scholarly journals Comparison of Muscle Mass Indexes According to Protein Intake in Obese Patients

2016 ◽  
Vol 25 (4) ◽  
pp. 215-224
Author(s):  
Mingyeong Heo ◽  
Yeonjoo Lee ◽  
Yongsoon Park
Diabetes ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 68 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 771-P
Author(s):  
SODAI KUBOTA ◽  
HITOSHI KUWATA ◽  
SAKI OKAMOTO ◽  
DAISUKE YABE ◽  
KENTA MUROTANI ◽  
...  

Nutrients ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (4) ◽  
pp. 1205
Author(s):  
Yoshitaka Isaka

Multi-factors, such as anorexia, activation of renin-angiotensin system, inflammation, and metabolic acidosis, contribute to malnutrition in chronic kidney disease (CKD) patients. Most of these factors, contributing to the progression of malnutrition, worsen as CKD progresses. Protein restriction, used as a treatment for CKD, can reduce the risk of CKD progression, but may worsen the sarcopenia, a syndrome characterized by a progressive and systemic loss of muscle mass and strength. The concomitant rate of sarcopenia is higher in CKD patients than in the general population. Sarcopenia is also associated with mortality risk in CKD patients. Thus, it is important to determine whether protein restriction should be continued or loosened in CKD patients with sarcopenia. We may prioritize protein restriction in CKD patients with a high risk of end-stage kidney disease (ESKD), classified to stage G4 to G5, but may loosen protein restriction in ESKD-low risk CKD stage G3 patients with proteinuria <0.5 g/day, and rate of eGFR decline <3.0 mL/min/1.73 m2/year. However, the effect of increasing protein intake alone without exercise therapy may be limited in CKD patients with sarcopenia. The combination of exercise therapy and increased protein intake is effective in improving muscle mass and strength in CKD patients with sarcopenia. In the case of loosening protein restriction, it is safe to avoid protein intake of more than 1.5 g/kgBW/day. In CKD patients with high risk in ESKD, 0.8 g/kgBW/day may be a critical point of protein intake.


Author(s):  
Sean Paul Kilroe ◽  
Jonathan Fulford ◽  
Sarah Jackman ◽  
Andrew Holwerda ◽  
Annemie Gijsen ◽  
...  

ABSTRACT Background Short-term (&lt;1 wk) muscle disuse lowers daily myofibrillar protein synthesis (MyoPS) rates resulting in muscle mass loss. The understanding of how daily dietary protein intake influences such muscle deconditioning requires further investigation. Objectives To assess the influence of graded dietary protein intakes on daily MyoPS rates and the loss of muscle mass during 3 d of disuse. Methods Thirty-three healthy young men (aged 22 ± 1 y; BMI = 23 ± 1 kg/m2) initially consumed the same standardized diet for 5 d, providing 1.6 g protein/kg body mass/d. Thereafter, participants underwent a 3-d period of unilateral leg immobilization during which they were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 eucaloric diets containing relatively high, low, or no protein (HIGH: 1.6, LOW: 0.5, NO: 0.15 g protein/kg/d; n = 11 per group). One day prior to immobilization participants ingested 400 mL deuterated water (D2O) with 50-mL doses consumed daily thereafter. Prior to and immediately after immobilization upper leg bilateral MRI scans and vastus lateralis muscle biopsies were performed to measure quadriceps muscle volume and daily MyoPS rates, respectively. Results Quadriceps muscle volume of the control legs remained unchanged throughout the experiment (P &gt; 0.05). Immobilization led to 2.3 ± 0.4%, 2.7 ± 0.2%, and 2.0 ± 0.4% decreases in quadriceps muscle volume (P &lt; 0.05) of the immobilized leg in the HIGH, LOW, and NO groups (P &lt; 0.05), respectively, with no significant differences between groups (P &gt; 0.05). D2O ingestion resulted in comparable plasma free [2H]-alanine enrichments during immobilization (∼2.5 mole percentage excess) across groups (P &gt; 0.05). Daily MyoPS rates during immobilization were 30 ± 2% (HIGH), 26 ± 3% (LOW), and 27 ± 2% (NO) lower in the immobilized compared with the control leg, with no significant differences between groups (P &gt; 0.05). Conclusions Three days of muscle disuse induces considerable declines in muscle mass and daily MyoPS rates. However, daily protein intake does not modulate any of these muscle deconditioning responses. Clinical trial registry number: NCT03797781


1987 ◽  
Vol 33 (3) ◽  
pp. 219-226 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yuriko OI ◽  
Toyoko OKUDA ◽  
Hideo KOISHI ◽  
Hideki KOH ◽  
Masako WAKI ◽  
...  

Nutrients ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 10 (9) ◽  
pp. 1156 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andreas Nilsson ◽  
Diego Montiel Rojas ◽  
Fawzi Kadi

The role of dietary protein intake on muscle mass and physical function in older adults is important for the prevention of age-related physical limitations. The aim of the present study was to elucidate links between dietary protein intake and muscle mass and physical function in older women meeting current guidelines of objectively assessed physical activity. In 106 women (65 to 70 years old), protein intake was assessed using a 6-day food record and participants were classified into high and low protein intake groups using two Recommended Dietary Allowance (RDA) thresholds (0.8 g·kg−1 bodyweight (BW) and 1.1 g·kg−1 BW). Body composition, aerobic fitness, and quadriceps strength were determined using standardized procedures, and self-reported physical function was assessed using the SF-12 Health Survey. Physical activity was assessed by accelerometry and self-report. Women below the 0.8 g·kg−1 BW threshold had a lower muscle mass (p < 0.05) with no differences in physical function variables. When based on the higher RDA threshold (1.1 g·kg−1 BW), in addition to significant differences in muscle mass, women below the higher threshold had a significantly (p < 0.05) higher likelihood of having physical limitations. In conclusion, the present study supports the RDA threshold of 0.8 g·kg−1 BW of proteins to prevent the loss of muscle mass and emphasizes the importance of the higher RDA threshold of at least 1.1 g·kg−1 BW to infer additional benefits on constructs of physical function. Our study also supports the role of protein intake for healthy ageing, even in older adults meeting guidelines for physical activity.


2020 ◽  
Vol 79 (OCE2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Yusuke Nishimura ◽  
Grith Hojfeldt ◽  
Simon Rønnow Schacht ◽  
Kenneth Mertz ◽  
Morten Hjulmand ◽  
...  

AbstractThe importance of dietary protein for the maintenance of muscle mass and strength is heavily discussed. However, adequate energy intake is an underlying assumption but often not considered. In this study, we investigated the impact of daily intake and meal distribution of both protein and energy on muscle mass and strength. In a cross-sectional study, a total of 184 older individuals (gender: 86F/98M, age: 70.2 ± 3.9 yrs, BMI: 25.4 ± 3.7 kg/m2; means ± SD) were recruited. Participants underwent a 3-day weighed dietary record, Dual-energy X-ray Absorptiometry (DXA) scan, hand-grip strength, and Maximal Voluntary Isometric knee-extension Contraction (MVIC). Participants were divided into two categories: lower (LOW; < 0.83 g/adjusted(a)BW/day) or higher (HIGH; ≥ 1.1 g/aBW/day) protein intake levels analysed by gender to characterize a daily protein and energy intake pattern. Main meal protein and energy intake distributions were calculated, and correlations were made. Further, energy intake at breakfast and lunch divided by total energy intake (energy ratio) was correlated with appendicular skeletal muscle index (ASMI), hand-grip strength, and MVIC were determined using the LOW/HIGH-protein-intake categorization. Further, gender-specific ASMI, hand-grip strength and knee extension were compared based on the following four distinct daily protein intake ranges: < 0.66; ≥ 0.66- < 0.83; ≥ 0.83- < 1.1; ≥ 1.1 g/aBW/day. A positive correlation appeared between protein and energy intake in all main meals (r ≥ 0.57, p < 0.0001). In the LOW category, positive correlations were found between energy ratio and ASMI (r = 0.16, p = 0.048), hand-grip strength (r = 0.40, p = 0.0009), and MVIC (r = 0.36, p = 0.0019), whereas no associations were found in the HIGH category. ASMI, hand grip, and MVIC were similar regardless of the protein intake ranges, though with women being lower than men (p < 0.05) in all outcomes. These results show that total daily protein intake did not affect muscle mass and strength in our cohort. However, our data demonstrate that greater energy intake in breakfast and lunch relative to total energy intake is associated with higher muscle mass and strength, particularly when protein intake is lower than 0.83 g/aBW/day, indicating the potential importance of meal energy content at lower intakes of protein.


Nutrients ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 612 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jun Yasuda ◽  
Mai Asako ◽  
Takuma Arimitsu ◽  
Satoshi Fujita

Protein intake of >0.24 g/kg of body weight (BW) at a single meal is necessary to maximize muscle protein synthesis in a young population. However, the association between the protein intake rate for three meals and muscle mass in the young population has not been evaluated. We hypothesized that a protein intake of >0.24 g/kg BW at all three meals is effective for maintaining muscle mass. Therefore, we cross-sectionally examined the association between protein intake at all three meals with muscle mass in 266 healthy young subjects (aged 21.4 ± 2.4 years). Subjects were divided into the AP group, which achieved protein intake >0.24 g/kg BW at all three meals; and the NP group, which did not. We calculated total fat-free mass (FFM) and appendicular fat-free mass (AppFFM) with dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry, and the percentage of total FFM (TotalFFM%) and appendicular FFM (AppFFM%) were calculated as the percentage of BW (%BW). We demonstrated that TotalFFM% (77.0 ± 0.5 vs. 75.2 ± 0.4%, p = 0.008) and AppFFM% (34.7 ± 0.3 vs. 34.1 ± 0.2%, p = 0.058) were higher in the AP than in the NP group. This finding suggests that achieving protein intake of >0.24 g/kg BW at all three meals is important for muscle mass maintenance in young populations.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document