4.7 Article

Effects of Different Types of Carbohydrates on Arterial Stiffness: A Comparison of Isomaltulose and Sucrose

Journal

NUTRIENTS
Volume 13, Issue 12, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/nu13124493

Keywords

arterial stiffness; glucose ingestion; middle-aged and older patients; isomaltulose; sucrose

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study aimed to investigate the impact of different carbohydrates on arterial stiffness during hyperglycemia in middle-aged and older adults. Results showed that intake of isomaltulose effectively inhibited the acute increase in arterial stiffness, which may have significant clinical implications for dietary programs in middle-aged and elderly patients.
Increased arterial stiffness during acute hyperglycemia is a risk factor for cardiovascular disease, but the type of carbohydrate that inhibits it is unknown. The purpose of this study was to determine the efficacy of low-glycemic-index isomaltulose on arterial stiffness during hyperglycemia in middle-aged and older adults. Ten healthy middle-aged and older adult subjects orally ingested a solution containing 25 g of isomaltulose (ISI trial) and sucrose (SSI trial) in a crossover study. In the SSI trial, the brachial-ankle (ba) pulse wave velocity (PWV) increased 30, 60, and 90 min after ingestion compared with that before ingestion (p < 0.01); however, in the ISI trial, the baPWV did not change after ingestion compared with that before ingestion. Blood glucose levels 30 min after intake were lower in the ISI trial than in the SSI trial (p < 0.01). The baPWV and systolic blood pressure were positively correlated 90 min after isomaltulose and sucrose ingestion (r = 0.640, p < 0.05). These results indicate that isomaltulose intake inhibits an acute increase in arterial stiffness. The results of the present study may have significant clinical implications on the implementation of dietary programs for middle-aged and elderly patients.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available