The effect of processed Tempeh Gembus to triglycerides levels and insulin resistance status in women with obesity

Abstract

Obesity is an increasing weight that exceeds the limits of physical and skeletal needs due to the excessive backfilling of body fat. Obesity is a predisposing factor for increasing triglyceride levels (TG) and insulin resistance status. Consumption of fiber, such as Tempeh Gembus can be an alternative treatment to lower TG levels and insulin resistance status. This research was aimed to prove the influence of processed Tempeh Gembus to TG levels and insulin resistance status. This research employed a pre-post randomized control group. The participants of this research are 40 women with pre-menopausal obesity which are divided into two groups: the control group which is given the daily standard diet treatment Isocaloric 30 kcal/kg of BW/day and the treatment group which is given the daily standard diet Isocaloric 30 kcal/kg of BW/day with the addition of processed Tempeh Gembus processed as much as 150 g/day for 28 days. The result show, giving Tempeh Gembus to the treatment group can lower the TG level (p = 0.010) and insulin resistance status (p = 0.000) significantly. The decreased levels of TG in the treatment group (-9.3±9.6 mg/dL) were higher compared to the decline in the control group (-2.90±4.43 mg/dL). Decreased insulin resistance status in the control group (- 0.60±0.51) is lower than the treatment group (-6.90±4.82). Based on the results above, consumption of 150 g/day of processed Tempeh Gembus for 28 days can lower TG levels

The impact of botanical fermented foods on obesity, metabolic syndrome and type 2 diabetes: a systematic review of randomised controlled trials

“…Like vinegar, many BFFs contain acetic acid and short chain fatty acids. Out of 19 studies which measured glucose outcomes, our review found that only six studies [53,60,[64][65][66]73,75] of different BFFs had significant improvements in some aspect of glycaemic control (FBG, HbA1c, FBI, 2hPPG and 2hPPI). Importantly, BFF subgroups, such as fermented kimchi, did not have the same effects on glycaemic control across all studies, which may be due to differences in study length, dosage and study populations.…”

“…Overall risk of bias was low in 54% of studies, of some concern in 38% and high in 8%. Risk of bias during the randomisation process was low in all but ten studies: eight were of some concern, [53][54][55][56][57][58][59][60] and two were at high risk. [61,62] These ten studies did not describe randomisation or allocation concealment methods in enough detail.…”

“…No studies reported toxicities or serious adverse events, likely due to the interventions being foods or food based. As such, although there were 11 open-label studies, [53][54][55][56][57][58][59][60][61][62][63] no studies were at risk of bias due to deviation from intended interventions.…”

“…No dropouts were reported in four studies. [53,60,64,65] Akamine et al [62] also reported no dropouts, but only analysed 88% of participants for plasma SCFA, and 85% of participants for faecal microbiota composition, due to missing or uncollected samples. Analysis of over 90% of randomised participants (91 to 96%) was conducted in ten studies; [55,[57][58][59]63,[66][67][68][69][70] all of these studies used per-protocol analysis.…”

“…Overall, we judged 14 of the included RCTs to have a low risk of bias. [63][64][65][66][67][68][69][71][72][73][74][75][76][77] Eight of the ten studies assessed to be of some concern [53][54][55][56][57][58][59][60] would likely be upgraded to low risk if more information regarding randomisation and allocation concealment was provided. Han et al [70] likely engaged in selective non-reporting of between-group analysis; more information from authors may change the level of risk assigned.…”