Intermittent bolus feeding versus continuous enteral feedingDr. Prashant Kumar
Similar to Effects of Daily Consumption of Synbiotic Bread on Insulin Metabolism and Serum High-Sensitivity C-Reactive Protein among Diabetic Patients (20)
2. Synbiotics and Diabetes Ann Nutr Metab 2014;65:34–41
DOI: 10.1159/000365153
35
ularly in skeletal muscle [3–5], as well as dysregulated fat-
ty acid metabolism and increased blood lipid profiles [6,
7]. Impaired insulin metabolism and increased inflam-
matory factors could result in increased cardiovascular
morbidity and mortality [8, 9], damaged fibrinolysis [10],
plaque development [11], and mental health issues (in
particular an increased risk of depression) [8].
Various strategies have been suggested for the man-
agement of the glycemic status and inflammatory mark-
ers in patients with T2DM, including diet therapy (es-
pecially with a low glycemic index and glycemic load)
[12], lifestyle modifications [13], weight loss in those
who are obese [14], vitamin B1 supplementation [15],
and the use of blood lipid-lowering agents [16]. Recent-
ly, a few studies have also reported that consumption of
synbiotics and probiotics can improve insulin sensitiv-
ity and decrease inflammatory factors [17, 18]. How-
ever, such beneficial effects have mainly been seen in
animal models or nondiabetic patients. In addition,
data on the effects of synbiotics and probiotics on met-
abolic status are conflicting. Administration of a synbi-
otic food containing Lactobacillus sporogenes (27 × 107
CFU) and 1.08 g inulin to diabetic patients for 6 weeks
compared to the control food resulted in decreased se-
rum insulin levels [19]. However, no significant effects
on fasting plasma glucose (FPG), serum insulin levels,
and homeostatic model assessment for insulin resis-
tance (HOMA-IR) were seen following the consump-
tion of probiotic supplements among patients with
T2DM after 8 weeks [20].
The beneficial effects of synbiotics and probiotics on
insulin metabolism and inflammatory markers might be
mediated by the production of short-chain fatty acids [21,
22], modulation of the gut flora composition [22], and a
decreased expression of inflammation-relevant genes
[23]. To our knowledge, there is no study indicating the
effects of daily consumption of synbiotic and probiotic
breads on insulin metabolism and serum high-sensitivity
C-reactive protein (hs-CRP) in patients with T2DM. The
aim of the current study is, therefore, to investigate the
effects of daily consumption of synbiotic and probiotic
breads on insulin metabolism and serum hs-CRP in pa-
tients with T2DM.
Materials and Methods
Participants
This randomized, double-blind, controlled clinical trial was
performed in Kashan, Iran, from October 2013 to December
2013. To estimate the required sample size, we used an appropri-
ate formula, where the type 1 (α) and type 2 errors (β) were con-
sidered 0.05 and 0.20 (power = 80%), respectively. In addition,
the HOMA-IR score was defined as the key variable, and based
on earlier studies [24] the SD of this variable was 2.6. We consid-
ered 2.0 as the meaningful difference in mean HOMA-IR scores
between the 2 groups. Therefore, the required sample size was
estimated to be 27 subjects in each group. The diagnosis of T2DM
was made based on criteria of the American Diabetes Association
[25], i.e. patients fulfilling one of the following criteria were con-
sidered to have T2DM: FPG ≥126 mg/dl, 2-hour plasma glucose
≥200 mg/dl, and HbA1C ≥6.5%. In the current study, we includ-
ed individuals with T2DM and aged 35–70 years recruited from
among patients attending the Golabchi Diabetes Clinic affiliated
with the Kashan University of Medical Sciences (Kashan, Iran).
We excluded pregnant women, those using insulin or vitamin
supplements, and those with chronic kidney disease, liver or lung
disease, and chronic or acute inflammatory disease, heart valve
disease, short-bowel syndrome, and allergies. This study was
conducted according to the guidelines of the Declaration of Hel-
sinki. The ethics committee of the Kashan University of Medical
Sciences approved this study, and written informed consent was
obtained from all participants.
Study Procedure
To obtain detailed information about the dietary intakes of
the study participants, all patients entered a 2-week run-in pe-
riod during which they had to refrain from eating any other
synbiotic and probiotic food. During the run-in period, par-
ticipants were asked to record their dietary intakes for 3 non-
consecutive days. At the end of the run-in period, subjects were
randomly assigned to synbiotic, probiotic, or control bread for
8 weeks. Subjects were stratified based on age, sex, BMI, and the
type and dosage of oral hypoglycemic medications they were
taking, and they were then randomly assigned to the synbiotic,
probiotic, or control group based on computer-generated ran-
dom number lists. Randomization and allocation were con-
cealed from the researcher and the participants until after the
main analyses had been completed. A trained nutritionist at a
diabetes clinic did the randomized allocation sequence, en-
rolled the participants, and assigned the participants to the in-
terventions. Participants were asked not to alter their routine
physical activity or usual diet and not to consume any synbi-
otic, probiotic, or fermented products other than the one pro-
vided to them by the investigators. Individuals were advised to
contact research staff immediately if they suspected a reaction
to the synbiotic or probiotic bread. Synbiotic, probiotic, or con-
trol bread was provided to the participants every 3 days. The
breads were provided at the clinic. They were stored in a cool,
dry place, and participants were told to store it the same way at
home. Participants were instructed to consume one whole bread
for each portion, as the size of the breads was designed for
this purpose. The breads all had the same appearance, so it was
not possible to distinguish one type from another. Compliance
with the consumption of breads was monitored once a week
throughphoneinterviews.Compliancewasalsodouble-checked
via the use of 3-day dietary records completed throughout the
study. The dietary intakes of participants in the same period
were assessed by means of 3-day dietary records (2 week days
and 1 weekend day at the study baseline and at weeks 3, 6, and
8 of intervention). The dietary records were kept according
Downloadedby:
UniversityofAlbertaLibrary
142.244.23.245-9/4/20148:15:28PM
3. Tajadadi-Ebrahimi/Bahmani/Shakeri/
Hadaegh/Hijijafari/Abedi/Asemi
Ann Nutr Metab 2014;65:34–41
DOI: 10.1159/000365153
36
to estimated values in household measurements. To obtain
the nutrient intakes of the participants based on the 3-day
food diaries in each phase, we used Nutritionist IV software
(First Databank, San Bruno, Calif., USA) modified for Iranian
foods. This study is registered at http://www.irct.ir (No.
IRCT201311215623N13).
Assessment of Variables
Anthropometric measurements were obtained at baseline and
after 8 weeks of intervention in each arm. Body weight was mea-
sured in an overnight fasted state, without shoes, and in minimal
clothing using a digital scale (Seca, Hamburg, Germany) to the
nearest 0.1 kg. Height was measured using a nonstretch tape mea-
sure (Seca) to the nearest 0.1 cm. The BMI was calculated as weight
in kilograms divided by height in meters squared.
Biochemical Assessment
Fasting blood samples (10 ml) were taken at baseline and the
end of the study at the Kashan reference laboratory early in the
morning after an overnight fast. FPG levels were quantified with
commercially available kits (Pars Azmun, Tehran, Iran). Serum in-
sulin levels were assayed using enzyme-linked immunoassay kits
(DiaMetra, Milan, Italy). The intra- and interassay coefficents of
variation for insulin were 2.7 and 5.5%, respectively. The HOMA-
IR, homeostatic model assessment-β-cell function (HOMA-B),
and quantitative insulin sensitivity check index (QUICKI) were
calculated based on suggested formulas [26]. The serum hs-CRP
concentration was assayed using ELISA kits (LDN, Nordhorn,
Germany). The inter- and intra-assay coefficients of variations for
the hs-CRP assays ranged from 4.9 to 7.1%. Measurements of FPG,
insulin, and hs-CRP were done in a blinded fashion, in duplicate,
inpairs(before/aftertheintervention)atthesametime,inthesame
analytical run, and in random order to reduce systematic error and
interassay variability.
Synbiotic, Probiotic, and Control Breads
The synbiotic bread contained the viable and heat-resistant
probiotic L. sporogenes (1 × 108 CFU) and 0.07 g inulin as a prebi-
otic per 1 g. The probiotic bread contained L. sporogenes (1 × 108
CFU per 1 g). The control bread (the same substance without pro-
biotic bacteria and prebiotic inulin) was packed in identical pack-
aging and coded by the producer to guarantee blinding. Patients
were asked to consume the synbiotic, probiotic, or control bread 3
times a day in a 40-gram package for a total of 120 g/day. In the
current study, we selected L. sporogenes instead of any other Lac-
tobacillus species due to its highly beneficial characteristics, in-
cluding its viability at high temperatures, in the acidity of the stom-
ach, and in bile acids, as well as its growth under physiological
conditions and its beneficial effects on the intestinal environment
and stool frequency and characteristics [27]. During production,
the content of the breads was measured routinely and the survival
of the probiotic bacteria was also measured on days 0, 3, and 5, as
some samples from each production process were held in the lab-
oratory for these tests. The probiotic bacteria were alive until the
end of the shelf life of the bread (day 5). We had produced probi-
otic bread with these bacteria without any prebiotics before, and
the bacteria were alive. L. sporogenes are spores and are encapsu-
lated, which would result in their increased protection. The synbi-
otic, probiotic, and control breads were provided by the Sahar
Bread Company (Tehran, Iran). The Sahar Bread Company knew
the identity of each bread, as they sent the samples with codes
printed on the packaging. All others were blinded to the identity
of the samples. The L. sporogenes for this study was provided by
the Tak Gen Zist Company (Tehran, Iran).
Statistical Analysis
To ensure a normal distribution of the variables, the Kolmo-
grov-Smirnov test was applied. The analyses were done based on
an intention-to-treat approach. Missing values were treated using
the last-observation-carried-forward method, which ignores
whether the participant’s condition was improving or deteriorat-
ing at the time of dropout but instead freezes outcomes at the val-
ue observed before dropout (i.e. the last observation). One-way
analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to detect differences in
general characteristics and dietary intakes and to determine the
effects of synbiotic, probiotic, and control breads on insulin me-
tabolism and hs-CRP levels between the 3 groups. Changes across
the 3 groups were compared using Bonferoni post hoc pairwise
comparisons. To assess whether the magnitude of the change de-
pended on the baseline values (FPG, insulin, HOMA-IR, HOMA-
B, QUICKI, and hs-CRP), age, and the baseline BMI, we condi-
tioned all analyses to the baseline values, age, and the baseline BMI
to avoid potential biases. These adjustments were done using anal-
ysis of covariance (ANCOVA). All statistical analyses were con-
ducted using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences version
17 (SPSS Inc., Chicago, Ill., USA).
Results
A total of 81 patients (15 males: 5 in each group, and
66 females: 22 in each group) with T2DM were recruit-
ed into this study and randomly assigned to synbiotic
(n = 27), probiotic (n = 27), or control bread (n = 27)
for 8 weeks. One patient was excluded from the control
group due to a need for insulin therapy. Among the in-
dividuals in the probiotic group, 1 person was excluded
due to a need for antibiotic treatment and 1 withdrew
themselves from the study; in the symbiotic group, 1
person withdrew themselves from the study and 1 per-
son was excluded due to a need for supplement therapy.
Finally, 76 participants (synbiotic bread, n = 25; probi-
otic bread, n = 25, and control bread, n = 26) completed
the trial (fig. 1). However, as the analysis was done based
on an intention-to-treat approach, all 81 patients (n =
27 in each group) were included in the final analysis.
No side effects were reported following the consump-
tion of synbiotic and probiotic breads in patients with
T2DM throughout the study. Comparing the anthropo-
metric measures at baseline and after the intervention, we
did not find a significant difference in weight or BMI be-
tween the 3 groups (table 1).
Based on the 3-day dietary records throughout the
study, no statistically significant difference was seen be-
Downloadedby:
UniversityofAlbertaLibrary
142.244.23.245-9/4/20148:15:28PM
4. Synbiotics and Diabetes Ann Nutr Metab 2014;65:34–41
DOI: 10.1159/000365153
37
tween the 3 groups in terms of dietary intakes of energy,
carbohydrates, protein, fat, saturated fatty acids, polyun-
saturated fatty acids, monounsaturated fatty acids, cho-
lesterol, total dietary fiber, insoluble fiber, calcium, mag-
nesium, or vitamin C (data not shown).
Consumption of the synbiotic bread resulted in a sig-
nificant reduction in serum insulin levels (–3.2 ± 5.4 vs.
–0.3 ± 3.4 and 0.6 ± 4.7 μIU/ml, respectively, p = 0.007),
HOMA-IR scores (–1.5 ± 2.7 vs. –0.2 ± 1.6 and 0.4 ± 3.5,
respectively, p = 0.03), and HOMA-B (–7.2 ± 16.3 vs.
–0.7 ± 10.8 and 0.7 ± 8.2, respectively, p = 0.04) compared
to the probiotic and control breads (table 2). No signifi-
cant effect of synbiotic bread consumption on FPG,
QUICKI, or serum hs-CRP levels was seen compared to
the probiotic and control breads. In addition, in a pair-
wise comparison between the synbiotic and probiotic
groups, no significant differences were seen, except for
serum insulin levels (p = 0.02) and HOMA-IR (p = 0.02).
When we adjusted the analysis for baseline values, the
above mentioned findings remained significant, except
for serum insulin levels (p = 0.08) and HOMA-B (p =
0.17) (table 3). Adjustment for age and baseline BMI did
not produce any significant changes in our findings, ex-
cept for HOMA-B (p = 0.06).
Table 1. General characteristics of the study participants
Control breada
(n = 27)
Probiotic breada
(n = 27)
Synbiotic breada
(n = 27)
pb
Age, years 53.4±7.5 52.0±7.2 51.3±10.4 0.65
Height, cm 158.8±7.7 158.9±9.1 162.1±10.1 0.32
Weight at study baseline, kg 76.8±12.1 75.1±14.3 80.6±15.2 0.34
Weight at the end of the trial, kg 76.8±11.9 75.0±14.4 80.1±15.3 0.32
BMI at the study baseline, kg/m2 30.5±4.1 29.8±5.7 30.8±5.9 0.79
BMI at the end of the trial, kg/m2 30.4±4.1 29.8±5.9 30.8±5.9 0.78
Metformin use, n/day 2.0±0.8 1.9±1.2 2.0±1.1 0.87
Glibenclamide use, n/day 2.1±0.9 2.0±1.2 2.1±1.1 0.98
Data are means ± SD. a
Five males and 22 females in each group. b
Obtained from an ANOVA test.
Allocated to the synbiotic
bread (n = 27)
Allocated to the probiotic
bread (n = 27)
Allocated to the control
bread (n = 27)
AllocationEnrollment
Lost to follow-up (n = 2)
Withdrawal (n = 1)
Supplement use (n = 1)
Lost to follow-up (n = 2)
Antibiotics use (n = 1)
Withdrawal (n = 1)
Lost to follow-up (n = 1)
Insulin therapy (n = 1)
Excluded (n = 19)
Not living in Kashan (n = 6)
Taking excluded insulin therapy
(n = 13)
Follow-up
Analyzed (n = 27)Analyzed (n = 27)Analyzed (n = 27)
Randomized (n = 81)
Assessed for eligibility (n = 100)
Analysis
Fig. 1. Patient flow diagram.
Downloadedby:
UniversityofAlbertaLibrary
142.244.23.245-9/4/20148:15:28PM
6. Synbiotics and Diabetes Ann Nutr Metab 2014;65:34–41
DOI: 10.1159/000365153
39
Discussion
Our study indicated that consumption of the synbi-
otic bread for 8 weeks among diabetic patients had ben-
eficial effects on serum insulin levels, HOMA-IR scores,
and HOMA-B but did not affect FPG, QUICKI, or serum
hs-CRP levels compared to the probiotic and control
breads. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study
to examine the effects of synbiotic and probiotic breads
on the insulin metabolism and inflammatory factors of
diabetic patients.
T2DM can result in metabolic complications includ-
ing insulin resistance, dyslipidemia, and increased in-
flammatory markers [28]. We demonstrated that con-
sumption of the synbiotic bread significantly decreased
serum insulin levels, HOMA-IR scores, and HOMA-B
but did not affect FPG, QUICKI, or serum hs-CRP lev-
els compared to the probiotic and control breads. Few
studies have reported beneficial effects of synbiotics
and probiotics on insulin metabolism. In line with our
study, Raso et al. [18] observed improvement in many
aspects of insulin resistance, such as the fasting re-
sponse, hormonal homeostasis, and glycemic control,
following the consumption a synbiotic composed of
L. paracasei plus arabinogalactan and fructo-oligosac-
charides in a rat model of high-fat feeding. Further-
more, a significant decrease in serum insulin levels in
our previous study in diabetic patients was seen after
administration of a synbiotic food containing L. sporo-
genes (27 × 107
CFU) and 1.08 g inulin for 6 weeks com-
pared to the control food [19]. The same findings were
reported among type 2 diabetic patients who received
L. acidophilus for 4 weeks [29], among patients with
T2DM who received multispecies probiotic supple-
ments for 8 weeks [20], and among pregnant women
who received 2 strains of L. acidophilus and Bifidobac-
terium animalis with a total of minimum 1 × 107
CFU
for 9 weeks [30]. However, some researchers did not find
such beneficial effects. For instance, no significant dif-
ference in FPG, serum insulin levels, or HOMA-IR
scores was seen following the consumption of probiotic
supplements among patients with T2DM after 8 weeks
compared to the placebo [20]. In addition, supplementa-
tion with the probiotic strain L. casei Shirota did not
show any significant effects on insulin sensitivity or
β-cell function [31]. Several mechanisms can explain
the beneficial effects of synbiotic bread on insulin me-
tabolism. The beneficial effects of synbiotic bread on
insulin sensitivity might be attributed to their impact
on gene expression [32] and modulation of the gut mi-
crobiota-short-chain fatty acid-hormone axis, and es-
pecially with regard to increased promotion of the hor-
mone glucagon-like peptide-1 from intestinal L cells
[22]. In addition, changes in the levels of gut hormones
like peptide YY [33] and activation of the lipopolysac-
charide Toll-like receptor-2 [34] by synbiotics may ex-
plain its effects on insulin metabolism.
The present study showed that the intake of synbiotic
bread did not affect serum hs-CRP levels. Divergent evi-
dence is available on the anti-inflammatory properties of
synbiotics and probiotics. In agreement with our study,
consumption of the synbiotic containing 2 Lactobacillus
strains, 1 Bifidobacterium strain, 1 Propionibacterium
strain, and galacto-oligosaccharides (32 g/l) did not influ-
ence serum CRP levels among men with a low serum en-
terolactone concentration after cross-over at 6 weeks
[35]. Furthermore, consumption of 1,500-mg probiotic
capsules containing L. acidophilus, L. bulgaricus, L. bifi-
dum, and L. casei twice daily did not show any significant
changes in serum hs-CRP levels among diabetic patients
after 6 weeks compared to the placebo [24]. Similar re-
sults were seen among patients with Crohn’s disease who
received Saccharomyces boulardii (1 g/day) for 52 weeks
[36] and patients with rheumatoid arthritis who received
L. rhamnosus GG for 12 months [37]. However, our pre-
vious study showed that multispecies probiotic supple-
mentation resulted in decreased serum hs-CRP levels
among diabetic patients for 8 weeks [20]. In addition, the
same findings were reported with consumption of a syn-
biotic food containing L. casei, B. breve, and galacto-oli-
gosaccharides among patients undergoing hepatobiliary
resection [38] and with the use of a synbiotic food in pa-
tients with severe multiple injuries [39]. The absent effect
of synbiotic bread consumption on serum hs-CRP levels
in the current study may be the result of different study
designs, the dosages of probiotic and inulin used, the pa-
tients studied, and the duration of supplementation.
Several limitations must be considered when inter-
preting our findings. First of all, due to budget limita-
tions, we were unable to assess the beneficial effects of the
synbiotic and probiotic breads on signaling pathways
and other inflammatory markers including IL-1, IL-6,
and tumor necrosis factor-α. Secondly, we did not to ad-
minister the synbiotic and probiotic breads for more
than 8 weeks. Long-term interventions might lead to
greater changes.
In conclusion, consumption of the synbiotic bread for
8 weeks among patients with T2DM had beneficial effects
on insulin metabolism but did not affect FPG, QUICKI,
or serum hs-CRP levels.
Downloadedby:
UniversityofAlbertaLibrary
142.244.23.245-9/4/20148:15:28PM
7. Tajadadi-Ebrahimi/Bahmani/Shakeri/
Hadaegh/Hijijafari/Abedi/Asemi
Ann Nutr Metab 2014;65:34–41
DOI: 10.1159/000365153
40
Acknowledgments
The present study was supported by a grant (No. 92107) from
the Vice Chancellor for Research, Kashan University of Medical
Sciences. The authors would like to thank the staff of the Gholab-
chi Clinic (Kashan, Iran) for their assistance with this project.
We are grateful to the Research and Development Department
of the Sahar Bread Company, which provided the synbiotic and
probiotic products for the present study. Furthermore, we are
grateful to the Research and Development Department of the
Tak Gen Zist Company, which provided the L. sporogenes for this
study.
Disclosure Statement
None of the authors has any personal or financial conflict of
interests.
References
1 Lin L, Saha PK, Ma X, Henshaw IO, Shao L,
Chang BH, Buras ED, Tong Q, Chan L, Mc-
Guinness OP, Sun Y: Ablation of ghrelin re-
ceptor reduces adiposity and improves insu-
lin sensitivity during aging by regulating fat
metabolism in white and brown adipose tis-
sues. Aging Cell 2011;10:996–1010.
2 Lontchi-Yimagou E, Sobngwi E, Matsha TE,
Kengne AP: Diabetes mellitus and inflamma-
tion. Curr Diab Rep 2013;13:435–444.
3 Yadav H, Jain S, Sinha PR: Antidiabetic effect
of probiotic dahi containing Lactobacillus ac-
idophilus and Lactobacillus casei in high fruc-
tose fed rats. Nutrition 2007;23:62–68.
4 Kawamoto R, Tabara Y, Kohara K, Miki T,
Kusunoki T, Takayama S, Abe M, Katoh T,
Ohtsuka N: Relationships between lipid pro-
files and metabolic syndrome, insulin resis-
tance and serum high molecular adiponectin
in Japanese community-dwelling adults. Lip-
ids Health Dis 2011;10:79.
5 Fiehn O, Garvey WT, Newman JW, Lok
KH, Hoppel CL, Adams SH: Plasma metabo-
lomic profiles reflective of glucose homeo-
stasis in non-diabetic and type 2 diabetic
obese African-American women. PLoS One
2010;5:e15234.
6 Kusminski CM, Shetty S, Orci L, Unger RH,
SchererPE:Diabetesandapoptosis:lipotoxic-
ity. Apoptosis 2009;14:1484–1495.
7 Raz I, Eldor R, Cernea S, Shafrir E: Diabetes:
insulin resistance and derangements in lipid
metabolism: cure through intervention in fat
transport and storage. Diabetes Metab Res
Rev 2005;21:3–14.
8 Aronne LJ, Pagotto U, Foster GD, Davis SN:
The endocannabinoid system as a target for
obesity treatment. Clin Cornerstone 2008;9:
52–64, discussion 65–66.
9 Jacob S, Klimm HJ, Rett K, Helsberg K, Har-
ing HU, Godicke J: Effects of moxonidine vs.
metoprolol on blood pressure and metabolic
control in hypertensive subjects with type 2
diabetes. Exp Clin Endocrinol Diabetes 2004;
112:315–322.
10 Eschwege E: The dysmetabolic syndrome, in-
sulin resistance and increased cardiovascular
(CV) morbidity and mortality in type 2 diabe-
tes: aetiological factors in the development of
CV complications. Diabetes Metab 2003;29:
6S19–6S27.
11 Pedicino D, Liuzzo G, Trotta F, Giglio AF, Gi-
ubilato S, Martini F, Zaccardi F, Scavone G,
Previtero M, Massaro G, Cialdella P, Cardillo
MT, Pitocco D, Ghirlanda G, Crea F: Adaptive
immunity, inflammation, and cardiovascular
complications in type 1 and type 2 diabetes
mellitus. J Diabetes Res 2013;2013:184258.
12 Farvid MS, Homayouni F, Shokoohi M, Fal-
lah A: Glycemic index, glycemic load and
their association with glycemic control
among patients with type 2 diabetes. Eur J
Clin Nutr 2014;68:459–463.
13 Chorell E, Svensson MB, Moritz T, Antti H:
Physical fitness level is reflected by alterations
in the human plasma metabolome. Mol Bio-
syst 2012;8:1187–1196.
14 Picot J, Jones J, Colquitt JL, Gospodarevskaya
E, Loveman E, Baxter L, Clegg AJ: The clinical
effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of bariatric
(weight loss) surgery for obesity: a systematic
review and economic evaluation. Health Tech-
nol Assess 2009;13:1–190, 215–357, iii–iv.
15 Gonzalez-Ortiz M, Martinez-Abundis E, Ro-
bles-Cervantes JA, Ramirez-Ramirez V, Ra-
mos-Zavala MG: Effect of thiamine adminis-
tration on metabolic profile, cytokines and
inflammatory markers in drug-naive patients
with type 2 diabetes. Eur J Nutr 2011;50:145–
149.
16 Ripsin CM, Kang H, Urban RJ: Management
of blood glucose in type 2 diabetes mellitus.
Am Fam Physician 2009;79:29–36.
17 Asemi Z, Jazayeri S, Najafi M, Samimi M, Mo-
fidV,ShidfarF,ForoushaniAR,Shahaboddin
ME: Effects of daily consumption of probiotic
yoghurt on inflammatory factors in pregnant
women: a randomized controlled trial. Pak J
Biol Sci 2011;14:476–482.
18 Raso GM, Simeoli R, Iacono A, Santoro A,
Amero P, Paciello O, Russo R, D’Agostino G,
Di Costanzo M, Canani RB, Calignano A, Meli
R: Effects of a Lactobacillus paracasei B21060
based synbiotic on steatosis, insulin signaling
and Toll-like receptor expression in rats fed a
high-fat diet. J Nutr Biochem 2014;25:81–90.
19 Asemi Z, Khorrami-Rad A, Alizadeh SA,
Shakeri H, Esmaillzadeh A: Effects of synbi-
otic food consumption on metabolic status of
diabetic patients: a double-blind randomized
cross-over controlled clinical trial. Clin Nutr
2014;33:198–203.
20 Asemi Z, Zare Z, Shakeri H, Sabihi S-S, Es-
maillzadeh A: Effect of multispecies probiotic
supplements on metabolic profile, hs-CRP
and oxidative stress in patients with type 2
diabetes. Ann Nutr Metab 2013;63:1–9.
21 Vitali B, Ndagijimana M, Cruciani F, Carne-
vali P, Candela M, Guerzoni ME, Brigidi P:
Impact of a synbiotic food on the gut micro-
bial ecology and metabolic profiles. BMC Mi-
crobiol 2010;10:4.
22 Yadav H, Lee JH, Lloyd J, Walter P, Rane SG:
Beneficial metabolic effects of a probiotic via
butyrate induced GLP-1 secretion. J Biol
Chem 2013;288:25088–25097.
23 Voltolini C, Battersby S, Etherington SL, Pe-
traglia F, Norman JE, Jabbour HN: A novel
antiinflammatory role for the short-chain fat-
ty acids in human labor. Endocrinology 2012;
153:395–403.
24 Mazloom Z, Yousefinejad A, Dabbaghman-
esh MH: Effect of probiotics on lipid profile,
glycemic control, insulin action, oxidative
stress, and inflammatory markers in patients
with type 2 diabetes: a clinical trial. Iran J Med
Sci 2013;38:38–43.
25 American Diabetes Association: Diagnosis
and classification of diabetes mellitus. Diabe-
tes Care 2012;35(suppl 1):S64–S71.
26 Pisprasert V, Ingram KH, Lopez-Davila MF,
Munoz AJ, Garvey WT: Limitations in the use
of indices using glucose and insulin levels to
predict insulin sensitivity: impact of race and
gender and superiority of the indices derived
from oral glucose tolerance test in African
Americans. Diabetes Care 2013;36:845–853.
27 Endres JR, Clewell A, Jade KA, Farber T,
Hauswirth J, Schauss AG: Safety assessment
of a proprietary preparation of a novel probi-
otic, Bacillus coagulans, as a food ingredient.
Food Chem Toxicol 2009;47:1231–1238.
28 Krentz AJ: Lipoprotein abnormalities and
their consequences for patients with type 2 di-
abetes. Diabetes Obes Metab 2003;5(suppl 1):
S19–S27.
29 Andreasen AS, Larsen N, Pedersen-Skovs-
gaard T, Berg RM, Moller K, Svendsen KD,
Jakobsen M, Pedersen BK: Effects of Lactoba-
cillus acidophilus NCFM on insulin sensitivity
and the systemic inflammatory response in
human subjects. Br J Nutr 2010;104:1831–
1838.
Downloadedby:
UniversityofAlbertaLibrary
142.244.23.245-9/4/20148:15:28PM
8. Synbiotics and Diabetes Ann Nutr Metab 2014;65:34–41
DOI: 10.1159/000365153
41
30 Asemi Z, Samimi M, Tabassi Z, Naghibi Rad
M, Rahimi Foroushani A, Khorammian H,
Esmaillzadeh A: Effect of daily consumption
of probiotic yoghurt on insulin resistance in
pregnant women: a randomized controlled
trial. Eur J Clin Nutr 2013;67:71–74.
31 TripoltNJ,LeberB,BlattlD,EderM,Wonisch
W, Scharnagl H, Stojakovic T, Obermayer-
Pietsch B, Wascher TC, Pieber TR, Stadlbauer
V, Sourij H: Short communication: effect of
supplementation with Lactobacillus casei Shi-
rota on insulin sensitivity, beta-cell function,
and markers of endothelial function and in-
flammation in subjects with metabolic syn-
drome – a pilot study. J Dairy Sci 2013;96:
89–95.
32 Esteve E, Ricart W, Fernandez-Real JM: Gut
microbiota interactions with obesity, insulin
resistance and type 2 diabetes: did gut micro-
biote co-evolve with insulin resistance? Curr
Opin Clin Nutr Metab Care 2011;14:483–
490.
33 Diamant M, Blaak EE, de Vos WM: Do nutri-
ent-gut-microbiota interactions play a role in
human obesity, insulin resistance and type 2
diabetes? Obes Rev 2011;12:272–281.
34 Caricilli AM, Picardi PK, de Abreu LL,
Ueno M, Prada PO, Ropelle ER, Hirabara
SM, Castoldi A, Vieira P, Camara NO, Curi
R, Carvalheira JB, Saad MJ: Gut microbiota
is a key modulator of insulin resistance in
TLR 2 knockout mice. PLoS Biol 2011;
9:e1001212.
35 Holma R, Kekkonen RA, Hatakka K, Poussa
T, Vapaatalo H, Adlercreutz H, Korpela R:
Low serum enterolactone concentration is as-
sociated with low colonic Lactobacillus-En-
terococcus counts in men but is not affected by
a synbiotic mixture in a randomised, placebo-
controlled, double-blind, cross-over inter-
vention study. Br J Nutr 2014;111:301–309.
36 Bourreille A, Cadiot G, Le Dreau G, Laharie
D, Beaugerie L, Dupas JL, Marteau P, Rampal
P, Moyse D, Saleh A, Le Guern ME, Galmiche
JP: Saccharomyces boulardii does not prevent
relapse of Crohn’s disease. Clin Gastroenterol
Hepatol 2013;11:982–987.
37 Hatakka K, Martio J, Korpela M, Herranen M,
Poussa T, Laasanen T, Saxelin M, Vapaatalo
H, Moilanen E, Korpela R: Effects of probi-
otic therapy on the activity and activation of
mild rheumatoid arthritis – a pilot study.
Scand J Rheumatol 2003;32:211–215.
38 Sugawara G, Nagino M, Nishio H, Ebata T,
Takagi K, Asahara T, Nomoto K, Nimura Y:
Perioperative synbiotic treatment to prevent
postoperative infectious complications in bil-
iary cancer surgery: a randomized controlled
trial. Ann Surg 2006;244:706–714.
39 Giamarellos-Bourboulis EJ, Bengmark S,
Kanellakopoulou K, Kotzampassi K: Pro- and
synbiotics to control inflammation and infec-
tion in patients with multiple injuries. J Trau-
ma 2009;67:815–821.
Downloadedby:
UniversityofAlbertaLibrary
142.244.23.245-9/4/20148:15:28PM
![E-Mail karger@karger.com
Original Paper
Ann Nutr Metab 2014;65:34–41
DOI: 10.1159/000365153
Effects of Daily Consumption of Synbiotic Bread
on Insulin Metabolism and Serum High-Sensitivity
C-Reactive Protein among Diabetic Patients:
A Double-Blind, Randomized, Controlled
Clinical Trial
Maryam Tajadadi-Ebrahimi
a
Fereashteh Bahmani
c
Hossein Shakeri
c
Haleh Hadaegh
b Mohammad Hijijafari
c Fatemeh Abedi
c Zatollah Asemi
c
a
Science Department, Science Faculty, Islamic Azad University, Tehran Central Branch, and b
Department of Research
and Development, Sahar Bread Company, Tehran, and c
Research Center for Biochemistry and Nutrition in Metabolic
Diseases, Kashan University of Medical Sciences, Kashan, Iran
tance scores (–1.5 ± 2.7 vs. –0.2 ± 1.6 and 0.4 ± 3.5, respec-
tively, p = 0.03), and homeostatic model assessment-β-cell
function (–7.2 ± 16.3 vs. –0.7 ± 10.8 and 0.7 ± 8.2, respective-
ly, p = 0.04) compared to the probiotic and control breads.
We did not find any significant effect of synbiotic bread con-
sumption on fasting plasma glucose, the quantitative insulin
sensitivity check index, or serum hs-CRP levels compared to
other breads. Conclusion: Consumption of the synbiotic
bread among diabetic patients had beneficial effects on in-
sulin metabolism. © 2014 S. Karger AG, Basel
Introduction
Obesity, increased adiposity in white adipose tissues,
and impaired thermogenesis in brown adipose tissues [1,
2] among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM)
result in impaired insulin function and inflammation. In-
sulin resistance in patients with T2DM leads to a reduced
insulin-mediated glucose uptake and metabolism, partic-
Key Words
Synbiotic · Probiotic · Insulin metabolism · Diabetes
Abstract
Background: This study was conducted to evaluate the ef-
fects of daily consumption of synbiotic bread on the meta-
bolic status of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Meth-
ods: This randomized, double-blind, controlled clinical trial
was performed in 81 diabetic patients. The subjects were
randomly assigned to consumption of synbiotic (n = 27),
probiotic (n = 27), or control bread (n = 27) for 8 weeks 3
times a day in a 40-gram package. The synbiotic bread con-
tained Lactobacillus sporogenes (1 × 108
CFU) and 0.07 g inu-
lin per 1 g. The probiotic bread contained L. sporogenes (1 ×
108
CFU per 1 g). Fasting blood samples were taken at base-
line and after an 8-week intervention for quantification of
related factors. Results: Consumption of the synbiotic bread
resulted in a significant reduction in serum insulin levels
(–3.2 ± 5.4 vs. –0.3 ± 3.4 and 0.6 ± 4.7 μIU/ml, respectively,
p = 0.007), homeostatic model assessment for insulin resis-
Received: February 27, 2014
Accepted after revision: June 9, 2014
Published online: September 4, 2014
Zatollah Asemi, PhD
Department of Biochemistry and Nutrition
Kashan University of Medical Sciences, Bolvare Ghotbe Ravandi
Kashan PO Box, Kashan 87198-441 (Iran)
E-Mail asemi_r @ yahoo.com
© 2014 S. Karger AG, Basel
0250–6807/14/0651–0034$39.50/0
www.karger.com/anm
Downloadedby:
UniversityofAlbertaLibrary
142.244.23.245-9/4/20148:15:28PM](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/c5caff53-6629-4ead-a3a5-3b2537306d2f-150510050634-lva1-app6892/85/effects-of-daily-consumption-of-synbiotic-bread-on-insulin-metabolism-and-serum-highsensitivity-creactive-protein-among-diabetic-patients-1-320.jpg)
![Synbiotics and Diabetes Ann Nutr Metab 2014;65:34–41
DOI: 10.1159/000365153
35
ularly in skeletal muscle [3–5], as well as dysregulated fat-
ty acid metabolism and increased blood lipid profiles [6,
7]. Impaired insulin metabolism and increased inflam-
matory factors could result in increased cardiovascular
morbidity and mortality [8, 9], damaged fibrinolysis [10],
plaque development [11], and mental health issues (in
particular an increased risk of depression) [8].
Various strategies have been suggested for the man-
agement of the glycemic status and inflammatory mark-
ers in patients with T2DM, including diet therapy (es-
pecially with a low glycemic index and glycemic load)
[12], lifestyle modifications [13], weight loss in those
who are obese [14], vitamin B1 supplementation [15],
and the use of blood lipid-lowering agents [16]. Recent-
ly, a few studies have also reported that consumption of
synbiotics and probiotics can improve insulin sensitiv-
ity and decrease inflammatory factors [17, 18]. How-
ever, such beneficial effects have mainly been seen in
animal models or nondiabetic patients. In addition,
data on the effects of synbiotics and probiotics on met-
abolic status are conflicting. Administration of a synbi-
otic food containing Lactobacillus sporogenes (27 × 107
CFU) and 1.08 g inulin to diabetic patients for 6 weeks
compared to the control food resulted in decreased se-
rum insulin levels [19]. However, no significant effects
on fasting plasma glucose (FPG), serum insulin levels,
and homeostatic model assessment for insulin resis-
tance (HOMA-IR) were seen following the consump-
tion of probiotic supplements among patients with
T2DM after 8 weeks [20].
The beneficial effects of synbiotics and probiotics on
insulin metabolism and inflammatory markers might be
mediated by the production of short-chain fatty acids [21,
22], modulation of the gut flora composition [22], and a
decreased expression of inflammation-relevant genes
[23]. To our knowledge, there is no study indicating the
effects of daily consumption of synbiotic and probiotic
breads on insulin metabolism and serum high-sensitivity
C-reactive protein (hs-CRP) in patients with T2DM. The
aim of the current study is, therefore, to investigate the
effects of daily consumption of synbiotic and probiotic
breads on insulin metabolism and serum hs-CRP in pa-
tients with T2DM.
Materials and Methods
Participants
This randomized, double-blind, controlled clinical trial was
performed in Kashan, Iran, from October 2013 to December
2013. To estimate the required sample size, we used an appropri-
ate formula, where the type 1 (α) and type 2 errors (β) were con-
sidered 0.05 and 0.20 (power = 80%), respectively. In addition,
the HOMA-IR score was defined as the key variable, and based
on earlier studies [24] the SD of this variable was 2.6. We consid-
ered 2.0 as the meaningful difference in mean HOMA-IR scores
between the 2 groups. Therefore, the required sample size was
estimated to be 27 subjects in each group. The diagnosis of T2DM
was made based on criteria of the American Diabetes Association
[25], i.e. patients fulfilling one of the following criteria were con-
sidered to have T2DM: FPG ≥126 mg/dl, 2-hour plasma glucose
≥200 mg/dl, and HbA1C ≥6.5%. In the current study, we includ-
ed individuals with T2DM and aged 35–70 years recruited from
among patients attending the Golabchi Diabetes Clinic affiliated
with the Kashan University of Medical Sciences (Kashan, Iran).
We excluded pregnant women, those using insulin or vitamin
supplements, and those with chronic kidney disease, liver or lung
disease, and chronic or acute inflammatory disease, heart valve
disease, short-bowel syndrome, and allergies. This study was
conducted according to the guidelines of the Declaration of Hel-
sinki. The ethics committee of the Kashan University of Medical
Sciences approved this study, and written informed consent was
obtained from all participants.
Study Procedure
To obtain detailed information about the dietary intakes of
the study participants, all patients entered a 2-week run-in pe-
riod during which they had to refrain from eating any other
synbiotic and probiotic food. During the run-in period, par-
ticipants were asked to record their dietary intakes for 3 non-
consecutive days. At the end of the run-in period, subjects were
randomly assigned to synbiotic, probiotic, or control bread for
8 weeks. Subjects were stratified based on age, sex, BMI, and the
type and dosage of oral hypoglycemic medications they were
taking, and they were then randomly assigned to the synbiotic,
probiotic, or control group based on computer-generated ran-
dom number lists. Randomization and allocation were con-
cealed from the researcher and the participants until after the
main analyses had been completed. A trained nutritionist at a
diabetes clinic did the randomized allocation sequence, en-
rolled the participants, and assigned the participants to the in-
terventions. Participants were asked not to alter their routine
physical activity or usual diet and not to consume any synbi-
otic, probiotic, or fermented products other than the one pro-
vided to them by the investigators. Individuals were advised to
contact research staff immediately if they suspected a reaction
to the synbiotic or probiotic bread. Synbiotic, probiotic, or con-
trol bread was provided to the participants every 3 days. The
breads were provided at the clinic. They were stored in a cool,
dry place, and participants were told to store it the same way at
home. Participants were instructed to consume one whole bread
for each portion, as the size of the breads was designed for
this purpose. The breads all had the same appearance, so it was
not possible to distinguish one type from another. Compliance
with the consumption of breads was monitored once a week
throughphoneinterviews.Compliancewasalsodouble-checked
via the use of 3-day dietary records completed throughout the
study. The dietary intakes of participants in the same period
were assessed by means of 3-day dietary records (2 week days
and 1 weekend day at the study baseline and at weeks 3, 6, and
8 of intervention). The dietary records were kept according
Downloadedby:
UniversityofAlbertaLibrary
142.244.23.245-9/4/20148:15:28PM]()