Skip to main content

Table 3 Results of the individual studies

From: The effect of additional protein on lean body mass preservation in post-bariatric surgery patients: a systematic review

Author,
year
LBM change (kg)(change%) Effect size (d) BFM change (kg)(change%) TBW change (kg)(change%) BMI change (kg/m2)(change%) RMR change (kcal/day)
Clements et al.,
2011 [24] 1
CON: − 7.9 ± 4.5 (14.6%)*
PRO: − 7.7 ± 3.5 (14.7%)*
0.23 (− 0.48 to 0.95) CON: − 8.0 ± 3.5 (14.3%)*
PRO: − 9.2 ± 3.2 (15.7%)*
CON: −15.7 ± 2.5 (13.8%)*
PRO: − 15.8 ± 2.6 (13.9%)*
CON: − 6.1 ± 1.1 (14%)*
PRO: − 5.9 ± 0.9 (13.8%)*
CON: − 294.1 ± 207.2 (15.9%)*
PRO: − 286.6 ± 271.1 (15.9%)*
Günes et al.,
2019 [25] 2
CON: − 7.2 (12%)*
PRO: 3.8 (8%)*^
0.31 (− 0.24 to 0.78) CON: − 25.1 (41%)*
PRO: − 36.7 (49.5%)*
CON: − 33.0 (26.9%)*
PRO: − 33.1 (27.2%)*
CON: − 12.6 (27.4%)*
PRO: − 12.2 (26.5%)*
NA
Oppert et al.,
2018 [26] 3
CON: − 8.8 (− 10.1 to − 7.5)* (16%)
PRO: − 8.2 (− 9.3 to − 7.1)* (15%)
NA CON: −19.7 (− 21.5 to − 17.9)*
PRO: − 19.8 (− 21.3 to − 18.2)*
CON: − 28 (− 30.6 to − 25.4)*
PRO: − 27.2 (− 29.4 to − 25.1)*
CON:-10.5 (−11.4 to − 9.6)*
PRO: − 10.2 (− 11.0 to − 9.4)*
NA
Schiavo et al.,
2017 [27] 1
CON: − 14.5 (19%)*
PRO: − 8.8 (12%)*^
0.61 (0.07 to 1.15) CON: −23.7 (50%)*
PRO: − 43.2 (84%)*^
CON: − 38.8 (31%)*
PRO: − 46.7 (36%)*
NA CON: − 645.16 (29%)*^
PRO: − 380.18 (17%)*^
Schollenberger et al.,
2016 [28] 1
CON: − 7.8 (11.3%)*
PRO: − 7.6 (11.7%)*
0.3 (− 0.59 to 1.18) CON: −21.0 (30.8%)*
PRO: − 29.1 (37.2%)*
CON: −28.7 (20.9%)*
PRO: − 36.4 (25%)*
CON: −10.3 (21%)*
PRO: − 13.0 (25%)*
NA
  1. 1 expressed as mean ± SD (change%)
  2. 2 expressed as mean (change%)
  3. 3 expressed as mean (CI) (change%)
  4. *denotes significant difference from baseline. ^denotes significant difference from control
  5. Abbreviations: CON control group, PRO protein group, NA not applicable or not assessed, LBM lean body mass, BFM body fat mass, TBW total body weight, BMI body mass index, RMR resting metabolic rate