4.7 Article

Resistant Starch Consumption Effects on Glycemic Control and Glycemic Variability in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes: A Randomized Crossover Study

Journal

NUTRIENTS
Volume 13, Issue 11, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/nu13114052

Keywords

resistant starch; banana; glycemic variability; glycemic control; type 2 diabetes; continuous glucose monitoring

Funding

  1. Programa de Fomento a la Investigacion of the Universidad Juarez Autonoma de Tabasco [UJAT-DACS 2015-IA-09]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study shows that under the experimental conditions, resistant starch from NBS and HMS did not improve glycemic control or variability in patients with type 2 diabetes. Further longer studies are needed to determine if these findings were affected by different baseline microbiota or other environmental factors.
We previously observed beneficial effects of native banana starch (NBS) with a high resistant starch (RS) content on glycemic response in lean and obese participants. Here, we aimed to determine the effects of NBS and high-amylose maize starch (HMS) on glycemic control (GC) and glycemic variability (GV) in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) when treatments were matched for digestible starch content. In a randomized, crossover study, continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) was performed in 17 participants (aged 28-65 years, BMI & GE; 25 kg/m(2), both genders) consuming HMS, NBS, or digestible maize starch (DMS) for 4 days. HMS and NBS induced an increase in 24 h mean blood glucose during days 2 to 4 (p < 0.05). CONGA, GRADE, and J-index values were higher in HMS compared with DMS only at day 4 (p < 0.05). Yet, NBS intake provoked a reduction in fasting glycemia changes from baseline compared with DMS (p = 0.0074). In conclusion, under the experimental conditions, RS from two sources did not improve GC or GV. Future longer studies are needed to determine whether these findings were affected by a different baseline microbiota or other environmental factors.

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