Suppr超能文献

隔日禁食对代谢健康的肥胖成年人减重、维持体重及心脏保护作用的影响:一项随机临床试验

Effect of Alternate-Day Fasting on Weight Loss, Weight Maintenance, and Cardioprotection Among Metabolically Healthy Obese Adults: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

作者信息

Trepanowski John F, Kroeger Cynthia M, Barnosky Adrienne, Klempel Monica C, Bhutani Surabhi, Hoddy Kristin K, Gabel Kelsey, Freels Sally, Rigdon Joseph, Rood Jennifer, Ravussin Eric, Varady Krista A

机构信息

Department of Kinesiology and Nutrition, University of Illinois at Chicago.

Department of Kinesiology and Nutrition, University of Illinois at Chicago2Nutrition Obesity Research Center, University of Alabama at Birmingham.

出版信息

JAMA Intern Med. 2017 Jul 1;177(7):930-938. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2017.0936.

Abstract

IMPORTANCE

Alternate-day fasting has become increasingly popular, yet, to date, no long-term randomized clinical trials have evaluated its efficacy.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the effects of alternate-day fasting vs daily calorie restriction on weight loss, weight maintenance, and risk indicators for cardiovascular disease.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A single-center randomized clinical trial of obese adults (18 to 64 years of age; mean body mass index, 34) was conducted between October 1, 2011, and January 15, 2015, at an academic institution in Chicago, Illinois.

INTERVENTIONS

Participants were randomized to 1 of 3 groups for 1 year: alternate-day fasting (25% of energy needs on fast days; 125% of energy needs on alternating "feast days"), calorie restriction (75% of energy needs every day), or a no-intervention control. The trial involved a 6-month weight-loss phase followed by a 6-month weight-maintenance phase.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcome was change in body weight. Secondary outcomes were adherence to the dietary intervention and risk indicators for cardiovascular disease.

RESULTS

Among the 100 participants (86 women and 14 men; mean [SD] age, 44 [11] years), the dropout rate was highest in the alternate-day fasting group (13 of 34 [38%]), vs the daily calorie restriction group (10 of 35 [29%]) and control group (8 of 31 [26%]). Mean weight loss was similar for participants in the alternate-day fasting group and those in the daily calorie restriction group at month 6 (-6.8% [95% CI, -9.1% to -4.5%] vs -6.8% [95% CI, -9.1% to -4.6%]) and month 12 (-6.0% [95% CI, -8.5% to -3.6%] vs -5.3% [95% CI, -7.6% to -3.0%]) relative to those in the control group. Participants in the alternate-day fasting group ate more than prescribed on fast days, and less than prescribed on feast days, while those in the daily calorie restriction group generally met their prescribed energy goals. There were no significant differences between the intervention groups in blood pressure, heart rate, triglycerides, fasting glucose, fasting insulin, insulin resistance, C-reactive protein, or homocysteine concentrations at month 6 or 12. Mean high-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels at month 6 significantly increased among the participants in the alternate-day fasting group (6.2 mg/dL [95% CI, 0.1-12.4 mg/dL]), but not at month 12 (1.0 mg/dL [95% CI, -5.9 to 7.8 mg/dL]), relative to those in the daily calorie restriction group. Mean low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels were significantly elevated by month 12 among the participants in the alternate-day fasting group (11.5 mg/dL [95% CI, 1.9-21.1 mg/dL]) compared with those in the daily calorie restriction group.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Alternate-day fasting did not produce superior adherence, weight loss, weight maintenance, or cardioprotection vs daily calorie restriction.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00960505.

摘要

重要性

隔日禁食越来越流行,但迄今为止,尚无长期随机临床试验评估其疗效。

目的

比较隔日禁食与每日热量限制对体重减轻、体重维持及心血管疾病风险指标的影响。

设计、地点和参与者:2011年10月1日至2015年1月15日在伊利诺伊州芝加哥的一所学术机构进行了一项针对肥胖成年人(18至64岁;平均体重指数为34)的单中心随机临床试验。

干预措施

参与者被随机分为3组,为期1年:隔日禁食(禁食日能量需求的25%;交替的“盛宴日”能量需求的125%)、热量限制(每天能量需求的75%)或无干预对照组。该试验包括一个为期6个月的体重减轻阶段,随后是一个为期6个月的体重维持阶段。

主要结局和测量指标

主要结局是体重变化。次要结局是对饮食干预的依从性和心血管疾病风险指标。

结果

在100名参与者(86名女性和14名男性;平均[标准差]年龄为44[11]岁)中,隔日禁食组的退出率最高(34人中有13人[38%]),而每日热量限制组为35人中有10人[29%],对照组为31人中有8人[26%]。与对照组相比,隔日禁食组参与者在第6个月(-6.8%[95%CI,-9.1%至-4.5%]对-6.8%[95%CI,-9.1%至-4.6%])和第12个月(-6.0%[95%CI,-8.5%至-3.6%]对-5.3%[95%CI،-7.6%至-3.0%])的平均体重减轻情况与每日热量限制组相似。隔日禁食组参与者在禁食日吃得比规定的多,在盛宴日吃得比规定的少,而每日热量限制组参与者总体上达到了规定的能量目标。在第6个月或第12个月时,干预组之间在血压、心率、甘油三酯、空腹血糖、空腹胰岛素、胰岛素抵抗、C反应蛋白或同型半胱氨酸浓度方面没有显著差异。与每日热量限制组相比,隔日禁食组参与者在第6个月时平均高密度脂蛋白胆固醇水平显著升高(6.2mg/dL[95%CI,0.1 - 12.4mg/dL]),但在第12个月时没有(1.0mg/dL[95%CI,-5.9至7.8mg/dL])。与每日热量限制组相比,隔日禁食组参与者在第12个月时平均低密度脂蛋白胆固醇水平显著升高(11.5mg/dL[95%CI,1.9 - 21.1mg/dL])。

结论及相关性

与每日热量限制相比,隔日禁食在依从性、体重减轻、体重维持或心脏保护方面并无优势。

试验注册

clinicaltrials.gov标识符:NCT00960505。

相似文献

引用本文的文献

本文引用的文献

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验