4.4 Article

Examining dietary acid load in individuals with type 2 diabetes: a case-control study

期刊

出版社

VERDUCI PUBLISHER

关键词

Dietary acid load; Type 2 diabetes; Potential renal acid load; Net endogenous acid production

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This case-control study aimed to evaluate the relationship between dietary acid load and the risk of type 2 diabetes. The findings suggest that a high acid load in the diet may increase the risk of type 2 diabetes.
OBJECTIVE: Diabetes is a chronic disease that can cause various complications and has a high prevalence. Evidence increasingly shows that acid-base homeostasis is critical to maintaining normal metabolic function. This case-control study aims to evaluate the relationship between dietary acid load and the risk of type 2 diabetes.PATIENTS AND METHODS: This study re-cruited 204 participants, 92 of whom had just been diagnosed with type 2 diabetes, and 102 healthy controls who were matched in age and gender as controls. Twenty-four dietary recall was used for dietary intake assessments. Di-etary acid load was approximated using two dif-ferent methods: potential renal acid load (PRAL) and net endogenous acid production (NEAP), both calculated from dietary recalls.RESULTS: In the case and control groups, the dietary acid load mean scores were 4.18 +/- 26.8, 20.84 +/- 29.54 mEq/day for PRAL, and 55.11 +/- 29.23, 68.43 +/- 32.23 mEq/day for NEAP, respectively. When it came to the multiple possible confounders, the participants in the highest tertile of PRAL (OR 4.43, 95% CI: 1.38-23.81, ptrend<0.001) and NEAP (OR: 3.15, 95% CI: 1.53-9.59, ptrend<0.001) had a signifi-cantly higher risk of developing type 2 diabetes compared to those in the lowest tertile. CONCLUSIONS: The findings of the present study suggest that a high acid load in the diet may increase the risk of type 2 diabetes. Therefore, it is possible that limiting dietary acid load could lower type 2 diabetes risk in vulnerable individuals.

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

4.4
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