4.7 Article

The Consumption of Beef Burgers Prepared with Wine Grape Pomace Flour Improves Fasting Glucose, Plasma Antioxidant Levels, and Oxidative Damage Markers in Humans: A Controlled Trial

期刊

NUTRIENTS
卷 10, 期 10, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/nu10101388

关键词

antioxidant; dietary intervention; fiber; oxidative damage; wine grape pomace

资金

  1. FONDEF-CONICYT [IT14i10011]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Wine grape pomace flour (WGPF) is a fruit byproduct that is high in fiber and antioxidants. We tested whether WGPF consumption could affect blood biochemical parameters, including oxidative stress biomarkers. In a three-month intervention study, 27 male volunteers, each with some components of metabolic syndrome, consumed a beef burger supplemented with 7% WGPF containing 3.5% of fiber and 1.2 mg gallic equivalents (GE)/g of polyphenols (WGPF-burger), daily, during the first month. The volunteers consumed no burgers in the second month, and one control-burger daily in the third month. At baseline and after these periods, we evaluated the metabolic syndrome components, plasma antioxidant status (i.e., 2,2-diphenyl-1-picrylhydrazyl radical scavenging capacity (DPPH), vitamin E, vitamin C), and oxidative damage markers (i.e., advanced oxidation protein products (AOPPs), oxidized low-density lipoproteins (oxLDLs), malondialdehyde (MDA)). The WGPF-burger intake significantly reduced glycemia and homeostatic model assessment-based measurement of insulin resistance. Vitamin C increased and decreased during the consumption of the WGPF-burger and control-burger, respectively. The WGPF-burger intake significantly decreased AOPP and oxLDL levels. Vitamin E and MDA levels showed no significant changes. In conclusion, the consumption of beef burgers prepared with WGPF improved fasting glucose and insulin resistance, plasma antioxidant levels, and oxidative damage markers. Therefore, this functional ingredient has potential as a dietary supplement to manage chronic disease risk in humans.

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