Cargando…

Digestion-resistant maltodextrin effects on colonic transit time and stool weight: a randomized controlled clinical study

PURPOSE: Increased awareness of the importance of dietary fibre has led to increased interest in “functional” fibre components like digestion-resistant maltodextrin (RMD). This randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind study assessed the effects of RMD in the colonic transit time (CTT) and defeca...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Abellán Ruiz, María Salud, Barnuevo Espinosa, María Dolores, Contreras Fernández, Carlos J., Luque Rubia, Antonio J., Sánchez Ayllón, Francisca, Aldeguer García, Miriam, García Santamaría, Carlos, López Román, Francisco Javier
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5122613/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26437831
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00394-015-1045-4
Descripción
Sumario:PURPOSE: Increased awareness of the importance of dietary fibre has led to increased interest in “functional” fibre components like digestion-resistant maltodextrin (RMD). This randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind study assessed the effects of RMD in the colonic transit time (CTT) and defecation characteristics (frequency, stool volume and consistency). METHODS: Sixty-six healthy adult volunteers (32 men) who did not have a daily defecation habit had a 7-day run-in period before the 21-day intervention period with RMD or placebo. CTT and segmental CTT (SCTT) were assessed by a single abdominal X-ray film taken at the end of both periods after radiopaque marker ingestion. Defecation characteristics and intestinal functions were also assessed, which were self-reported by patients. Intragroup comparisons were evaluated by Student’s paired t test, Bonferroni test and Chi-square test, while time comparisons by analysis of variance (ANOVA) and time-by-treatment interaction by repeated-measures ANOVA. RESULTS: Fifty-seven subjects were assessed for CTT (placebo, n = 28; RMD, n = 29). In the RMD group, the total CTT, left SCTT and rectosigmoidal SCTT decreased significantly compared to baseline (p < 0.01 each; −13.3, −4.7, −8.7 h, respectively). Significant differences between groups were observed in total CTT and left SCTT. Significant time-by-treatment interaction was observed in the RMD group for stool volume (p = 0.014), increasing 56 % compared to baseline (p < 0.01), while remained unchanged in the placebo group. Stool consistency was improved only in the RMD group (p < 0.01). No adverse effects related to study products were observed. CONCLUSIONS: The results show that RMD improved CTT, stool volume, stool consistency and some intestinal functions in a healthy population.