Open Access Research

Effect of a conventional energy-restricted modified diet with or without meal replacement on weight loss and cardiometabolic risk profile in overweight women

Christine E Metzner12*, Anke Folberth-Vögele13, Norman Bitterlich4, Martin Lemperle3, Sandy Schäfer15, Birgit Alteheld6, Peter Stehle6 and Roswitha Siener7

Author Affiliations

1 Bonn Education Association for Dietetics r. A., Fürst-Pückler-Str. 44, D-50935 Cologne, Germany

2 Department of Internal Medicine III, University Hospital, RWTH, Pauwelsstraße 44, D-52074 Aachen, Germany

3 Ambulant Centre for Nutrition Education, Frankfurt am Main, Schweizer Straße 47, D- 60594, Frankfurt/M, Germany

4 Medicine and Service Ltd, Department of Biostatistics, Boettcherstr. 10, D-09117 Chemnitz, Germany

5 B-Vital, Ambulant Centre for Nutrition Education, Elsterwerdaer Platz 1, D-12683 Berlin, Germany

6 Department of Nutrition and Food Sciences, Nutritional Physiology, University of Bonn, Endenicher Allee 11-13, AVZ1, D-53115 Bonn-Endenich, Germany

7 Medical Nutrition Science, Department of Urology, University of Bonn, Sigmund-Freud-Straße 25, D-53105 Bonn, Germany

For all author emails, please log on.

Nutrition & Metabolism 2011, 8:64  doi:10.1186/1743-7075-8-64

Published: 22 September 2011

Abstract

Background

Abdominal obesity, atherogenic dyslipidemia and hypertension are essential risk factors for cardiovascular diseases. Several studies showed favorable effects of weight loss in overweight subjects on cardiometabolic risk profile.

Methods

This open-label, randomized, controlled study investigated the effect of an energy-restricted modified diet with (MR) or without meal replacements for weight control (C) on weight loss, body composition and cardiometabolic risk profile in overweight women. Of 105 randomized participants, 87 were eligible for per protocol analysis. Anthropometric, clinical, blood, 24 h-urine parameters and dietary intake were assessed at baseline and after 12 weeks.

Results

Dietary intervention resulted in a significant weight loss in both groups (MR: -5.98 ± 2.82 kg; p < 0.001, C: -4.84 ± 3.54 kg; p < 0.001). However, the rate of responder (weight loss >5%) was higher in MR (77%) versus C group (50%) (p = 0.010). A significant reduction in waist circumference (WC) and body fat mass (BFM) was observed in both groups. Body cell mass (BCM) and lean body mass (LBM) decreased, while percentage of BCM of body weight increased in MR more than in C group. Systolic and diastolic blood pressure (BP) significantly decreased and to a similar extent in both groups. Total cholesterol (TC), LDL-C but also HDL-C declined significantly in both groups, while no change occurred in triglycerides.

Conclusions

Both dietary intervention strategies had a similar effect on weight loss and body fat distribution, but rate of responder was significantly higher in MR group. Systolic BP decreased to a similar extent in both groups. Cardiometabolic risk profile improved only partly in both groups.