Impact of dietary supplementation with resistant dextrin (NUTRIOSE®) on satiety, glycaemia, and related endpoints, in healthy adults

Abstract

Purpose: Resistant dextrin (RD) supplementation has been shown to alter satiety, glycaemia, and body weight, in overweight Chinese men; however, there are limited data on its effects in other demographic groups. Here, we investigated the effects of RD on satiety in healthy adults living in the United Kingdom.

Methods: 20 normal weight and 16 overweight adults completed this randomised controlled cross-over study. Either RD (14 g/day NUTRIOSE® FB06) or maltodextrin control was consumed in mid-morning and mid-afternoon preload beverages over a 28-day treatment period with crossover after a 28-day washout. During 10-h study visits (on days 1, 14, and 28 of each treatment period), satietogenic, glycaemic and anorectic hormonal responses to provided meals were assessed.

Results: Chronic supplementation with RD was associated with higher fasted satiety scores at day 14 (P = 0.006) and day 28 (P = 0.040), compared to control. RD also increased satiety after the mid-morning intervention drink, but it was associated with a reduction in post-meal satiety following both the lunch and evening meals (P < 0.01). The glycaemic response to the mid-morning intervention drink (0-30 min) was attenuated following RD supplementation (P < 0.01). Whilst not a primary endpoint we also observed lower systolic blood pressure at day 14 (P = 0.035) and 28 (P = 0.030), compared to day 1, following RD supplementation in the normal weight group. Energy intake and anthropometrics were unaffected.

Conclusions: RD supplementation modified satiety and glycaemic responses in this cohort, further studies are required to determine longer-term effects on body weight control and metabolic markers. CLINICALTRIALS.

Gov registration: NCT02041975 (22/01/2014).

Keywords: Appetite; Glycaemia; Obesity; Prebiotic; Resistant dextrin; Satiety.

Conflict of interest statement

The study was funded by Roquette Ltd. who produce the resistant dextrin NUTRIOSE®. The contributing authors from Roquette helped define the study hypothesis, these authors were not involved in the study execution, analysis, or data interpretation. The academic team has no vested interest in the study outcome and was given full control over the publication of study data. All study data can be made available on request.

© 2021. The Author(s).

Figures

Fig. 1

Schematic overview of the study visits. Participants arrived at 07:45 and finished at 18:00. Preloads were provided at 10:30 and 15:00. Standard breakfast, and ad libitum lunch and evening meals were provided at 08:45, 13:00 and 17:30, respectively. Blood samples were collected, VAS questionnaires were completed, and water was provided at the time points shown. For analytical purposes, the study day was divided into time segments (S1–S7)

Fig. 2

Systolic blood pressure in normal weight and overweight participants following RD and control treatments. #Systolic blood pressure lower at day 28 compared to day 1 (P = 0.030) in normal weight participants following RD treatment. ≠ Systolic blood pressure lower at day 28 compared to day 14 (P = 0.035) in normal weight participants following RD treatment. Data presented as estimated marginal means ± 95% confidence interval (CI)

Fig. 3

Fasting satiety and AUC satiety for S3 and S4 in the entire cohort. Fasting graph: *Satiety scores higher with RD compared to control at day 14 (P = 0.006) and day 28 (P = 0.040). AUC satiety S3: * AUC satiety higher with RD compared to control at day 28 (P = 0.008). AUC satiety S4: * AUC satiety lower with RD relative to control at day 28 (P = 0.004). ≠ AUC satiety lower at day 28 compared to day 1 following RD supplementation (P = 0.008). # AUC satiety lower at day 28 compared to day 14 following RD supplementation (P = 0.019). Data presented as estimated marginal means ± 95% CI

Fig. 4

AUC glucose and GIP responses to the morning preload drink in S2 in the entire cohort. * AUC glucose lower with RD than control treatment at day 14 (P = 0.044) and day 28 (P = 0.009), ≠ AUC glucose lower at day 28 compared to day 1 following RD supplementation (P = 0.009) and AUC glucose lower at day 14 compared to day 1 following RD treatment (P = 0.009). AUC GIP lower with RD compared to control at day 28 (P = 0.002). Data presented as estimated marginal means ± 95% CI