scholarly journals Effects of testosterone on lean mass gain in elderly men: systematic review with meta-analysis of controlled and randomized studies

AGE ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 37 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Walter Krause Neto ◽  
Eliane Florencio Gama ◽  
Leandro Yanase Rocha ◽  
Carla Cristina Ramos ◽  
Wagner Taets ◽  
...  
Author(s):  
Nathalia Sernizon Guimarães ◽  
Mariana Amaral Raposo ◽  
Dirceu Greco ◽  
Unaí Tupinambás ◽  
Melissa Orlandin Premaor

2019 ◽  
Vol 21 (4) ◽  
pp. 397
Author(s):  
Suelen Maiara Medeiros da Silva ◽  
Bárbara Cristovão Carminati ◽  
Valfredo De Almeida Santos Junior ◽  
Pablo Christiano Barboza Lollo

AbstractThe interest of the supplementation market for the soy protein consumption  to optimize physical and metabolic performance after exercise is increasing. However, evidence suggests that the  soy protein ingestion has lower anabolic properties when compared with whey protein. The purpose of this systematic review was to compare the effects of whey protein and soy protein supplementation on the  muscle functions maintenance after exercise. This review was performed using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). Articles were searched for in the Pubmed database and included studies comparing the effects of soy protein and whey protein consumption on protein synthesis, lean mass gain and oxidative stress reduction in response to endurance or resistance training. Thirteen trials were included in this review. The results showed that the whey protein consumption is superior to that of soy protein with respect to protein synthesis and lean mass gain, but soy protein showed superior results in reducing oxidative stress. Future research comparing both soy and whey protein are needed to define protein source to be used in nutritional interventions to protein synthesis, lean mass gain and oxidative stress in different populations. Keywords: Soybean Proteins. Milk Proteins. Protein Biosynthesis. Hypertrophy. ResumoO interesse do mercado de suplementação pelo consumo de proteína de soja para otimizar o desempenho físico e metabólico após o exercício está aumentando. No entanto, evidências sugerem que a ingestão da proteína de soja tem propriedades anabólicas mais baixas quando comparada à proteína do soro do leite. O objetivo desta revisão sistemática foi comparar os efeitos da suplementação com whey protein e proteína de soja na manutenção das funções musculares após o exercício. Esta revisão foi realizada usando os Itens de Relatório Preferidos para Revisões Sistemáticas e Meta-Análises (PRISMA). Os artigos foram pesquisados na base de dados Pubmed e incluíram estudos comparando os efeitos da proteína de soja e do consumo de proteínas do soro na síntese protéica, ganho de massa magra e redução do estresse oxidativo em resposta ao treinamento de resistência ou resistência. Treze ensaios foram incluídos nesta revisão. Os resultados mostraram que o consumo de proteína de soro é superior ao da proteína de soja em relação à síntese protéica e ao ganho de massa magra, mas a proteína de soja apresentou resultados superiores na redução do estresse oxidativo. Pesquisas futuras comparando a soja e a proteína do soro do leite são necessárias para definir a fonte protéica a ser usada em intervenções nutricionais para a síntese protéica, ganho de massa magra e estresse oxidativo em diferentes populações. Palavras-chave: Proteínas de Soja. Proteínas do Leite. Biossíntese de Proteínas. Hipertrofia.


2020 ◽  
Vol 7 ◽  
pp. 205435812090697
Author(s):  
Rosendo A. Rodriguez ◽  
Matthew Spence ◽  
Richard Hae ◽  
Mohsen Agharazii ◽  
Kevin D. Burns

Background: Increased carotid-femoral pulse wave velocity (cf-PWV), a surrogate of increased aortic stiffness, is a risk factor for cardiovascular events and all-cause mortality in end-stage renal disease (ESRD). To minimize the deleterious effects of an increased aortic stiffness in ESRD patients, several interventions have been developed and cf-PWV has been used to monitor responses. Objective: The aim of this study was to determine the effects of pharmacologic interventions that target aortic stiffness on cf-PWV and systolic blood pressure (SBP) in adults with ESRD. Study design: This study implements a systematic review and meta-analysis. Data sources: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central, Health Technology Assessment, and EBM databases were searched. Study eligibility, participants, and interventions: Randomized and non-randomized studies involving adults (>18 years) with ESRD of any duration, receiving or not renal replacement therapy (hemodialysis, peritoneal dialysis) and exposed to a pharmacologic intervention whose effects were assessed by cf-PWV. Methods: Study screening, selection, data extraction, and quality assessments were performed by 2 independent reviewers. Narrative synthesis and quantitative data analysis summarized the review. Results: We included 1027 ESRD participants from 13 randomized and 5 non-randomized studies. Most pharmacologic interventions targeted bone mineral metabolism disorder or hypertension. Treatment with vitamin D analogues or cinacalcet did not decrease cf-PWV or SBP over placebo or matched controls ( P > .05). Calcium-channel blockers (CCB) decreased cf-PWV and SBP compared with placebo or standard care ( P < .05). Renin-angiotensin system inhibitors did not show any advantage over placebo in decreasing cf-PWV ( P > .05). Limitations: Quality of evidence ranged from very low to moderate. Overall evidence was limited by the low number of studies, small sample sizes, and methodological inconsistencies. Conclusions: Pharmacologic interventions targeting aortic stiffness in ESRD have mixed effects on reducing cf-PWV, with some strategies suggesting potential benefit. The quality of evidence, however, is insufficient to draw definitive conclusions on their use to slow progression of aortic stiffness in ESRD. Further well-designed studies are needed to confirm these associations and their impact on cardiovascular outcomes in ESRD. Registered in PROSPERO (CRD42016033463)


2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 548-558 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joshua L Hudson ◽  
Yu Wang ◽  
Robert E Bergia III ◽  
Wayne W Campbell

ABSTRACT Under stressful conditions such as energy restriction (ER) and physical activity, the RDA for protein of 0.8 g · kg−1 · d−1 may no longer be an appropriate recommendation. Under catabolic or anabolic conditions, higher protein intakes are proposed to attenuate the loss or increase the gain of whole-body lean mass, respectively. No known published meta-analysis compares protein intakes greater than the RDA with intakes at the RDA. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the effects of protein intakes greater than the RDA, compared with at the RDA, on changes in whole-body lean mass. Three researchers independently screened 1520 articles published through August 2018 using the PubMed, Scopus, CINAHL, and Cochrane databases, with additional articles identified in published systematic review articles. Randomized, controlled, parallel studies ≥6 wk long with apparently healthy adults (≥19 y) were eligible for inclusion. Data from 18 studies resulting in 22 comparisons of lean mass changes were included in the final overall analysis. Among all comparisons, protein intakes greater than the RDA benefitted changes in lean mass relative to consuming the RDA [weighted mean difference (95% CI): 0.32 (0.01, 0.64) kg, n = 22 comparisons]. In the subgroup analyses, protein intakes greater than the RDA attenuated lean mass loss after ER [0.36 (0.06, 0.67) kg, n = 14], increased lean mass after resistance training (RT) [0.77 (0.23, 1.31) kg, n = 3], but did not differentially affect changes in lean mass [0.08 (−0.59, 0.75) kg, n = 7] under nonstressed conditions (no ER + no RT). Protein intakes greater than the RDA beneficially influenced changes in lean mass when adults were purposefully stressed by the catabolic stressor of dietary ER with and without the anabolic stressor of RT. The RDA for protein is adequate to support lean mass in adults during nonstressed states. This review was registered at www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero as CRD 42018106532.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document