4.1 Article Proceedings Paper

Brain and systemic glucose metabolism in the healthy elderly following fish oil supplementation

期刊

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.plefa.2011.04.008

关键词

-

资金

  1. Canadian Institutes of Health Research Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Cerebral metabolic rate of glucose (CMRg) is lower in individuals affected by cognitive decline and dementia, especially in Alzheimer's disease. However, as yet there is no consensus as to whether CMRg decreases during healthy aging. Epidemiological studies show that weekly consumption of fish abundant in omega 3 fatty acids has a protective effect on cognition during aging. Thus, the primary objective of this human study was to use positron emission tomography analysis with F-18-fluorodeoxyglucose to evaluate whether supplementation with a fish oil rich in w3 fatty acids increases cerebral glucose metabolism in young or elderly adults. Healthy young (23 +/- 5 y old; n=5) and elderly (76 +/- 3 y old; n=6) women and men were included in the study. Semi-quantitative expression of the data as 'standardized uptake values' showed that elderly participants had significantly lower cerebral glucose metabolism compared with the young group. However, when expressed quantitatively a CMRg, there was no effect of age or omega 3 supplementation on glucose metabolism in any of the brains regions studied. Higher plasma triglyceride levels and higher plasma insulin levels were associated with lower CMRg in several regions, suggesting that a trend towards the metabolic syndrome may be associated with cerebral hypometabolism. We conclude that under these experimental conditions, omega 3 supplementation did not affect brain glucose metabolism in the healthy elderly. Future studies in this area should address whether glucose intolerance or other conditions linked to the metabolic syndrome impact negatively on brain glucose metabolism and cognition. (C) 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.1
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据