4.7 Article

Effects of alternate-day fasting or daily calorie restriction on body composition, fat distribution, and circulating adipokines: Secondary analysis of a randomized controlled trial

期刊

CLINICAL NUTRITION
卷 37, 期 6, 页码 1871-1878

出版社

CHURCHILL LIVINGSTONE
DOI: 10.1016/j.clnu.2017.11.018

关键词

Calorie restriction; Alternate day fasting; Body composition; Visceral adipose tissue; Adipokine; Obese adult

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health [R01HL106228, T32HL007034, F32DK107157]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background & aims: Indirect comparisons suggest that alternate-day fasting (ADF) may produce greater improvements in body composition, fat distribution, and/or the adipokine profile compared to daily calorie restriction (CR), but this has not been tested directly. In a pre-planned secondary analysis of a randomized controlled trial, we compared changes in the VAT:SAT ratio, FFM:total mass ratio, and the adipokine profile between ADF and CR. Methods: Overweight and obese participants (n = 100) were randomized to 1) ADF (alternating every 24-h between consuming 25% or 125% of energy needs); 2) CR (consuming 75% of needs every day); or 3) control (consuming 100% of needs every day) for 24 wk. Results: The VAT:SAT ratio did not change in any group. The FFM:total mass ratio increased in both ADF (0.03 0.00) and CR (0.03 +/- 0.01) compared to the control group (P < 0.01), with no differences between the intervention groups. Circulating leptin decreased in both the ADF group (-18 +/- 6%) and CR group (-31 +/- 10%) relative to the control group (P < 0.05), with no differences between the intervention groups. Circulating levels of adiponectin, resistin, IL-6, and TNF-oc did not change in either intervention group relative to the control group. Conclusion: ADF and CR similarly improve the FFM:total mass ratio and reduce leptin after a 24-wk intervention. (C) 2017 Elsevier Ltd and European Society for Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism. 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

4.7
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