Blog
About

2
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found

      Comparison of a Vegetable-Based (Soya) and an Animal-Based Low-Protein Diet in Predialysis Chronic Renal Failure Patients

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          There is some experimental evidence to suggest that progression of chronic renal failure (CRF) is slower on diets based on soya protein than on diets based on animal protein. We have compared the effect of a soya-based vegetarian low-protein diet (VPD) and an animal-based low-protein diet (APD) in 15 patients with CRF. 15 patients with CRF (<sup>51</sup>Cr-EDTA-measured glomerular filtration rate 15–50 ml/min/1.73 m<sup>2</sup>) were studied. In a randomized crossover trial, the patients were given each diet (each containing 0.75 g protein and 32 kcal per kilogram body weight) for a 6-month period. Nine patients completed the trial, 2 others dropped out because they could not tolerate the VPD, 3 because of unrelated medical complications, and 1 for technical reasons. The caloric intake was higher and the protein, phosphate and essential amino acid intake lower on the VPD than on the APD. The compliance with the suggested caloric intake was better with the VPD than with the APD (97 vs. 88% of recommended intake), as was the compliance with the suggested protein intake (94 vs. 112% of recommended intake) and with the suggested phosphate intake (102 vs. 116%). The mean glomerular filtration rate, as judged by <sup>51</sup>Cr-EDTA, was similar after 6 months on each diet and remained unchanged throughout the entire year of the study. The rate of fall of glomerular filtration, as measured by the slope of 1/serum creatinine was slowed by 73% during the 1-year study period as compared with the prestudy period. Nutritional status (as measured by body mass index, midarm circumference, and lean body mass and percent body fat), serum transferrin, cholesterol and albumin, and total lymphocyte count were similar on the two diets. The serum albumin level on both diets, however, was significantly higher on the two diets than during the prediet period. Blood urea nitrogen, urine urea nitrogen, protein catabolic rate, and 24-hour urine creatinine and phosphate were lower on the VPD than on the APD. The 24-hour protein excretion was similar on the two diets. The two low-protein diets resulted in a slowing in the progression of CRF. A VPD is well tolerated in CRF and is associated with lower protein and phosphate intakes and a higher caloric intake than an APD and may, therefore, be used as a safe alternative or partial substitute for the usual APD in CRF.

          Related collections

          Most cited references 1

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Effect of vegetarian soy diet on hyperlipidaemia in nephrotic syndrome

            Bookmark

            Author and article information

            Journal
            NEF
            Nephron
            10.1159/issn.1660-8151
            Nephron
            S. Karger AG
            1660-8151
            2235-3186
            1998
            June 1998
            27 May 1998
            : 79
            : 2
            : 173-180
            Affiliations
            Departments of a Nephrology, b Nutrition and Dietetics, and c Nuclear Medicine, Tel Aviv Medical Center, Tel Aviv, d Institute of Biochemistry, Food Science and Nutrition, Faculty of Agriculture, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Rehovot, Israel
            Article
            45021 Nephron 1998;79:173–180
            10.1159/000045021
            9647497
            © 1998 S. Karger AG, Basel

            Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug. Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.

            Page count
            Tables: 5, References: 39, Pages: 8
            Product
            Self URI (application/pdf): https://www.karger.com/Article/Pdf/45021
            Categories
            Original Paper

            Comments

            Comment on this article