Plain language summary
Energy restriction (ER) diets are considered an effective strategy for managing obesity and preventing or reducing the risk of associated comorbidities. However, there are very few previous studies comparing the quality of energy restriction diets and their effect on maximising the health benefits. Therefore, this 12-week, parallel-designed, randomised controlled trial compared the effects of a 25% high-quality ER diet with a 25% low-quality ER diet and a habitual diet on cardiometabolic risk factors of 110 participants with abdominal obesity. Both ER diets were nutritionally balanced. The high-quality ER diet had added Monounsaturated fatty acids (MUFAs), Omega-3 Polyunsaturated fatty acids (n-3 PUFAs), fibre, and plant protein and had less fructose in it. The low-quality ER diet contained Saturated fatty acids (SFAs) and monosaccharides such as fructose. At the end of the 12-week trial, participants on the 25% high-quality diet showed more promising results in weight loss, reduction in cholesterol and triglycerides, and adipose tissue gene expression of energy metabolism pathways compared to the 25% low-quality ER diet. Insulin-sensitive participants with abdominal obesity on a 25% high-quality diet lost more weight compared to the rest of the participants. Further robust studies are required to evaluate the findings due to the limitations of this study. However, healthcare professionals can use the results of this study to understand the beneficial effects of an ER diet when it is enriched with specific nutrients.
Abstract
BACKGROUND Despite the established relation between energy restriction (ER) and metabolic health, the most beneficial nutrient composition of a weight-loss diet is still a subject of debate. OBJECTIVES The aim of the study was to examine the additional effects of nutrient quality on top of ER. METHODS A parallel-designed, 12-week 25% ER dietary intervention study was conducted (clinicaltrials.gov: NCT02194504). Participants aged 40-70 years with abdominal obesity were randomized over 3 groups: a 25% ER high-nutrient-quality diet (n = 40); a 25% ER low-nutrient-quality diet (n = 40); or a habitual diet (n = 30). Both ER diets were nutritionally adequate, and the high-nutrient-quality ER diet was enriched in MUFAs, n-3 PUFAs, fiber, and plant protein and reduced in fructose. Before and after the intervention, intrahepatic lipids, body fat distribution, fasting and postprandial responses to a mixed-meal shake challenge test of cardiometabolic risk factors, lipoproteins, vascular measurements, and adipose tissue transcriptome were assessed. RESULTS The high-nutrient-quality ER diet (-8.4 ± 3.2) induced 2.1 kg more weight loss (P = 0.007) than the low-nutrient-quality ER diet (-6.3 ± 3.9), reduced fasting serum total cholesterol (P = 0.014) and plasma triglycerides (P < 0.001), promoted an antiatherogenic lipoprotein profile, and induced a more pronounced decrease in adipose tissue gene expression of energy metabolism pathways than the low-quality ER diet. Explorative analyses showed that the difference in weight loss between the two ER diets was specifically present in insulin-sensitive subjects (HOMA-IR ≤ 2.5), in whom the high-nutrient-quality diet induced 3.9 kg more weight loss than the low-nutrient-quality diet. CONCLUSIONS A high-nutrient-quality 25% ER diet is more beneficial for cardiometabolic health than a low-nutrient-quality 25% ER diet. Overweight, insulin-sensitive subjects may benefit more from a high- than a low-nutrient-quality ER diet with respect to weight loss, due to potential attenuation of glucose-induced lipid synthesis in adipose tissue.
Methodological quality
Jadad score
:
3
Allocation concealment
:
No
