Search

This randomized trial tested the effect of metformin on glycemic control and cardiac function in patients with heart failure (HF) and type 2 diabetes while evaluating intestinal effects on selected gut microbiome products reflected by trimethylamine-N-oxide (TMAO) and gut-derived incretins. Metformin treatment improved glycemic control and postprandial metabolism and enhanced postprandial glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP-1) secretion but did not influence cardiac function or the TMAO levels. Metabolic effects of metformin in HF may be mediated by an improvement in intestinal endocrine function and enhanced secretion of the gut-derived incretin GLP-1. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Summary: This review synthesized the evidence from randomized controlled trials comparing the effect of meal replacements (MRs) as part of a weight loss intervention with conventional food‐based weight loss diets on cardiometabolic risk in individuals with pre‐diabetes and features of metabolic syndrome. MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library were searched through January 16, 2024. Data were pooled using the generic inverse variance method and expressed as mean difference [95% confidence intervals]. The overall certainty of the evidence was assessed using GRADE. Ten trials (n = 1254) met the eligibility criteria. MRs led to greater reductions in body weight (−1.38 kg [−1.81, −0.95]), body mass index (BMI, −0.56 kg/m2 [−0.78, −0.34]), waist circumference (−1.17 cm [−1.93, −0.41]), HbA1c (−0.11% [−0.22, 0.00]), LDL‐c (−0.18 mmol/L [−0.28, −0.08]), non‐HDL‐c (−0.17 mmol/L [−0.33, −0.01]), and systolic blood pressure (−2.22 mmHg [−4.20, −0.23]). The overall certainty of the evidence was low to moderate owing to imprecision and/or inconsistency. The available evidence suggests that incorporating MRs into a weight loss intervention leads to small important reductions in body weight, BMI, LDL‐c, non‐HDL‐c, and systolic blood pressure, and trivial reductions in waist circumference and HbA1c, beyond that seen with conventional food‐based weight loss diets. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Adverse associations of low- and no-calorie sweetened beverages (LNCSB) with cardiometabolic outcomes in observational studies may be explained by reverse causality and residual confounding.Purpose: To address these limitations we used change analyses of repeated measures of intake and substitution analyses to synthesize the association of LNCSB with cardiometabolic outcomes.Data Sources: MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched up to 10 June 2021 for prospective cohort studies with ≥1 year of follow-up duration in adults.Study Selection: Outcomes included changes in clinical measures of adiposity, risk of overweight/obesity, metabolic syndrome, type 2 diabetes (T2D), cardiovascular disease, and total mortality.Data Extraction: Two independent reviewers extracted data, assessed study quality, and assessed certainty of evidence using GRADE. Data were pooled with a random-effects model and expressed as mean difference (MD) or risk ratio (RR) and 95% CI.Data Synthesis: A total of 14 cohorts (416,830 participants) met the eligibility criteria. Increase in LNCSB intake was associated with lower weight (5 cohorts, 130,020 participants; MD -0.008 kg/year [95% CI -0.014, -0.002]). Substitution of LNCSB for sugar-sweetened beverages (SSB) was associated with lower weight (three cohorts, 165,579 participants; MD, -0.12 [-0.14, -0.10,] kg/y) and lower incidence of obesity (OB) (one cohort, 15,765 participants; RR 0.88 [95% CI 0.88, 0.89]), coronary heart disease (six cohorts, 233,676 participants; 0.89 [0.81, 0.98]), cardiovascular disease mortality (one cohort, 118,363 participants; 0.95 [0.90, 0.99]), and total mortality (one cohort, 118,363 participants; 0.96 [0.94, 0.98]) with no adverse associations across other outcomes. Substitution of water for SSB showed lower weight (three cohorts, 165,579 participants; MD -0.10 kg/year [-0.13, -0.06]), lower waist circumference (one cohort, 173 participants; -2.71 cm/year [-4.27, -1.15]) and percent body fat (one cohort, 173 participants; -1.51% per year [-2.61, -0.42]), and lower incidence of OB (one cohort, 15,765 participants; RR 0.85 [0.75, 0.97]) and T2D (three cohorts, 281,855 participants; 0.96 [0.94, 0.98]). Substitution of LNCSB for water showed no adverse associations.Limitations: The evidence was low to very low certainty owing to downgrades for imprecision, indirectness, and/or inconsistency.Conclusions: LNCSB were not associated with cardiometabolic harm in analyses that model the exposure as change or substitutions. The available evidence provides some indication that LNCSB in their intended substitution for SSB may be associated with cardiometabolic benefit, comparable with the standard of care, water. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Goal: Our study focuses on examining the relationship between the frequency and timing of meals and changes in BMI in the Adventist Health Study-2 (AHS-2) which represents a relatively healthy population in North America., Methodology: A longitudinal analysis was undertaken using data from 48 673 individuals monitored over an average period of 7.43 ± 1.24 years. The number of meals per day, length of nighttime fasting, eating breakfast and timing of the largest meal of the day (breakfast 5-11 a.m., lunch noon-4 p.m. or supper/dinner 5-11 p.m.) were used as independent variables. The primary output was the change in body mass index (BMI) once in a year. Linear regression analyses were adjusted for all important demographic factors and lifestyle factors., Results: Consumption of 1 and 2 meals a day was associated with decrease in BMI (-0.04; 95% CI -0.06 to -0.03 and -0.02; 95% CI -0.03 to -0,01 kg.m-2 per year, respectively). On the other hand, consumption of 3 or more meals a day was associated with increase in BMI, in a linear relation (p < 0.001). BMI of those who skipped breakfast increased (0.029; 95% CI 0.021-0.037 kg.m-2 per year; p = 0.002) as compared to no BMI change in those who had breakfast (-0.0002; 95% CI -0.005 to + 0.004 kg.m-2 per year). Those, whose largest meal of the day was breakfast, recorded no significant change in BMI (-0.002 95% CI -0.008 to +0.004 kg.m-2 per year). On the contrary, the largest supper was associated with the greatest increase in BMI (0.034; 95% CI 0.029-0.040 kg.m-2 per year)., Conclusion: Our results indicate that eating less frequently, consuming breakfast and having the largest meal in the morning hours may be effective measures to prevent weight gain.Key words: body mass index (BMI) - frequency and timing of meals - body mass regulation - breakfast.