4.7 Article

Gastrointestinal hormones and appetite ratings after weight loss induced by diet or bariatric surgery

期刊

OBESITY
卷 31, 期 2, 页码 399-411

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/oby.23655

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study aimed to compare changes in gastrointestinal hormones and appetite ratings after weight loss induced by a very low-energy diet alone or in combination with sleeve gastrectomy (SG) or Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB). The results showed that SG and RYGB led to more significant changes in gastrointestinal hormones compared with diet alone, while appetite ratings decreased in all groups.
ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to compare changes in gastrointestinal hormones and appetite ratings after a similar weight loss induced by a very low-energy diet alone or in combination with sleeve gastrectomy (SG) or Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB). MethodsPatients with severe obesity scheduled for SG (n = 15) and RYGB (n = 14) and 15 controls (very low-energy diet alone) were recruited. Body weight/composition, plasma concentrations of ss-hydroxybutyric acid, acylated ghrelin, total glucagon-like peptide-1, total peptide YY, cholecystokinin, and ratings of hunger, fullness, desire to eat, and prospective food consumption were measured pre- and postprandially, before and after 10 weeks of intervention. ResultsChanges in body weight/composition and level of ketosis were similar across groups. In SG and RYGB, basal and postprandial acylated ghrelin declined, and postprandial glucagon-like peptide-1 increased, both significantly more compared with controls. Postprandial peptide YY increased in all groups. Overall, postprandial hunger decreased, and postprandial fullness increased. But ratings of desire to eat and prospective food consumption were more favorable after both surgeries compared with controls. ConclusionsWeight loss with SG and RYGB leads to more favorable changes in gastrointestinal hormones compared with diet alone, although ratings of appetite were reduced across all groups.

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