4.6 Review

A systematic review and meta-analyses of food preference modifications after bariatric surgery

期刊

OBESITY REVIEWS
卷 22, 期 10, 页码 -

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/obr.13315

关键词

bariatric surgery; food choices; food preference; food reward

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This systematic review and meta-analyses found that following bariatric surgery, there were changes in food preferences in terms of macronutrient intake, food selection, and overall food appreciation. Specifically, there was an increase in protein energy percentage and a decrease in fat energy percentage in the postoperative period.
This systematic review and meta-analyses aimed to synthesize evidence of the link between bariatric surgery and changes in food preferences, considering the method of assessment. MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Cinahl, PsychINFO, ProQuest, and Open grey were searched incorporating two blocks of terms (Intervention and Food Preferences). Interventional or observational studies involving patients (BMI >= 35 kg m(-2)) with sleeve gastrectomy (SG) or Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass (RYGB) and a control group were included. Meta-analyses were performed comparing the standardized daily mean percentage energy from proteins, carbohydrates, and lipids between preoperative and postoperative patients. Fifty-seven studies concerning 2,271 patients with RYGB and 903 patients with SG met the inclusion criteria, of which 24 were eligible for meta-analysis. Despite a total reduction in macronutrient intakes, the meta-analyses revealed a postoperative increase in percentage energy from proteins at 12 months (0.24, 95% CI: 0.03, 0.46, {I-2} = 73%) and a decrease in percentage energy from fat at 1 month (-0.47, 95% CI: 0.86, 0.09, {I-2} = 72%), up to 24 months (-0.20, 95% CI: -0.31, 0.08, {I-2} = 0%). In conclusion, the present systematic review and meta-analyses showed changes of food preferences in terms of macronutrient, food selection and, overall food appreciation up to 5 years following bariatric surgery.

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