AJCN EB Program 2010
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Purchase Article
Right arrow View Shopping Cart
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Pearce, K. L
Right arrow Articles by Clifton, P. M
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Pearce, K. L
Right arrow Articles by Clifton, P. M
Agricola
Right arrow Articles by Pearce, K. L
Right arrow Articles by Clifton, P. M
American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, Vol. 87, No. 3, 638-644, March 2008
© 2008 American Society for Nutrition


ORIGINAL RESEARCH COMMUNICATION

Effect of carbohydrate distribution on postprandial glucose peaks with the use of continuous glucose monitoring in type 2 diabetes1,2,3

Karma L Pearce, Manny Noakes, Jennifer Keogh and Peter M Clifton

1 From the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization (CSIRO), Health Sciences and Nutrition, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia (KLP, MN, JK, and PMC), and Department of Physiology, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia (KLP)

Background:Large postprandial glucose peaks are associated with increased risk of diabetic complications and cardiovascular disease.

Objective:We investigated the effect of carbohydrate distribution on postprandial glucose peaks with continuous blood glucose monitoring (CGMS), when consuming a moderate carbohydrate diet in energy balance in subjects with type 2 diabetes.

Design:Twenty-three subjects with type 2 diabetes were randomly assigned to each of four 3-d interventions in a crossover design with a 4-d washout period. Identical foods were provided for each treatment with a ratio of total carbohydrate to protein to fat of 40%:34%:26% but differing in carbohydrate content at each meal: even distribution (CARB-E; {approx}70g carbohydrate), breakfast (CARB-B), lunch (CARB-L), and dinner(CARB-D), each providing {approx}125 g carbohydrate in the loaded meal in a 9-MJ diet. Glucose concentrations were continuously measured with CGMS. Outcomes were assessed by postprandial peak glucose (Gmax), time spent > 12 mmol/L (T > 12), and total area under the glucose curve (AUC20).

Results:Daily Gmax differed between treatments (P = 0.003) with CARB-L (14.2 ± 1.0 mmol/L), CARB-E (14.5 ± 0.9 mmol/L), and CARB-D (14.6 ± 0.8 mmol/L) being similar but lower than CARB-B (16.5 ± 0.8 mmol/L). Meal Gmax was weakly related to carbohydrate amount and glycemic load (r = 0.40–0.44). T > 12 differed between treatments (P = 0.014), and a treatment x fasting blood glucose (FBG) interaction (P = 0.003) was observed with CARB-L (184 ± 74 min) < CARB-B (190 ± 49 min) < CARB-D (234 ± 87 min) < CARB-E (262 ± 91 min). Total AUC20 was not significantly different between treatments. After adjustment for FBG, treatment became significant (P = 0.006); CARB-L (10 049 ± 718 mmol/L x 20 h) < CARB-E (10 493 ± 706 mmol/L x 20 h) < CARB-B (10 603 ± 642 mmol/L x 20 h) < CARB-D (10 717 ± 638 mmol/L x 20 h).

Conclusion:CARB-E did not optimize blood glucose control as assessed by postprandial peaks, whereas CARB-L provided the most favorable postprandial profile.

Key Words: Type 2 diabetes • carbohydrate distribution • moderate carbohydrate diet • continuous glucose monitoring • energy balance • postprandial blood glucose







HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2008 by The American Society for Nutrition