Abstract

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES:

'Slowly digestible' carbohydrates have been claimed to reduce appetite through their effects on postprandial glucose and insulin levels, but literature is inconsistent. The inconsistencies between studies might be explained by factors other than glycemic effects per se, for example, nutritional or physical properties. We tested this possibility by examining postprandial glucose, insulin and appetite responses to drinks differing only in rate and extent of digestibility of carbohydrates. This was accomplished by comparing different glucose polymers: maltodextrin (rapidly digestible) versus medium-chain pullulan (slowly but completely digestible) versus long-chain pullulan (indigestible).

SUBJECTS/METHODS:

In a randomized double-blind balanced crossover design, 35 subjects received drinks with 15 g test carbohydrate polymers. Key outcome measures were appetite scores, digestibility (in vitro test and breath hydrogen), and (in a subset) glucose and insulin levels.

RESULTS:

Digestibility, glucose and insulin data confirmed the rapid, slow and nondigestible nature of the test carbohydrates. Despite its low digestibility, only long-chain pullulan reduced appetite compared with the maltodextrin control, whereas the medium-chain pullulan did not.

CONCLUSIONS:

We conclude that glycemic responses per se have minimal effects on appetite, when tested in products differing in only carbohydrate digestibility rate and extent.