1.
A Low-FODMAP Diet Provides Benefits for Functional Gastrointestinal Symptoms but Not for Improving Stool Consistency and Mucosal Inflammation in IBD: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Peng, Z, Yi, J, Liu, X
Nutrients. 2022;14(10)
-
-
-
-
Free full text
Plain language summary
The low-FODMAP diet eliminates carbohydrates that cannot be easily digested in order to reduce functional gastrointestinal symptoms associated with irritable bowel disease (IBD). The symptoms of irritable bowel disease include abdominal pain and bloating. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate whether a low-FODMAP diet can alleviate functional gastrointestinal symptoms in individuals with inflammatory bowel disease. In comparison with a regular diet, a low-FODMAP diet significantly reduced symptoms of bloating, wind, flatulence, abdominal pain, fatigue, and lethargy in patients with IBD. In addition, patients with Crohn's disease have achieved remission or reduced symptoms after following a low-FODMAP diet. Healthcare professionals can use this study to understand better the effects of a low-FODMAP diet on patients with IBD who have functional gastrointestinal symptoms. Further robust studies are, however, required to evaluate the evidence's robustness and identify the mechanism behind the improvement of symptoms.
Expert Review
Conflicts of interest:
None
Take Home Message:
- LFD use in IBD improved symptoms of bloating, wind or flatulence, borborygmi, abdominal pain, and fatigue or lethargy, but not nausea and vomiting.
Evidence Category:
-
X
A: Meta-analyses, position-stands, randomized-controlled trials (RCTs)
-
B: Systematic reviews including RCTs of limited number
-
C: Non-randomized trials, observational studies, narrative reviews
-
D: Case-reports, evidence-based clinical findings
-
E: Opinion piece, other
Summary Review:
Introduction
This meta-analysis assesses the efficacy of a low fermentable oligosaccharides, disaccharides, monosaccharides, and polyols diet (LFD) in inflammatory bowel disease [IBD: ulcerative colitis (UC) and Crohn’s disease (UC)] participants with functional gastrointestinal symptoms (FGSs).
Methods
A search was performed on PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), WanFang (Chinese) Database up to March 2022. Quality assessment of all included studies was performed.
Results
9 studies (4 randomised controlled trials, 5 non-randomised studies) with a total of 351 participants diagnosed with IBD were included, and compared LFD with a placebo diet or normal diet (ND), overall and individual
LFD Effects of FGS:
- Overall 9 studies: an improvement (0.47, 0.33–0.66, p = 0.0000)
- No difference in the subgroup classified by disease type
- CD and UC: no improvement
Individual improvement:
- Bloating (0.37, 0,24-0,57, p=0.0000); wind or flatulence (0.38, 0,28-0,51, p=0.0000); borborygmi (0.48, 0,26-0,89, p=0.0000), abdominal pain (0.5, 0,37-0,68, p=0.0000), fatigue/lethargy (0.71, 0,61-0,82, p=0.0000)
- No difference in nausea and vomiting (0.54, 0,22-1,32, p=018)
IBS Quality of Life Score:
- 2 studies: reduced Short IBD Questionnaire (SIBDQ) score (11.24, 6.61-15.87, p=0.0000)
Bristol Stool Form Chart:
- 2 studies: normal stool consistency (type 3-4); no difference (5.99, 0.17-216.51, p=0.33)
- 2 other studies: no difference (-0.17, 0.48 - 0.15, p=0.30)
Diseases activity (Harvey-Bradshaw index):
- 2 studies using the Mayo score: no difference (-32, -1,09-0.45, p=0.41)
- 3 studies using BHi score: reduction (-1.09, -1,77-0.42, p=0.002)
Faecal calprotectin:
- 2 studies: no change (-16.03, -36,78-4.73, p=0.13)
Limitations
- Comparison diets were not standardised, suggesting the potential of different dietary habits to bias results..
- Heterogeneity of included studies, and the relatively small sample size of the studies can reduce the reliability of the results.
Conclusion
While the study found inconsistent definition standards for FGS, all the nine studies showed that LFD was associated with an improvement in some symptoms.
Clinical practice applications:
- This study suggests that IBD patients with FGSs may benefit from LFD treatment with the assistance of a healthcare professional.
Considerations for future research:
- This study has shown that LFD can improve FGSs in IBD, but further research with a larger sample size and more comprehensive analysis is warranted to replicate the results.
- The description of the findings and Quality of Life data are a little unclear. The impact on Quality of Life warrants further investigation, as clinicians need to consider the impact of following a restrictive diet on Quality of Life.
Abstract
BACKGROUND A low fermentable oligosaccharides, disaccharides, monosaccharides, and polyols diet (LFD) is claimed to improve functional gastrointestinal symptoms (FGSs). However, the role of LFD in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients with FGSs remains unclear. OBJECTIVE To systematically assess the efficacy of LFD in IBD patients with FGSs. METHODS Six databases were searched from inception to 1 January 2022. Data were synthesized as the relative risk of symptoms improvement and normal stool consistency, mean difference of Bristol Stool Form Scale (BSFS), Short IBD Questionnaire (SIBDQ), IBS Quality of Life (IBS-QoL), Harvey-Bradshaw index (HBi), Mayo score, and fecal calprotectin (FC). Risk of bias was assessed based on study types. A funnel plot and Egger's test were used to analyze publication bias. RESULTS This review screened and included nine eligible studies, including four randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and five before-after studies, involving a total of 446 participants (351 patients with LFD vs. 95 controls). LFD alleviated overall FGSs (RR: 0.47, 95% CI: 0.33-0.66, p = 0.0000) and obtained higher SIBDQ scores (MD = 11.24, 95% CI 6.61 to 15.87, p = 0.0000) and lower HBi score of Crohn's disease (MD = -1.09, 95% CI -1.77 to -0.42, p = 0.002). However, there were no statistically significant differences in normal stool consistency, BSFS, IBS-QoL, Mayo score of ulcerative colitis, and FC. No publication bias was found. CONCLUSIONS LFD provides a benefit in FGSs and QoL but not for improving stool consistency and mucosal inflammation in IBD patients. Further well-designed RCTs are needed to develop the optimal LFD strategy for IBD.
2.
The impact of nutrition and lifestyle on male fertility.
Benatta, M, Kettache, R, Buchholz, N, Trinchieri, A
Archivio italiano di urologia, andrologia : organo ufficiale [di] Societa italiana di ecografia urologica e nefrologica. 2020;92(2)
-
-
-
Free full text
Plain language summary
The impact of environmental, lifestyle and nutritional factors on unexplained male fertility has long been acknowledged. Yet, little research had been dedicated to the topic, despite declining semen quality having become a worldwide phenomena. Available studies have yielded limited, and at times conflicting, evidence. Hence this literature review sought to capture the current knowledge around unexplained male infertility and environmental, lifestyle, diet and nutrients factors. Summarized is the evidence from 69 studies, including population observations and clinical trials. The collected outcomes showed that a Western-type diet, rich in red and processed meats, refined grains, high-energy drinks and sweets, trans and saturated fats was associated with poor semen quality. Whereby higher intakes of fruits and vegetables, whole grains, omega-3 and poultry showed beneficial effects. However, as only selected groups were examined, more research is needed to project such findings onto the wider population. The reviewed evidence also included alcohol consumption, which showed high alcohol intake closely correlated to declining sperm concentrations. Whilst the verdict on caffeine consumption and the impact on sperm quality was inconclusive. In addition, several interventional studies evaluated the effect of dietary supplementation on various parameters of semen, where coenzyme Q10, L-carnitine, vitamin E, antioxidants, combined nutrient formulations and herbal blends all had positive outcomes. The review on zinc and folic acid supplementation yielded mixed results. This brief recap of the current evidence on environmental, lifestyle and nutritional influences on male infertility summarises the dietary foundations for the support of unexplained male infertility.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS Male unexplained infertility has long been suspected to result from environmental, lifestyle and nutritional factors. However, the literature on the subject is still scarce, and clinical studies providing robust evidence are even scarcer. In addition, some similar studies come to different conclusions. Dietary pattern can influence spermatogenesis by its content of fatty acids and antioxidants. Yet, in an age of industrialized mass food production, human bodies become more exposed to the ingestion of xenobiotics, as well as chemicals used for production, preservation, transportation and taste enhancement of foods. We attempted in this paper to collect the available evidence to date on the effect of nutritional components on male fertility. MATERIAL AND METHODS A systematic search of the relevant literature published in PubMed, ScienceDirect and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials Database was conducted. Literature was evaluated according to the Newcastle-Ottawa- Scale. RESULTS Epidemiological observations are concordant in demonstrating an association of low-quality sperm parameters with higher intake of red meat, processed and organ meat and fullfat dairy. On the contrary, better semen parameters were observed in subjects consuming a healthy diet, rich in fruit, vegetables, whole grains and fish. Evidences of the negative impact on male fertility of by-products of water disinfection, accumulation in food chain of persistent organochlorine pollutants, pesticides, phthalates from food and water containers and hormones used in breeding cattle have been reported. Clinical trials of the effects of micronutrients on semen parameters and outcomes of assisted fertilization are encouraging, although optimal modality of treatment should be established. CONCLUSIONS Although quality of evidence should be ameliorated, it emerges that environmental factors can influence male fertility. Some nutrients may enhance fertility whereas others will worsen it. With diagnostic analysis on a molecular or even sub-molecular level, new interactions with micronutrients or molecular components of our daily ingested foods and leisure drugs may lead to a better understanding of so far suspected but as yet unexplained effects on male spermatogenesis and fertility.