Beverage consumption, appetite, and energy intake: what did you expect?
Beverage consumption, appetite, and energy intake: what did you expect?
复制标题
DOI：
10.3945/ajcn.111.025437
复制
发表时间：
2012-03-01
影响因子：
7.1
通讯作者：
Mattes, Richard D.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Cassady, Bridget A.;Considine, Robert V.;Mattes, Richard D.
背景：与固体食物相比，饮料消费引起的能量补偿反应较弱，因此与超重/肥胖流行有关。然而，似乎合理的机制并未被记录下来。 目的：本研究评估了不同的食后反应对能量和常量营养素匹配的液体（饮料形式）和固体食物形式的认知和感觉贡献，并确定了可能解释这些反应的生理过程。设计：52 名健康成年人[平均 +/- SD 年龄：24.7 +/- 5.5 岁； BMI（单位：kg/m(2)）：26.3 +/- 6.3] 完成了这项随机、4 臂交叉研究。参与者通过认知操作消耗了他们在胃中感知到的液体或固体的口服液体和固体预负荷（即口服液体/感知胃液、口服液体/感知胃液、口服固体/感知胃液或口服固体/感知胃液）。然而，所有预载都是为了呈现液体胃挑战而设计的。在接下来的 4 小时内监测食欲、胃排空和口盲肠传输时间以及选定的内分泌反应；还记录了总能量摄入量。结果：与口服固体和感知胃固体治疗后的反应相比，口服液体和感知胃液体前负荷引起更大的餐后饥饿感和更低的饱腹感、更快的胃排空和口盲肠转运时间、减弱的胰岛素和胰高血糖素样肽 1 释放以及更低的胃饥饿素抑制（所有 P<0.05）。胃液预负荷消耗后，更快的胃排空时间与更大的能量摄入显着相关（P，0.05）。消耗胃液前负荷的日子比消耗胃固体的日子能量摄入量更高（2311 +/- 95 与 1897 +/- 72 kcal 相比，P = 0.007）。 结论：这些数据记录了食物形式对摄入行为的感觉和认知影响，并确定了可能导致饮料饱腹感值低的物理和内分泌变量。它们与透明、产生能量的饮料对正能量平衡构成特定风险的研究结果是一致的。该研究在 ClinicalTrials.gov 上注册为 NCT01070199。美国临床营养杂志 2012； 95：587-93。
Background: Beverage consumption is implicated in the overweight/obesity epidemic through the weaker energy compensation response it elicits compared with solid food forms. However, plausible mechanisms are not documented.Objective: This study assessed the cognitive and sensory contributions of differential postingestive responses to energy- and macronutrient-matched liquid (in beverage form) and solid food forms and identifies physiologic processes that may account for them.Design: Fifty-two healthy adults [mean +/- SD age: 24.7 +/- 5.5 y; BMI (in kg/m(2)): 26.3 +/- 6.3] completed this randomized, 4-arm crossover study. Participants consumed oral liquid and solid preloads that they perceived, through cognitive manipulation, to be liquid or solid in their stomach (ie, oral liquid/perceived gastric liquid, oral liquid/perceived gastric solid, oral solid/perceived gastric liquid, or oral solid/perceived gastric solid). However, all preloads were designed to present a liquid gastric challenge. Appetite, gastric-emptying and orocecal transit times, and selected endocrine responses were monitored for the following 4 h; total energy intake was also recorded.Results: Oral-liquid and perceived gastric-liquid preloads elicited greater postprandial hunger and lower fullness sensations, more rapid gastric-emptying and orocecal transit times, attenuated insulin and glucagon-like peptide 1 release, and lower ghrelin suppression than did responses after oral-solid and perceived gastric-solid treatments (all P < 0.05). Faster gastric-emptying times were significantly associated with greater energy intake after consumption of perceived gastric-liquid preloads (P, 0.05). Energy intake was greater on days when perceived gastric-liquid preloads were consumed than when perceived gastric solids were consumed (2311 +/- 95 compared with 1897 +/- 72 kcal, P = 0.007).Conclusions: These data document sensory and cognitive effects of food form on ingestive behavior and identify physical and endocrine variables that may account for the low satiety value of beverages. They are consistent with findings that clear, energy-yielding beverages pose a particular risk for positive energy balance. This study was registered at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT01070199. Am J Clin Nutr 2012; 95: 587-93.