Factors Associated with Visceral Fat Loss in Response to a Multifaceted Weight Loss InterventionRock CL1*, Flatt SW1, Nichols JF2, Pakiz B1, Barkai HS1, Wing DR2, Heath DD1 and Liu FX1
- Corresponding Author:
- Cheryl L. Rock
Department of Family and Preventive Medicine
School of Medicine, University of California
San Diego, 3855 Health Sciences Drive
La Jolla, CA, USA 92093-0901
E-mail: [email protected]
Received Date: July 28, 2017; Accepted Date: August 07, 2017; Published Date: August 14, 2017
Citation: Rock CL, Flatt SW, Nichols JF, Pakiz B, Barkai HS, et al. (2017) Factors Associated with Visceral Fat Loss in Response to a Multifaceted Weight Loss Intervention. J Obes Weight Loss Ther 7:346. doi:10.4172/2165-7904.1000346
Copyright: © 2017 Rock CL, et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Background: Visceral adipose tissue is more metabolically active than other fat depots and is more closely associated with obesity-related diseases, such as cardiovascular disease and type 2 diabetes, than indicators of obesity, such as body mass index. Across various strategies to promote weight loss, including energy-reduced diet and exercise, variable effects on VAT compared to loss of total body fat have been reported.
Methods: To examine the effect of a behavioral weight loss intervention using portion-controlled prepackaged entrées on VAT, we examined data and measurements from overweight/obese men and women (N=183) who were assigned to a weight loss intervention and prescribed a reduced-energy diet with either portion-controlled prepackaged entrées or self-selected meals in a randomized clinical trial. VAT was estimated with dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry at baseline and study end (12 weeks).
Results: VAT loss was greater for the prepackaged entrees group (p=0.02), with an average loss of 29% compared to an average loss of 19% among participants consuming self-selected meals. VAT (mean [SEM]) was 1651 (71) g and 1546 (157) g at baseline and 1234 (59) g and 1278 (118) g at study end in the prepackaged entrees and self-selected meal groups, respectively. Greater VAT loss was associated with higher baseline weight and VAT, and greater weight loss, but not associated with age or physical activity.
Conclusion: Prescribing portion-controlled prepackaged entrees in a behavioral weight loss intervention promotes a reduction in VAT, which should promote improved metabolic profile and reduced cardiovascular disease risk.