Effects of Oral Exposure Duration and Gastric Energy Content on Appetite Ratings and Energy Intake in Lean Men.

Anne G M Wijlens, Cees de Graaf, Alfrun Erkner, Monica Mars
Author Information
  1. Anne G M Wijlens: Division of Human Nutrition, Wageningen University, 6700 EV Wageningen, The Netherlands. anne.wijlens@wur.nl.
  2. Cees de Graaf: Division of Human Nutrition, Wageningen University, 6700 EV Wageningen, The Netherlands. kees.degraaf@wur.nl.
  3. Alfrun Erkner: Nestlé Research Center, Nestec Limited, PO Box 44, 1000 Lausanne 26; Switzerland. alfrun.erkner@rdls.nestle.com.
  4. Monica Mars: Division of Human Nutrition, Wageningen University, 6700 EV Wageningen, The Netherlands. monica.mars@wur.nl.

Abstract

Studies show that longer oral exposure to food leads to earlier satiation and lowers energy intake. Moreover, higher energy content of food has been shown to lead to higher satiety. Up to now, it has not been studied systematically how oral exposure duration and gastric energy content interact in satiety regulation. Thirty-seven men (22 ± 4 years, 22 ± 2 kg/m²) participated in a randomized cross-over trial, in which we independently manipulated: (1) oral exposure duration by modified sham feeding (MSF) for 1 or 8 min; and (2) energy content of gastric load (GL) by a nasogastric tube: 100 kcal/500 mL or 700 kcal/500 mL. Outcome measures were appetite ratings and subsequent energy intake from an ad libitum meal. Energy intake was 35% lower after the GLs with 700 kcal than with 100 kcal (p < 0.0001). All appetite ratings were lower in the 700 kcal than in the 100 kcal treatments (area under the curve (AUC); p-values ≤ 0.002); fullness was higher and prospective consumption was lower in the 8 min than in the 1 min MSF treatments (AUC; p-values ≤ 0.02). In conclusion, the current showed that a GL of 700 kcal/500 mL vs. 100 kcal/500 mL increased satiety and lowered energy intake. No additional effects of oral exposure duration could be observed, presumably due to the high contrast in energy between the manipulations. Future research should also focus on the role of oral exposure as such and not only the duration.

Keywords

References

  1. Appetite. 2001 Jun;36(3):235-6 [PMID: 11358347]
  2. Obes Rev. 2016 Jan;17(1):18-29 [PMID: 26662879]
  3. Lancet. 1977 Oct 1;2(8040):679-82 [PMID: 71495]
  4. Gastroenterology. 1986 Feb;90(2):428-33 [PMID: 3940915]
  5. World Health Organ Tech Rep Ser. 1985;724:1-206 [PMID: 3937340]
  6. J Hepatol. 1993 Nov;19(3):465-9 [PMID: 8151108]
  7. Appetite. 1998 Dec;31(3):377-90 [PMID: 9920689]
  8. Physiol Behav. 1999 Aug;67(2):299-306 [PMID: 10477062]
  9. Obes Res. 2005 Jan;13(1):93-100 [PMID: 15761167]
  10. Appetite. 2008 Mar-May;50(2-3):435-42 [PMID: 17977618]
  11. Int J Obes (Lond). 2008 Apr;32(4):676-83 [PMID: 18071342]
  12. Am J Clin Nutr. 2009 Aug;90(2):269-75 [PMID: 19515731]
  13. Br J Nutr. 2009 Oct;102(7):1091-7 [PMID: 19356272]
  14. Am J Clin Nutr. 2010 Apr;91(4):841-7 [PMID: 20164319]
  15. Nat Rev Endocrinol. 2010 May;6(5):290-3 [PMID: 20351697]
  16. Obes Rev. 2010 Mar;11(3):234-50 [PMID: 20433660]
  17. Obes Rev. 2010 Mar;11(3):251-70 [PMID: 20122136]
  18. Nutr Rev. 2010 Nov;68(11):643-55 [PMID: 20961295]
  19. Am J Clin Nutr. 2012 Mar;95(3):587-93 [PMID: 22258267]
  20. Obesity (Silver Spring). 2012 Nov;20(11):2226-32 [PMID: 22592331]
  21. Appetite. 2014 Feb;73:114-20 [PMID: 24220316]
  22. Physiol Behav. 2014 Aug;135:135-42 [PMID: 24952264]
  23. Physiol Behav. 2014 Oct;137:9-17 [PMID: 25008799]
  24. J Nutr. 2015 Feb;145(2):365-71 [PMID: 25644360]
  25. Am J Clin Nutr. 2014 Jul;100(1):123-51 [PMID: 24847856]
  26. Physiol Behav. 2001 Nov-Dec;74(4-5):729-34 [PMID: 11790436]

MeSH Term

Adolescent
Adult
Appetite
Appetite Regulation
Area Under Curve
Body Mass Index
Cross-Over Studies
Energy Intake
Feeding Behavior
Gastrointestinal Contents
Humans
Hunger
Male
Meals
Mouth
Postprandial Period
Prospective Studies
Reference Values
Satiation
Stomach
Young Adult

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0energyoralexposureintakecontentsatietyduration100kcal/500mL700kcalhighergastric1minappetiteEnergylower0food22±2MSF8GLratingstreatmentsAUCp-valuesStudiesshowlongerleadsearliersatiationlowersMoreovershownleadnowstudiedsystematicallyinteractregulationThirty-sevenmen4yearskg/m²participatedrandomizedcross-overtrialindependentlymanipulated:modifiedshamfeedingloadnasogastrictube:Outcomemeasuressubsequentadlibitummeal35%GLsp<0001areacurve002fullnessprospectiveconsumption02conclusioncurrentshowedvsincreasedloweredadditionaleffectsobservedpresumablyduehighcontrastmanipulationsFutureresearchalsofocusroleEffectsOralExposureDurationGastricContentAppetiteRatingsIntakeLeanMen

Similar Articles

Cited By