The efficacy of pomegranate (Punica granatum) extract (PE) for improving performance and post-exercise recovery in an active population was equivocal in previous studies. In this study, a randomised, double-blinded, placebo-controlled, balanced, cross-over trial with two arms was conducted. Eligibility criteria for participants were as follows: male, amateur cyclist, with a training routine of 2 to 4 sessions per week (at least one hour per session). The cyclists (n = 26) were divided into treatment (PE) and placebo (PLA) groups for a period of 15 days. After physical tests, the groups were exchanged after a 14-day washout period. Exercise tests consisted of endurance bouts (square-wave endurance exercise test followed by an incremental exercise test to exhaustion) and an eccentric exercise drill. The objective was to assess the efficacy of PE in performance outcomes and post-exercise muscular recovery and force restoration after a prolonged submaximal effort. Twenty-six participants were included for statistical analysis. There was a statistically significant difference in total time to exhaustion (TTE)(17.66–170.94 s, p < 0.02) and the time to reach ventilatory threshold 2 (VT2)(26.98–82.55 s, p < 0.001), with greater values for the PE compared to the PLA group. No significant results were obtained for force restoration in the isokinetic unilateral low limb test. PE, after a prolonged submaximal effort, may be effective in improving performance outcomes at maximal effort and might help to restore force in the damaged muscles.

This study aimed to analyse the effect of 10 weeks of a highly concentrated docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) + eicosapentaenoic (EPA) supplementation (ratio 8:1) on strength deficit and inflammatory and muscle damage markers in athletes. Fifteen endurance athletes participated in the study. In a randomized, double-blinded cross-over controlled design, the athletes were supplemented with a re-esterified triglyceride containing 2.1 g/day of DHA + 240 mg/day of EPA or placebo for 10 weeks. After a 4-week wash out period, participants were supplemented with the opposite treatment. Before and after each supplementation period, participants performed one eccentric-induced muscle damage exercise training session (ECC). Before, post-exercise min and 24 and 48 h after exercise, muscle soreness, knee isokinetic strength and muscle damage and inflammatory markers were tested. No significant differences in strength deficit variables were found between the two conditions in any of the testing sessions. However, a significant effect was observed in IL1β (p = 0.011) and IL6 (p = 0.009), which showed significantly lower values after DHA consumption than after placebo ingestion. Moreover, a significant main effect was observed in CPK (p = 0.014) and LDH-5 (p = 0.05), in which significantly lower values were found after DHA + EPA consumption. In addition, there was a significant effect on muscle soreness (p = 0.049), lower values being obtained after DHA + EPA consumption. Ten weeks of re-esterified DHA + EPA promoted lower concentrations of inflammation and muscle damage markers and decreased muscle soreness but did not improve the strength deficit after an ECC in endurance athletes.

PurposeIncreased 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).MethodsSixty-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.ResultsFifty-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.ConclusionsThe results show that RMD improved CTT, stool volume, stool consistency and some intestinal functions in a healthy population.

This randomized double-blind and controlled single-center clinical trial was designed to evaluate the effect of a 6-week intake of a probiotic product (1 capsule/day) vs. a placebo on an oxidative stress model of physical exercise (high intensity and duration) in male cyclists (probiotic group, n = 22; placebo, n = 21). This probiotic included three lyophilized strains (Bifidobacterium longum CECT 7347, Lactobacillus casei CECT 9104, and Lactobacillus rhamnosus CECT 8361). Study variables were urinary isoprostane, serum malondialdehyde (MDA), serum oxidized low-density lipoprotein (Ox-LDL), urinary 8-hydroxy-2’-deoxiguanosine (8-OHdG), serum protein carbonyl, serum glutathione peroxidase (GPx), and serum superoxide dismutase (SOD). At 6 weeks, as compared with baseline, significant differences in 8-OHdG (Δ mean difference −10.9 (95% CI −14.5 to −7.3); p < 0.001), MDA (Δ mean difference −207.6 (95% CI −349.1 to −66.1; p < 0.05), and Ox-LDL (Δ mean difference −122.5 (95% CI −240 to −4.5); p < 0.05) were found in the probiotic group only. Serum GPx did not increase in the probiotic group, whereas the mean difference was significant in the placebo group (477.8 (95% CI 112.5 to 843.2); p < 0.05). These findings suggest an antioxidant effect of this probiotic on underlying interacting oxidative stress mechanisms and their modulation in healthy subjects. The study was registered in ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03798821).