Cited by 259Food composition and propertiesDiabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and LipoproteinsAdipokines, Inflammation, and Metabolic Diseases

Resistant Starch Improves Insulin Sensitivity in Metabolic Syndrome

Johnston, K. L., Thomas, E. L., Bell, J. D., Frost, G. S., Robertson, M. D.·2010·Diabetic Medicine

Abstract

Aims Diets rich in non-viscous fibre are linked to a reduced risk of both diabetes and cardiovascular disease; however, the mechanism of action remains unclear. This study was undertaken to assess whether chronic consumption of this type of fibre in individuals with the metabolic syndrome would improve insulin sensitivity via changes in ectopic fat storage. Methods The study was a single-blind, randomized, parallel nutritional intervention where 20 insulin resistant subjects consumed either the fibre supplement (resistant starch) (40 g/day) or placebo supplement (0 g/day) for 12 weeks. Insulin sensitivity was measured by euglycaemic-hyperinsulinaemic clamp and ectopic fat storage measured by whole-body magnetic resonance spectroscopy. Results Resistant starch consumption did not significantly affect body weight, fat storage in muscle, liver or visceral depots. There was also no change with resistant starch feeding on vascular function or markers of inflammation. However, in subjects randomized to consume the resistant starch, insulin sensitivity improved compared with the placebo group (P = 0.023). Insulin sensitivity correlated significantly with changes in waist circumference and fat storage in tibialis muscle and to a lesser extent to visceral-to-subcutaneous abdominal adipose tissue ratio. Conclusion Consumption of resistant starch improves insulin sensitivity in subjects with the metabolic syndrome. Unlike in animal models, diabetes prevention does not appear to be direc…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1464-5491.2010.02923.x

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

No citation lists for this paper

No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.

References 38 · Cited by 259

Authors
Johnston, K. L., Thomas, E. L., Bell, J. D., Frost, G. S., & Robertson, M. D.
Affiliations
  • University of Surrey (GB)
  • Imperial College London (GB)
Corresponding author
Robertson, M. D.
Venue
Diabetic Medicine
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2010-04
Volume
27
Issue
4
Pages
391-397
ISSN
  • 0742-3071 (ISSN-L)
  • 1464-5491
OpenAlex
W2119910609
Cited by
259
References
38
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 18 · 2020: 20 · 2019: 21 · 2018: 17 · 2017: 18 · 2016: 20 · 2015: 24 · 2014: 17 · 2013: 22 · 2012: 17
FWCI
15.17
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Diabetic Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Surrey Research Insight Open Access (The University of Surrey) (submittedVersion)
  • Open Research (University of Surrey) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Food composition and properties
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and Lipoproteins
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Adipokines, Inflammation, and Metabolic Diseases
Keywords
resistant starch, insulin sensitivity, metabolic syndrome, visceral adipose tissue, waist circumference, vascular function, inflammation, diabetes prevention
MeSH terms
Body Weight, Dietary Fiber, Female, Humans, Insulin Resistance, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Middle Aged, Obesity, Glucose Clamp Technique, Metabolic Syndrome, Body Fat Distribution, Lipid Metabolism, Waist Circumference

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review