区间 (95%CI)。累积排序曲线下表面(SUCRA)用于对饮食方法进行排序。此外,还使用 CINeMA(网络荟萃分析中的置信度)框架对置信度进行了评估。结果:共纳入了 31 项试验,这些试验比较了八种饮食干预方法(地中海饮食、中等碳水化合物饮食、低碳水化合物饮食、素食、低血糖指数/负荷饮食、低脂肪饮食、高蛋白饮食和对照饮食),涉及 3096 人。在血糖控制方面,地中海饮食的效果最好(SUCRA:88.15%),其次是中等碳水化合物饮食(SUCRA:83.3%)和低碳水化合物饮食(SUCRA:55.7%)。在人体测量方面,低碳水化合物饮食(SUCRA:74.6%)排名第一,其次是中等碳水化合物饮食(SUCRA:68.7%)和素食饮食(SUCRA:57%)。这些结果还表明,几乎所有饮食模式在人体测量方面的差异都很小,而且往往微不足道。结论总之,地中海饮食是改善血糖控制最有效的饮食干预方法,而低脂饮食在 T2DM 和并发超重/肥胖症患者的人体测量方面得分最高。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Food & Function
Food & Function BIOCHEMISTRY & MOLECULAR BIOLOGY-FOOD SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY
CiteScore
10.10
自引率
6.60%
发文量
957
审稿时长
1.8 months
期刊介绍: Food & Function provides a unique venue for physicists, chemists, biochemists, nutritionists and other food scientists to publish work at the interface of the chemistry, physics and biology of food. The journal focuses on food and the functions of food in relation to health.
期刊最新文献
Enzymatic treatment to decrease the allergenicity of Pru p 3 from peach. Exploring the potential of sorghum with reference to its bioactivities, physicochemical properties and potential health benefits. Brassica rapa L. crude polysaccharide meditated synbiotic fermented whey beverage ameliorates hypobaric hypoxia induced intestinal damage. A network meta-analysis of the comparative efficacy of different dietary approaches on glycaemic control and weight loss in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and overweight or obesity. Bioaccessibility and unravelling of polyphenols, sulforaphane, and indoles biotransformation after in vitro gastrointestinal digestion of a novel lactofermented broccoli beverage.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1