SciELO - Scientific Electronic Library Online

 
vol.34 número3Adherencia y tolerancia como claves en la detención de la pérdida de peso en pacientes oncológicos sometidos a radioterapia mediante una estrategia de suplementación precoz con una fórmula enteral hipercalórica e hiperproteica específicaEfecto de la glutamina en las lesiones hepáticas inducidas por isquemia-reperfusión intestinal en ratas índice de autoresíndice de materiabúsqueda de artículos
Home Pagelista alfabética de revistas  

Servicios Personalizados

Revista

Articulo

Indicadores

Links relacionados

  • En proceso de indezaciónCitado por Google
  • No hay articulos similaresSimilares en SciELO
  • En proceso de indezaciónSimilares en Google

Compartir


Nutrición Hospitalaria

versión On-line ISSN 1699-5198versión impresa ISSN 0212-1611

Resumen

ANGARITA-DAVILA, Lissé et al. Glycemic index, glycemic load and insulin response of two formulas of isoglucose with different sweeteners and dietary fiber in healthy adults and type-2 diabetes. Nutr. Hosp. [online]. 2017, vol.34, n.3, pp.532-539. ISSN 1699-5198.  http://dx.doi.org/10.20960/nh.654.

Objective:

The aim of this study is to compare the glycemic index (GI) and glycemic load (GL) of two formulas with the same glucose content with different sweeteners and dietary fiber for diabetics in healthy adults and in patients with type-2 diabetes (DM2).

Methodology:

In this randomized, double-blind crossover research, eleven healthy people and six with DM2 consumed two enteral formulas, Glucerna SR(r), Laboratorios Abbott C.A. (GF) and Enterex Diabetic(r), Victus C.A. (EF), sweetened with fructose y sucralose, with 1.2 and 1.3 g/100 ml of fiber source respectively (four times). Additionally, they consumed glucose solution once, obtaining blood samples at 0, 15, 30, 45, 60, 90 and 120 min for controls; in the diabetics, minutes 150 and 180 were added for measuring blood glucose, basal and postprandial insulin after two and three hours.

Results:

The incremental area under the curve (IAUC) was lower for the formulas rather than for SG. In the healthy controls was 12,857 ± 422 for EF and 11,601 ± 272 for GF (p < 0.014). In diabetics, this curve reduced for GF (28,656 ± 123) compared to EF (29,855 ± 496) (p < 0.01). The IG resulted in 58.07 ± 8.4 and 60.7 ± 2 for GF and EF, respectively, in the controls, and 65.16 ± 0.2 and 68.06 ± 1 in diabetics, without significant differences, as well as in post-prandial insulin.

Conclusions:

The GI and the GL of the two formulas resulted in an intermediate value in both groups, with a glycemic profile inferior to SG. No significant differences were observed regarding insulin behavior, showing that the absorption rate of carbohydrates in these formulas is slower, with a lower glycemic impact than the pattern product; thus, making its indication acceptable for the diabetic patient.

Palabras clave : Formulas; Fiber; Sweeteners; Diabetes.

        · resumen en Español     · texto en Español     · Español ( pdf )