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

      Animal Protein versus Plant Protein in Supporting Lean Mass and Muscle Strength: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

      review-article

      Read this article at

      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

          Although animal protein is usually considered to be a more potent stimulator of muscle protein synthesis than plant protein, the effect of protein source on lean mass and muscle strength needs to be systematically reviewed. This study aimed to examine potential differences in the effect of animal vs. plant protein on lean mass and muscle strength, and the possible influence of resistance exercise training (RET) and age. The following databases were searched: PubMed, Embase, Scopus and CINAHL Plus with Full Text, and 3081 articles were screened. A total of 18 articles were selected for systematic review, of which, 16 were used for meta-analysis. Total protein intakes were generally above the recommended dietary allowance at the baseline and end of intervention. Results from the meta-analyses demonstrated that protein source did not affect changes in absolute lean mass or muscle strength. However, there was a favoring effect of animal protein on percent lean mass. RET had no influence on the results, while younger adults (<50 years) were found to gain absolute and percent lean mass with animal protein intake (weighted mean difference (WMD), 0.41 kg; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.08 to 0.74; WMD 0.50%; 95% CI 0.00 to 1.01). Collectively, animal protein tends to be more beneficial for lean mass than plant protein, especially in younger adults.

          Related collections

          Most cited references71

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          Sarcopenia: revised European consensus on definition and diagnosis

          Abstract Background in 2010, the European Working Group on Sarcopenia in Older People (EWGSOP) published a sarcopenia definition that aimed to foster advances in identifying and caring for people with sarcopenia. In early 2018, the Working Group met again (EWGSOP2) to update the original definition in order to reflect scientific and clinical evidence that has built over the last decade. This paper presents our updated findings. Objectives to increase consistency of research design, clinical diagnoses and ultimately, care for people with sarcopenia. Recommendations sarcopenia is a muscle disease (muscle failure) rooted in adverse muscle changes that accrue across a lifetime; sarcopenia is common among adults of older age but can also occur earlier in life. In this updated consensus paper on sarcopenia, EWGSOP2: (1) focuses on low muscle strength as a key characteristic of sarcopenia, uses detection of low muscle quantity and quality to confirm the sarcopenia diagnosis, and identifies poor physical performance as indicative of severe sarcopenia; (2) updates the clinical algorithm that can be used for sarcopenia case-finding, diagnosis and confirmation, and severity determination and (3) provides clear cut-off points for measurements of variables that identify and characterise sarcopenia. Conclusions EWGSOP2's updated recommendations aim to increase awareness of sarcopenia and its risk. With these new recommendations, EWGSOP2 calls for healthcare professionals who treat patients at risk for sarcopenia to take actions that will promote early detection and treatment. We also encourage more research in the field of sarcopenia in order to prevent or delay adverse health outcomes that incur a heavy burden for patients and healthcare systems.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement.

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

              Skeletal muscle mass and distribution in 468 men and women aged 18-88 yr.

              We employed a whole body magnetic resonance imaging protocol to examine the influence of age, gender, body weight, and height on skeletal muscle (SM) mass and distribution in a large and heterogeneous sample of 468 men and women. Men had significantly (P < 0.001) more SM in comparison to women in both absolute terms (33.0 vs. 21.0 kg) and relative to body mass (38.4 vs. 30.6%). The gender differences were greater in the upper (40%) than lower (33%) body (P < 0.01). We observed a reduction in relative SM mass starting in the third decade; however, a noticeable decrease in absolute SM mass was not observed until the end of the fifth decade. This decrease was primarily attributed to a decrease in lower body SM. Weight and height explained approximately 50% of the variance in SM mass in men and women. Although a linear relationship existed between SM and height, the relationship between SM and body weight was curvilinear because the contribution of SM to weight gain decreased with increasing body weight. These findings indicate that men have more SM than women and that these gender differences are greater in the upper body. Independent of gender, aging is associated with a decrease in SM mass that is explained, in large measure, by a decrease in lower body SM occurring after the fifth decade.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Role: Academic Editor
                Role: Academic Editor
                Journal
                Nutrients
                Nutrients
                nutrients
                Nutrients
                MDPI
                2072-6643
                18 February 2021
                February 2021
                : 13
                : 2
                : 661
                Affiliations
                Department of Food Science & Technology, National University of Singapore, 3 Science Drive 3, Singapore 117543, Singapore; e0427298@ 123456u.nus.edu (M.T.L.); e0384141@ 123456u.nus.edu (B.J.P.); dareltoh@ 123456u.nus.edu (D.W.K.T.); e0254848@ 123456u.nus.edu (C.N.S.)
                Author notes
                [* ]Correspondence: fstkje@ 123456nus.edu.sg ; Tel.: +65-6516-1136; Fax: +65-6775-7895
                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1608-0669
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7198-2713
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3912-9042
                Article
                nutrients-13-00661
                10.3390/nu13020661
                7926405
                33670701
                7d7b53ce-c2b9-4a48-b11e-dbd6cbb7cdff
                © 2021 by the authors.

                Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

                History
                : 28 December 2020
                : 13 February 2021
                Categories
                Review

                Nutrition & Dietetics
                body composition,muscle mass,muscular strength,protein source
                Nutrition & Dietetics
                body composition, muscle mass, muscular strength, protein source

                Comments

                Comment on this article