4.6 Review

Effect of dietary advanced glycation end-products restriction on type 2 diabetes mellitus control: a systematic review

期刊

NUTRITION REVIEWS
卷 80, 期 2, 页码 294-305

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1093/nutrit/nuab020

关键词

advanced glycation end products; diet; glucose; inflammation; type 2 diabetes mellitus

资金

  1. Coordenacao de Aperfeicoamento de Pessoal de N~ivel Superior (Brazil)
  2. Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Cientifico e Tecnologico (Brazil) [302851/2019-4]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Critically analyzing studies on the effects of restricting dietary advanced glycation end-products (AGEs) on patients with type 2 diabetes, it was found that such restriction may help lower insulin resistance and blood sugar levels, but there is some controversy regarding its impact on inflammation and oxidative stress.
Context: Reducing dietary advanced glycation end-products (AGEs) may favor diabetes control. Objective: Critically analyze studies about the effect of dietary AGEs restriction on inflammation, oxidative stress, and glycemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM2). Data Source: This systematic review was conducted according to PRISMA methodology. The PubMed, Web of Science, LILACS, and Cochrane Library databases were searched, using the terms type 2 diabetes, advanced glycation end products and diet. Data Extraction: Seven original studies were included in this review. The duration of the studies ranged from 1 day to 16 weeks. All extracted data were compiled, compared, and critically analyzed. Data Analysis: Glycemic variables were considered the primary outcomes. The secondary outcomes were glycation, inflammatory, and oxidative stress markers. Conclusion: Although serum insulin, homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance, and glycated hemoglobin values were lower after the consumption of AGEs restricted diets in most studies, there was a lack of unanimity regarding dietary AGEs' positive effect on inflammation, oxidative stress, and blood glucose.

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

4.6
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