Why the study?
Does the combination of moxonidine and a low-calorie diet improve cardiometabolic parameters in young males with overweight?
Does the combination of moxonidine and a low-calorie diet improve cardiometabolic parameters in young males with overweight?
The combination of moxonidine and a low-calorie diet provides synergistic cardiometabolic benefits, including improved lipid profiles and renal function, in young overweight males.
May support adding moxonidine to weight loss for added metabolic benefit in obese patients; leaves open confirmation in larger trials.
OBJECTIVE: Because sympathetic nervous system activity plays a detrimental role in metabolic and cardiovascular health, this study compared the effects of a centrally acting sympatholytic agent, the effects of a weight loss (WL) program using a low-calorie diet, and the effects of a combination of both. METHODS: ) were allocated to a WL program (n = 10), a moxonidine treatment course (M; n = 10, 0.4 mg/d), a combination of both (WL + M; n = 11), or to a control (C) group (n = 6) for 6 months. Muscle sympathetic nerve activity (MSNA), endothelial function, renal function (Cockcroft-Gault formula), and the metabolic profile were assessed before and after intervention. RESULTS: WL occurred in the WL and WL + M groups (-7.6 ± 1.9 kg, P < 0.001 in both). MSNA and systolic blood pressure decreased similarly in the WL, M, and WL + M groups (by ∼10 bursts/min, P < 0.001, and by ∼9 mm Hg, P < 0.05). All other parameters for the WL, C, and M groups remained unchanged. In the WL + M group, decreased total cholesterol (-0.78 ± 0.23 mmol/L, P < 0.001), decreased low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (-0.49 ± 0.16 mmol/L, P < 0.01), decreased insulin (-6.5 ± 2.8 mmol/L, P < 0.05), and attenuated glomerular hyperfiltration (-19 ± 5 mL/min, P < 0.01) occurred. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of moxonidine with a WL program has beneficial effects on aspects of the metabolic profile and end organ damage in young males with overweight.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Lambert et al. (2017) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: