From Research to Practice

Low-Carbohydrate and Very-Low-Carbohydrate Diets in Patients With Diabetes

  1. Jennifer D. Merrill1,
  2. Diana Soliman1,
  3. Nitya Kumar1,
  4. Sooyoung Lim2,
  5. Afreen I. Shariff1 and
  6. William S. Yancy Jr.3,4
  1. 1Division of Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC
  2. 2Department of Internal Medicine, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC
  3. 3Duke Diet and Fitness Center, Department of Medicine, Duke University Health System, Durham, NC
  4. 4Durham Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Durham, NC
  1. Corresponding author: Jennifer D. Merrill, Jennifer.Merrill{at}gmail.com
Diabetes Spectrum 2020 May; 33(2): 133-142. https://doi.org/10.2337/ds19-0070

Abstract

Low-carbohydrate diets have been advocated as an effective method for promoting weight loss in overweight and obese individuals and preventing and treating type 2 diabetes. This article reviews the differences between various low-carbohydrate eating plans and discusses the benefits and drawbacks of such a diet based on available evidence. It also offers practical pointers for clinicians.

Obesity is a growing epidemic; almost 40% of adults worldwide are overweight, and more than 650 million people are obese. This number has tripled since 1975 (1). The increasing prevalence of type 2 diabetes has paralleled the increase in obesity. Elevated body weight increases the risk of type 2 diabetes and mortality (2,3). The development and progression of obesity and type 2 diabetes can be delayed with exercise, diet, and weight loss of 5–10% (4–6). Because type 2 diabetes is largely a lifestyle-mediated chronic disease, there has been growing emphasis on dietary modifications and on determining the optimal eating plan for combatting obesity, diabetes, and their comorbidities.

Guidelines from the American Diabetes Association (ADA) and the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics recommend that overweight adults with type 2 diabetes reduce energy intake to promote weight loss (7–10). Macronutrient distribution should be tailored to patients’ eating patterns, preferences, and metabolic goals.

Very-low-carbohydrate diets were the mainstay of diabetes therapy before the development of exogenous insulin, with a goal of minimizing glucosuria (11,12). In the late 1940s, high-fat diets were found to correlate with high cholesterol levels, leading to the promotion of low-fat diets (LFDs) rather than low-carbohydrate diets (LCDs) for people with risk factors for cardiovascular disease (CVD), including those with diabetes (13). However, the obesity and diabetes epidemics continued to progress. In the 1970s, studies linked high-carbohydrate diets to obesity, type 2 diabetes, and metabolic syndrome, and the paradigm began to shift from LFDs to LCDs (14,15). The article reviews the recent literature on LCDs for patients with type 1 or type 2 diabetes who are overweight or obese.

Physiology of LCDs and Ketosis

After about 4 days without carbohydrate consumption, glycogen is depleted and the body begins breaking down protein and fat for energy. Hormone-sensitive lipase is thought to be responsible for fatty acid release (16). From partial degradation of long-chain fatty acids, the liver generates ketone bodies (acetoacetate, β-hydroxybutyrate [BHB], and acetone) (17). Ketones are taken up by tissues in need of energy, converted first to acetyl-CoA and then to adenosine triphosphate (18).

Skeletal muscle, the myocardium, and the liver can use fatty acids for energy, but almost all tissues can also use ketones. The central nervous system depends on ketones during glucopenia because fatty acids do not cross the blood-brain barrier (19,20). Ketogenesis requires glucopenia because glucose is a potent stimulator of insulin secretion, and insulin suppresses fatty acid release. Therefore, ketogenesis is abruptly stopped by administering insulin or glucose (17,21).

Ketone catabolism releases more energy than pyruvate in glycogenolysis because ketones are more reduced. At best, 185.7 kcal/mol can be liberated from pyruvate, but 243.6 kcal/mol can be liberated from BHB—31% more calories (22). This energy difference has been observed in vitro using rat heart models, and human studies have echoed this finding (23). Serum levels of BHB reach 1–2 mmol/L after 2 days of fasting or 90 minutes of intense exercise (24,25) and increase to 6–8 mmol/L with prolonged starvation (20). BHB may stay consistently above 2 mmol/L on a ketogenic diet (26). Ketosis can be measured by blood BHB levels and in the urine as acetoacetate (27,28).

Although ketosis at moderate levels (typically defined as up to 3 mmol/L), deemed “nutritional ketosis,” does not appear to be intrinsically harmful, clinicians often avoid ketosis because, at higher levels, it can signal dangerous states such as diabetic and alcoholic ketoacidosis, in which metabolic acidosis occurs (29). However, research indicates that ketone bodies may serve as more than an alternative fuel source; there is emerging evidence supporting their signaling properties and physiologic impact, which may include reducing inflammation and improving insulin sensitivity (18).

Types of Weight Loss Diets

A typical American diet consists of 2,200 kcal/day, with roughly 35% from fat, 15% from protein, and 50% (∼275 g) from carbohydrate (30). Dietary approaches for weight loss commonly emphasize one of the following: decreased carbohydrate intake, decreased fat intake, or decreased calories/portions (Table 1) (31). This review focuses on the approaches that reduce carbohydrate intake, especially those that emphasize maintaining nutritional ketosis.

View this table:
TABLE 1

Common Calorie and Macronutrient Content in Various Dietary Approaches

LCDs

There are a wide variety of LCDs, which typically consist of 60–130 g/day carbohydrate (26–45% of daily caloric intake) but do not seek to promote ketosis (32). Popular LCDs include the South Beach Diet and the Zone Diet (33,34).

Very-Low-Carbohydrate Ketogenic Diets

Ketogenic diets were originally used in the early 20th century to combat epilepsy in children but have since been adapted for weight management. Typically, very-low-carbohydrate ketogenic diets (VLCKDs) are characterized by reducing dietary carbohydrate intake to 20–50 g/day (<26% of a 2,000-kcal/day diet) (35). This goal is based on reducing carbohydrate to produce ketosis (36). Many of these eating plans include an induction phase, and most do not advocate calorie restriction, operating on the premise that higher percentages of protein and fat in the diet, and potentially circulating ketones, promote satiety (36–38). Examples of ketogenic eating plans include the Atkins (37), Protein Power (39), and Sugar Busters (40) diets.

In research and clinical practice, ketosis can be measured as BHB in blood on fingerstick or acetoacetate in urine (28). Ketone meters are available for home use to monitor ketones and have also been used to monitor adherence in studies (41,42). Variations of the Atkins diet are commonly used in research and practice, so it is described in more detail below.

Atkins Diet

This VLCKD was first popularized by R.C. Atkins in the 1972 book Dr. Atkins’ Diet Revolution and was later updated in Dr. Atkins’ New Diet Revolution (37,38). The eating plan begins with an induction phase that limits carbohydrates to 20 g/day for 2 weeks and allows meat, poultry, fish/shellfish, eggs, 1 cup of vegetables, and 1 cup of salad vegetables per day but avoids fruit, bread, grains, starchy vegetables, and dairy products other than cheese, cream, and butter. Induction is meant to rapidly deplete glycogen stores and thus induce fat oxidation (43). Carbohydrates are added gradually while maintaining ketosis until the carbohydrate level that can maintain the goal weight is identified (37). The diet emphasizes urine ketone examination to identify a level of carbohydrates that will maintain ketosis.

Low-Carbohydrate Mediterranean Diet

Initially described in the 1960s, the Mediterranean diet has since been linked to lower mortality (44) and improved A1C and fasting blood glucose (FBG) in patients with diabetes (45). Low-carbohydrate Mediterranean diet (LCMD) plans focus on consuming an abundance of plant-based foods (fruits, vegetables, cereals, potatoes, beans, nuts, and seeds), moderate fish and poultry, fat principally from olive oil, low levels of saturated fat, and limited sweets and red meat (46). They often incorporate breads, cereals, and potatoes but are still lower in carbohydrate than the typical American diet or LFDs. LCMDs emphasize the types of proteins and fat found in the Mediterranean diet while reducing carbohydrates by varying amounts to <50% of daily intake, resulting in weight loss, A1C and triglyceride reductions, and increased HDL cholesterol (45,47).

Paleolithic or Hunter-Gatherer Diet

In 1984, O’Dea (48) studied 10 Aboriginal people with type 2 diabetes who lived for a 7-week period as hunter-gathers. Fasting glucose, postprandial glucose clearance, insulin response to glucose, and triglyceride levels all improved (48). Although no standard definition exists, Paleolithic-style diets encourage the consumption of foods that were prevalent before the agricultural revolution, including grass-fed meat, wild fish, fruits, vegetables, and nuts, and avoidance of processed foods, refined sugars, legumes, dairy products, grains, and cereals (49). A Paleolithic diet is typically lower in carbohydrate than the typical American diet or LFDs.

Impact on Glucose Management in Type 1 Diabetes

Glycemic Control

A systematic review (50) evaluated the effects of LCDs (<45% of total energy) on glycemic control in eight studies of adults and children with type 1 diabetes. The heterogeneity and small size of the studies precluded overall conclusions, but statistically significant improvements in A1C were seen in three of the eight studies. Studies by O’Neill et al. (51) and Nielson et al. (52) found the largest absolute average decrease in A1C, each with reductions of 1.3%, representing roughly a 17–19% reduction from baseline. The remaining five studies showed stable glucose levels. Two studies lacked standardized insulin protocols, which is a potential confounder.

Medication Management

Insulin dose reduction in patients with type 1 diabetes lowers the risk for complications of hyperinsulinemia, including hypoglycemia, weight gain, and metabolic syndrome (53,54). In the systematic review (50), LCDs reduced total daily insulin dose in all five studies that reported medication use, although in only two studies did the reduction reach statistical significance. Ireland et al. (55) found the daily insulin dose decreased by an average of 5.1 units/day with an average intake of 87 g/day carbohydrate over a 2-week study period. Krebs et al. (56) found an average reduction in total insulin dose of 22.2 units/day over a 12-week study period using an eating plan averaging 100 g/day carbohydrate.

Dietary fat and protein also cause postprandial hyperglycemia in patients with type 1 diabetes (57). High-fat, high-protein meals require more than double the amount of insulin than lower-fat, lower-protein meals with the same carbohydrate content (58). The ADA recommends that patients with type 1 diabetes who have mastered carbohydrate counting learn to incorporate estimates of dietary fat and protein into their insulin dosing (59).

Impact on Glucose Management in Type 2 Diabetes

Short-Term Glycemic Control (≤8 Weeks)

Boden et al. (60) studied 10 obese patients with type 2 diabetes who consumed an Atkins-modeled diet for 2 weeks in a strictly supervised setting. Mean fasting plasma glucose (FPG) levels decreased from 7.5 mmol/L (135 mg/dL) on the first day to 6.3 mmol/L (113 mg/dL) on the final day. Mean 24-hour serum insulin levels were significantly lower at the end of the VLCKD. Insulin sensitivity improved by 75% when measured via euglycemic-hyperinsulinemic clamp; mean A1C improved from 7.3 to 6.8% in 14 days. This study used gold-standard methods to highlight the immediate metabolic impact of a ketogenic eating pattern in people with type 2 diabetes.

Intermediate-Term Glycemic Control (3–6 Months)

In a single-arm pilot study by Yancy et al. (61), patients with type 2 diabetes who consumed <20 g/day carbohydrate for 16 weeks reduced mean fasting glucose by 17% and A1C from 7.5 to 6.3%. In a study by Westman et al. (62), adults with obesity and type 2 diabetes were randomized to a <20 g VLCKD or a reduced-calorie, low-glycemic-index diet (LGID) with a 500 kcal/day deficit over 24 weeks. Although both groups experienced improved glycemic control, a greater improvement was seen in the VLCKD group, with a mean change in A1C of −1.5% versus −0.5% in the low-calorie LGID group. In a 3-month study by Saslow et al. (63) comparing a VLCKD to a low-fat moderate-carbohydrate (150 g) calorie-restricted diet (MCCR), A1C remained stable in the MCCR group but declined significantly by 0.4% in the VLCKD group.

Long-Term Glycemic Control (≥1 Year)

1-Year Outcomes

Several recent studies have followed patients on a VLCKD over 1 year. Davis et al. (64) randomized a group of overweight adults with type 2 diabetes to a VLCKD (2-week restriction to 20–25 g carbohydrate and then reintroduction of 5 g carbohydrate and per week while maintaining ketosis) and an LFD modeled after the Diabetes Prevention Program (fat intake 25% of daily energy) (4). Dietary intake was measured by 24-hour recall at baseline, 6 months, and 12 months, and participants were encouraged to keep food logs. The LFD and VLCKD groups had similar reductions in A1C in the first 3 months. Neither group maintained these improvements at 1 year, but dietary changes were also not maintained according to self-reported dietary intake. Mayer et al. (65) compared overweight and obese adults with type 2 diabetes on a VLCKD (initially <20 g/day carbohydrate without calorie restriction) versus peers on an LFD with orlistat (fat <30% of energy, saturated fat <10% of energy, and an energy deficit of 500–1,000 kcal). Patients following the VLCKD had an improvement in A1C of 0.7% compared with an increase of 0.2% in patients on the LFD. Saslow et al. (66) randomized overweight patients with prediabetes or type 2 diabetes to a VLCKD (20–50 g carbohydrate with a goal BHB of 0.5–3 mmol/L) or an MCCR (45–50% of calories from carbohydrate) over 1 year. Participants attended 19 classes over the 12-month study period and were taught behavioral strategies and mindful eating. Adherence was assessed with 24-hour dietary recall obtained at baseline and at 3, 6, and 12 months. The VLCKD group had a greater reduction in A1C than the MCCR group (decreased from 6.6 to 6.1% vs. from 6.9 to 6.7%, P = 0.007), despite greater reductions in diabetes medications. Hallberg et al. (42) conducted a study of overweight and obese adults with type 2 diabetes who self-selected to follow a VLCKD and were closely followed by a telemedicine platform used to upload weight, blood glucose, and BHB levels with daily feedback from the care team. These participants were compared with patients receiving usual care. Blood BHB was monitored daily using a home meter. The carbohydrate goal was individualized to maintain nutritional ketosis (goal BHB 0.5–3.0 mmol/L) but typically was <30 g/day. BHB measurement confirmed continued nutritional ketosis with a threefold elevation above baseline at 70 days and a twofold elevation at 1 year. There was a decrease in A1C of 17%, from 7.6 to 6.3%, with an improvement in fasting glucose of 22% from baseline. Adherence was a strength of this study; 83% of participants remained in the intensive intervention arm at 1 year, but it was not a randomized study.

2-Year Outcomes

DIRECT (Dietary Intervention Randomized Controlled Trial) (67) randomized participants to a VLCKD (2-month induction of <20 g/day carbohydrate with potential to increase to 120 g without limitation in calories or other macronutrients), the Mediterranean diet (1,500 kcal/day for women and, 1,800 for men with <35% from fat), and an LFD (1,500 kcal/day for women and 1,800 for men, with 30% of calories from fat and 10% from saturated fat) in obese patients and evaluated glycemic control in a subgroup of participants with diabetes. Participants met with a dietitian 18 times during the 2-year study period, and adherence was assessed with a food questionnaire at 6, 12, and 24 months with two repeated 24-hour dietary recalls in a subgroup of participants. FPG decreased at 12 months by 18.1 mg/dL in the VLCKD group and by 23.4 mg/dL in the Mediterranean diet group but increased by 3 mg/dL in the LFD group. At 24 months, the LFD group had an increase in FPG of 12.1 mg/dL from baseline compared with an increase of 1.2 mg/dL in the VLCKD group and a decrease of 32.8 mg/dL in the Mediterranean diet group. A1C had decreased at 24 months by 0.4 ± 1.3% in the LFD group, 0.5 ± 1.1% in the Mediterranean diet group, and 0.9 ± 0.8% in the VLCKD group. The changes were significant (P <0.05) only in the VLCKD group.

Tay et al. (68) compared A1C effects in obese individuals on a VLCKD that was high in unsaturated fat and low in saturated fat (14% carbohydrates [<50 g daily increased to 70 g after 2 months], 28% protein, 58% total fat) or an isocaloric, high-carbohydrate LFD (53% carbohydrate, 17% protein, <30% total fat) consistent with the current dietary guidelines. Adherence to the VLCKD was assessed with plasma BHB, which increased to three times that of the LFD group and then decreased toward baseline over the study period. Over 2 years, the study noted similar improvements in body weight, FBG, and A1C. The VLCKD group experienced reduced glycemic variability and had more favorable lipoprotein profile changes. However, the study was limited by a 53% attrition rate in both groups.

Athinarayanan et al. (69) published a 2-year follow-up to the study by Hallberg et al. (42) in which participants’ biomarkers were monitored via telemedicine and carbohydrate intake was adjusted to maintain nutritional ketosis consistent with patients’ personal health goals. At 2 years, A1C improved by an average of 0.9% from baseline in the VLCKD arm; fasting glucose declined by 29.1 mg/dL for the VLCKD arm and increased by a mean of 21.7 mg/dL in the usual care arm. At 2 years, 74% of participants in the intervention arm and 78% of those in the control arm remained enrolled in the study, and BHB remained 50% higher than baseline in participants pursuing ketosis.

Medication Management

Short-Term Medication Reduction (<3 Months)

McKenzie et al. (41) studied patients on individualized diets designed to maintain nutritional ketosis, with most patients eating <30 g/day carbohydrate. Over the 10-week study period, 51% of patients were able to decrease their insulin dose, with 36% discontinuing insulin entirely. A striking 90% of patients discontinued sulfonylureas, 86% discontinued a sodium–glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitor, 57% discontinued a dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitor, and 75% decreased doses of a thiazolidinedione. Another 38% discontinued a glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist, with 44% using a decreased dose and 26% using an increased dose at the end of the study period. This study highlights the necessity of frequent medication adjustments in the early stages of a VLCKD.

Intermediate-Term Medication Reduction (3–6 Months)

The majority of the 21 participants in the 16-week study by Yancy et al. (61) had diabetes medications either discontinued (n = 7) or reduced (n = 10) on a VLCKD. In the study by Westman et al. (62) of obese adults with type 2 diabetes randomized to a VLCKD and an LGID over 24 weeks, 95.2% of the VLCKD participants had an elimination or reduction in diabetes medication, compared with 62.1% of the LGID participants. Four individuals in the VLCKD group and one in the LGID group who were taking at least 20 units of insulin at baseline no longer required insulin at the study’s conclusion. Two of the 13 patients in the MCCR arm of the 3-month study by Saslow et al. (63) were able to reduce, but not stop, diabetes medications, whereas two of 11 patients in the VLCKD arm were able to stop diabetes medications entirely.

Long-Term Medication Reduction (≥1 Year)

Several long-term studies have noted significant reductions in diabetes medications with a VLCKD. Although changes in A1C were not significantly different, Davis et al. (64) found that insulin doses decreased by a mean of 10 units in the VLCKD arm but increased by a mean of 4 units in the LFD arm. Mayer et al. (65) found that the LCD led to a greater reduction in antihyperglycemic medications using a medication effect score based on medication potency and total daily dose; 70.6% of those in the LCD group compared with 30.4% of those in the LFD group decreased their medication effect score by ≥50%. In the study by Tay et al. (68), more than twice the number of VLCKD participants had a reduction of ≥20% in medication effect score compared with LFD participants. Finally, Hallberg et al. (42) found that 40% of patients with type 2 diabetes who started a 1-year VLCKD study period on insulin were able to eliminate this medication. The remaining insulin users decreased their daily insulin dose from a mean of 105.2 to 53.8 units.

Diabetes Remission

Diabetes remission is difficult to define because glycemic control exists along a continuum (70). Yancy et al. (71), Hallberg et al. (42), and Athinarayanan et al. (69) defined remission as an A1C <6.5% while off medication or on metformin alone. In the 48-week study by Yancy et al. (71) comparing group medical visits emphasizing weight loss using a VLCKD (20–30 g/day carbohydrate without caloric restriction) compared with standard group visits emphasizing medication intensification, 11.5% of participants in the weight management group achieved remission compared with no patients in the standard visit group. In the 2-year study by Athinarayanan et al. (69), 53% of participants on the VLCKD achieved sustained A1C <6.5% off of all medications except metformin compared with no patients in the control arm. Furthermore, 6.7% of participants on the VLCKD had complete diabetes remission, defined as normoglycemia of at least 1 year’s duration without medication and an A1C <5.7% on two separate occasions, compared with no patients in the usual care group. A 4-year study by Esposito et al. (72) showed that an LCD can help with diabetes remission in newly diagnosed patients with type 2 diabetes who have never been exposed to diabetes medications. Remission was defined as patients transitioning from meeting diabetes criteria to either meeting prediabetes criteria (“partial remission”) or normalization (“complete remission”), as defined by FBG and A1C levels. In comparing an LCMD (<50% carbohydrate) to an LFD, the LCMD participants were significantly more likely to have partial or complete remission than those in the LFD group. There are no studies of long of enough duration to examine the effect of LCDs on prolonged diabetes remission >5 years as defined by a 2009 ADA consensus statement (70).

Impact on Weight Loss

The impact of LCDs on weight has been studied in the short term, but studies longer than 2 years are limited. Yancy et al. (61) found an average weight loss of 6.6% from original body weight for patients adhering to a VLCKD for 16 weeks; interestingly, weight change did not predict change in A1C. In a study by Hussain et al. (73), in which patients were given the opportunity to choose between a low-calorie eating plan or a VLCKD, those with diabetes lost significantly more weight over the 24-week period on the VLCKD than on the low-calorie diet (−12 vs. −7% of original body weight). Hallberg et al. (42) also found a 12% mean weight loss on the VLCKD over the 1-year period of their study.

Some studies have shown significant weight loss favoring the VLCKD over other eating plans (64,73,74), but others have not shown a difference (63,75). None of the comparison diets have demonstrated greater weight loss. Tay et al. (68) found that both a VLCKD and an LFD combined with exercise led to weight loss, although there was no significant difference in weight loss between the two eating plans. In a meta-analysis (76), LCDs (<130 g/day carbohydrate) for patients with type 2 diabetes significantly reduced body weight compared with baseline, but results were mixed as to whether greater weight loss was achieved compared with other eating plans.

Impact on Diabetes Complications

Microvascular Complications

To our knowledge, there have been no human studies looking at the impact of VLCKDs on microvascular complications of diabetes. A study of mouse models with either type 1 or type 2 diabetes (77) showed that albuminuria was reversed by maintaining the ketogenic diet for 2 months. Histologic evidence of nephropathy was only partially reversed. Another study (78) transitioned mice who had developed evidence of impaired glucose tolerance from a high-fat diet to a ketogenic diet. The mice fed a high-fat diet developed increased sensitivity to painful stimuli, which improved after transition to a ketogenic diet. The mice on a ketogenic diet also had increased neurite outgrowth. This study indicates that a ketogenic diet may help reverse small-fiber neuropathy and distal symmetric sensorimotor poly-neuropathy in diabetes and prediabetes.

The presence of microvascular complications such as nephropathy is often an exclusion criterion in human studies of LCDs. Several studies of VLCKDs did not report worsening of serum creatinine (61,62,68,73), and a case report noted reversal of nephropathy and stabilization of retinopathy in a patient who lost 19 kg and experienced a 2% decrease in A1C on a VLCKD (79). We were unable to find any evidence that LCDs and VLCKDs worsen microvascular complications of diabetes.

Macrovascular Complications and Risk Factors

Lipids

LCDs and VLCKDs can have significant effects on serum lipids, even in the short term. In a monitored study of an Atkins-type diet (60), serum triglyceride levels decreased by 35%, and LDL cholesterol decreased by 10% at the end of the 2-week VLCKD period compared with baseline. A meta-analysis of nine studies (76) including 734 patients with type 2 diabetes on diets containing <130 g/day carbohydrate for study periods ranging from 3 months to 2 years found a significant reduction in serum triglyceride levels and an increase in serum HDL cholesterol, but no significant change in total or LDL cholesterol. In a 1-year study of a VLCKD (80), the average 10-year risk for atherosclerotic CVD decreased by 11.9%. The effects of LCDs and VLCKDs on LDL cholesterol levels may be variable, with some patients developing increased LDL cholesterol (81). Therefore, serum lipids should be monitored in patients using an LCD, and management of lipid levels should be individualized.

Blood Pressure

In the study by Westman et al. (62) comparing a VLCKD and an LGID, both groups had a significant decrease in blood pressure from baseline, but there was no difference between groups. Davis et al. (64) and Guldbrand et al. (75) found similar results with insignificant blood pressure variations between randomized LFD and LCD groups over 1 year. It appears that a VLCKD lowers blood pressure in people with diabetes, but not more than other weight loss strategies.

Effect on Mortality

There are limited randomized controlled trials of LCDs and VLCKDs lasting longer than 2 years. These two eating plans can be high in red meat and low in fruits, vegetables, and whole grains, which has prompted concern about cardiovascular effects. Several observational studies have evaluated the impact of low dietary carbohydrate intake on mortality. Two cohort studies (82,83) reported that lower dietary carbohydrate and higher protein intake were associated with increased cardiovascular and all-cause mortality. Each study evaluated a few hundred deaths and did not evaluate the sources of dietary protein and fat. Fung et al. (84) analyzed two large cohorts and found a modest increased risk for all-cause mortality in individuals who consumed animal-based diets with low carbohydrate content but not vegetable-based diets. This finding is consistent with the results reported in an analysis of the Iowa Women’s Health Study (85). It is unclear whether people who reported lower carbohydrate intake in these studies were specifically following LCDs. Furthermore, these observational studies were dependent on self-reported information, so interpretation of results is limited by potential confounding and self-report bias.

Clinical Use and Practical Pointers

Potential Side Effects and How to Avoid Them

A study comparing a VLCKD and an LFD in patients with obesity (rather than diabetes) (74) found that adverse effects occurred more commonly in the VLCKD group. These side effects included constipation (68%), headache (60%), halitosis (38%), muscle cramps (35%), diarrhea (23%), weakness (25%), and rash (13%). Other studies in patients with diabetes have not reported adverse effects (68,75). Clinical experience suggests that adequate fluid and sodium intake can be preventive with regard to side effects (7).

Sparse literature is available in adults with diabetes, but nephrolithiasis has been reported at rates of 3–10% in children being treated with a VLCKD for refractory seizures (86–88). This effect tends to occur 14–24 months after diet initiation. Studies of children who presented with nephrolithiasis have noted low serum bicarbonate and hypercalciuria, hypocitraturia, and hyperuricosuria (86,88). Fluid liberalization and urinary alkalinization helps prevent further stone formation and are viable treatment options (86). Nephrolithiasis has not been mentioned frequently as a side effect of VLCKDs in adults, and we were unable to find case reports, although articles in the lay press mention a potential risk of this condition.

The most commonly reported adverse effect in adults is hypoglycemia resulting from inadequate reduction of insulin or antihyperglycemic medications (61,89). However, Yancy et al. (71) found a 50% decrease in hypoglycemic events in patients on a VLCKD who underwent protocolized medication reduction compared with peer control subjects who received medication intensification to improve glycemic control. It therefore appears that hypoglycemia can be avoided with careful medical management.

Strategies for Medication Reduction

Given the risk of hypoglycemia from VLCKDs in patients with type 2 diabetes, some studies decreased doses of insulin by half and discontinued sulfonylureas at the initiation of the eating plan (61,64). There have been case reports of the development of euglycemic diabetic ketoacidosis in patients who use an SGLT2 inhibitor and follow a VLCKD, likely resulting from increased lipolysis and ketone formation (90,91). For this reason, the National Lipid Association recommends against concurrent use of a VLCKD and an SGLT2 inhibitor (81). Most clinicians discontinue SGLT2 inhibitors at the initiation of a VLCKD; however, some patients may tolerate concomitant VLCKD and SGLT2 inhibitor without incident. Patients with diabetes who are taking medications known to increase the risk of hypoglycemia or SGLT2 inhibitors who are undertaking a VLCKD should have close medical supervision with an emphasis on frequent blood glucose monitoring and proactive (and ongoing) adjustment of diabetes medications.

Strategies for Increasing and Monitoring Dietary Adherence

The studies that show long-term clinically significant weight loss, medication reductions, and improvement in glycemic control are those that also closely monitored adherence to the eating plan (42,68,69). A study of adults using long-term nutritional ketosis for seizure reduction in epilepsy found that blood BHB levels correlate better than urine ketones with a reduction in seizure frequency (27).

Areas of Controversy

There is concern among some experts that LCDs are potentially deficient in vitamins E, A, thiamin, B6, folate, calcium, magnesium, iron, potassium, and dietary fiber based on the foods allowed, but studies documenting such deficiencies are lacking (31). Many protocols address this concern by encouraging attention to well-balanced micronutrients and a daily multivitamin supplement.

Cardiac complications have not been well described in the literature. A pediatric case series found prolonged QTc developed after diet initiation in 3 of 20 patients. This finding correlated with low serum bicarbonate and high BHB. Three patients had cardiac chamber enlargement; one patient with severe dilated cardiomyopathy and prolonged QTc had reversal of these conditions with diet discontinuation (92). A prospective cohort study with a 20-year follow-up showed an increased risk of incident atrial fibrillation with lower self-reported carbohydrate intake (93). We have not found evidence of arrhythmia in the randomized trials of LCDs and VLCKDs.

Future Research Directions

A global trend has emerged toward using low-carbohydrate dietary interventions to treat diabetes and obesity, especially given the documented benefits with regard to weight, insulin, and medication reduction. Patients with type 2 diabetes often present with long-term complications, including nephropathy, retinopathy, neuropathy, established CVD, and nonalcoholic steatohepatitis. Many of the studies of LCDs, however, excluded patients with these common comorbid conditions, so caution should still be used when using these eating plans in the setting of these complications. Furthermore, the safety and efficacy of these eating plans has not been studied in pregnant patients or patients with a history of disordered eating, so the safety of such diets in these populations is uncertain. Long-term studies are needed to evaluate the effects of LCDs in these circumstances. Finally, challenges with sustained adherence are important considerations for any long-term dietary interventions in diabetes and obesity.

Summary

LCDs and VLCKDs can be attractive options for treating patients with diabetes and obesity. These eating plans are associated with at least as much weight loss as other diet strategies, but have the added benefit of being associated with significant reductions in the need for insulin and other diabetes medications. Patients attempting a low-carbohydrate dietary strategy should be closely followed so their medication regimen can be appropriately decreased as needed. This dietary strategy appears to be safe and effective in most patients; however, more studies are needed to evaluate the long-term effects of LCDs and VLCKDs on microvascular and macrovascular complications of diabetes.

Article Information

Duality of Interest

W.S.Y. consults for dietdoctor.com and Guideline Central. No other potential conflicts of interest relevant to this article were reported.

Author Contributions

J.D.M., D.S., N.K., S.L., and A.I.S. researched and wrote the manuscript. W.S.Y. researched and wrote the manuscript and provided editing guidance. All authors are the guarantors of this work and, as such, take responsibility for the accuracy of the data analysis.

https://www.diabetesjournals.org/content/license

Readers may use this article as long as the work is properly cited, the use is educational and not for profit, and the work is not altered. More information is available at https://www.diabetesjournals.org/content/license.

References

  1. 1.↵
    1. World Health Organization
    . Obesity and overweight. Available from https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/obesity-and-overweight. Accessed 15 October 2019
  2. 2.↵
    1. Calle EE,
    2. Thun MJ,
    3. Petrelli JM,
    4. Rodriguez C,
    5. Heath CW Jr.
    . Body-mass index and mortality in a prospective cohort of U.S. adults. N Engl J Med 1999;341:1097–1105
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  3. 3.↵
    1. Edelstein SL,
    2. Knowler WC,
    3. Bain RP, et al.
    Predictors of progression from impaired glucose tolerance to NIDDM: an analysis of six prospective studies. Diabetes 1997;46:701–710
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  4. 4.↵
    1. Knowler WC,
    2. Barrett-Connor E,
    3. Fowler SE, et al; Diabetes Prevention Program Research Group
    . Reduction in the incidence of type 2 diabetes with lifestyle intervention or metformin. N Engl J Med 2002;346:393–403
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  5. 5.
    1. Tuomilehto J,
    2. Lindström J,
    3. Eriksson JG, et al; Finnish Diabetes Prevention Study Group
    . Prevention of type 2 diabetes mellitus by changes in lifestyle among subjects with impaired glucose tolerance. N Engl J Med 2001;344:1343–1350
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  6. 6.↵
    1. Magkos F,
    2. Fraterrigo G,
    3. Yoshino J, et al.
    Effects of moderate and subsequent progressive weight loss on metabolic function and adipose tissue biology in humans with obesity. Cell Metab 2016;23:591–601
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  7. 7.↵
    1. American Diabetes Association
    . 5. Facilitating behavior change and well-being to improve health outcomes: Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes—2020. Diabetes Care 2020;43(Suppl. 1):S48–S65
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  8. 8.
    1. Evert AB,
    2. Dennison M,
    3. Gardner CD, et al.
    Nutrition therapy for adults with diabetes or prediabetes: a consensus report. Diabetes Care 2019;42:731–754
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  9. 9.
    1. Franz MJ,
    2. MacLeod J,
    3. Evert A, et al.
    Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics nutrition practice guideline for type 1 and type 2 diabetes in adults: systematic review of evidence for medical nutrition therapy effectiveness and recommendations for integration into the nutrition care process. J Acad Nutr Diet 2017;117:1659–1679
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  10. 10.↵
    1. MacLeod J,
    2. Franz MJ,
    3. Handu D, et al.
    Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics nutrition practice guideline for type 1 and type 2 diabetes in adults: nutrition intervention evidence reviews and recommendations. J Acad Nutr Diet 2017;117:1637–1658
    OpenUrl
  11. 11.↵
    1. Osler W,
    2. McCrae T
    . The Principles and Practice of Medicine. New York, NY, D. Appleton and Co., 1920
  12. 12.↵
    1. Westman EC,
    2. Yancy WS Jr.,
    3. Humphreys M
    . Dietary treatment of diabetes mellitus in the pre-insulin era (1914–1922). Perspect Biol Med 2006;49:77–83
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  13. 13.↵
    1. La Berge AF
    . How the ideology of low fat conquered America. J Hist Med Allied Sci 2008;63:139–177
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  14. 14.↵
    1. Evert AB,
    2. Boucher JL,
    3. Cypress M, et al.
    Nutrition therapy recommendations for the management of adults with diabetes. Diabetes Care 2014;37(Suppl. 1):S120–S143
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  15. 15.↵
    1. McKeown NM,
    2. Meigs JB,
    3. Liu S,
    4. Saltzman E,
    5. Wilson PW,
    6. Jacques PF
    . Carbohydrate nutrition, insulin resistance, and the prevalence of the metabolic syndrome in the Framingham Offspring Cohort. Diabetes Care 2004;27:538–546
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  16. 16.↵
    1. Holm C,
    2. Osterlund T,
    3. Laurell H,
    4. Contreras JA
    . Molecular mechanisms regulating hormone-sensitive lipase and lipolysis. Annu Rev Nutr 2000;20:365–393
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  17. 17.↵
    1. Fukao T,
    2. Lopaschuk GD,
    3. Mitchell GA
    . Pathways and control of ketone body metabolism: on the fringe of lipid biochemistry. Prostaglandins Leukot Essent Fatty Acids 2004;70:243–251
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  18. 18.↵
    1. Newman JC,
    2. Verdin E
    . β-Hydroxybutyrate: a signaling metabolite. Annu Rev Nutr 2017;37:51–76
    OpenUrlPubMed
  19. 19.↵
    1. Owen OE,
    2. Morgan AP,
    3. Kemp HG,
    4. Sullivan JM,
    5. Herrera MG,
    6. Cahill GF Jr.
    . Brain metabolism during fasting. J Clin Invest 1967;46:1589–1595
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  20. 20.↵
    1. Cahill GF Jr.
    . Fuel metabolism in starvation. Annu Rev Nutr 2006;26:1–22
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  21. 21.↵
    1. Page MM,
    2. Alberti KG,
    3. Greenwood R, et al.
    Treatment of diabetic coma with continuous low-dose infusion of insulin. BMJ 1974;2:687–690
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  22. 22.↵
    1. Veech RL
    . The therapeutic implications of ketone bodies: the effects of ketone bodies in pathological conditions: ketosis, ketogenic diet, redox states, insulin resistance, and mitochondrial metabolism. Prostaglandins Leukot Essent Fatty Acids 2004;70:309–319
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  23. 23.↵
    1. Cox PJ,
    2. Kirk T,
    3. Ashmore T, et al.
    Nutritional ketosis alters fuel preference and thereby endurance performance in athletes. Cell Metab 2016;24:256–268
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  24. 24.↵
    1. Cahill GF Jr.,
    2. Herrera MG,
    3. Morgan AP, et al.
    Hormone-fuel interrelationships during fasting. J Clin Invest 1966;45:1751–1769
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  25. 25.↵
    1. Koeslag JH,
    2. Noakes TD,
    3. Sloan AW
    . Post-exercise ketosis. J Physiol 1980;301:79–90
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  26. 26.↵
    1. Kim DY,
    2. Rho JM
    . The ketogenic diet and epilepsy. Curr Opin Clin Nutr Metab Care 2008;11:113–120
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  27. 27.↵
    1. van Delft R,
    2. Lambrechts D,
    3. Verschuure P,
    4. Hulsman J,
    5. Majoie M
    . Blood beta-hydroxybutyrate correlates better with seizure reduction due to ketogenic diet than do ketones in the urine. Seizure 2010;19:36–39
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  28. 28.↵
    1. Urbain P,
    2. Bertz H
    . Monitoring for compliance with a ketogenic diet: what is the best time of day to test for urinary ketosis? Nutr Metab (Lond) 2016;13:77
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  29. 29.↵
    1. Umpierrez GE,
    2. DiGirolamo M,
    3. Tuvlin JA,
    4. Isaacs SD,
    5. Bhoola SM,
    6. Kokko JP
    . Differences in metabolic and hormonal milieu in diabetic- and alcohol-induced ketoacidosis. J Crit Care 2000;15:52–59
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  30. 30.↵
    1. Shan Z,
    2. Rehm CD,
    3. Rogers G, et al.
    Trends in dietary carbohydrate, protein, and fat intake and diet quality among US adults, 1999–2016. JAMA 2019;322:1178–1187
    OpenUrl
  31. 31.↵
    1. Freedman MR,
    2. King J,
    3. Kennedy E
    . Popular diets: a scientific review. Obes Res 2001;9(Suppl. 1):1S–40S
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  32. 32.↵
    1. Accurso A,
    2. Bernstein RK,
    3. Dahlqvist A, et al.
    Dietary carbohydrate restriction in type 2 diabetes mellitus and metabolic syndrome: time for a critical appraisal. Nutr Metab (Lond) 2008;5:9
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  33. 33.↵
    1. Agatston A
    . The South Beach Diet: The Delicious, Doctor-Designed, Foolproof Plan for Fast and Healthy Weight Loss. Rodale Books. Emmaus, PA, Rodale Books, 2003
  34. 34.↵
    1. Sears B,
    2. Lawren B
    . The Zone: A Dietary Road Map. New York, NY, Regan Books, 1995
  35. 35.↵
    1. Paoli A,
    2. Rubini A,
    3. Volek JS,
    4. Grimaldi KA
    . Beyond weight loss: a review of the therapeutic uses of very-low-carbohydrate (ketogenic) diets. Eur J Clin Nutr 2013;67:789–796
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  36. 36.↵
    1. Feinman RD,
    2. Pogozelski WK,
    3. Astrup A, et al.
    Dietary carbohydrate restriction as the first approach in diabetes management: critical review and evidence base. Nutrition 2015;31:1–13
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  37. 37.↵
    1. Atkins RC
    . Dr. Atkins’ Diet Revolution: The High Calorie Way to Stay Thin Forever. New York, NY, D. McKay Co., 1972
  38. 38.↵
    1. Atkins RC
    . Dr. Atkins’ New Diet Revolution. New York, NY, Avon Books, 2002
  39. 39.↵
    1. Eades MR,
    2. Eades MD
    . Protein Power: The Metabolic Breakthrough. New York, NY, Bantam Books, 1996
  40. 40.↵
    1. Steward HL
    . Sugar Busters! Cut Sugar to Trim Fat. New York, NY, Ballantine Books, 1998
  41. 41.↵
    1. McKenzie AL,
    2. Hallberg SJ,
    3. Creighton BC, et al.
    A novel intervention including individualized nutritional recommendations reduces hemoglobin A1c level, medication use, and weight in type 2 diabetes. JMIR Diabetes 2017;2:e5
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  42. 42.↵
    1. Hallberg SJ,
    2. McKenzie AL,
    3. Williams PT, et al.
    Effectiveness and safety of a novel care model for the management of type 2 diabetes at 1 year: an open-label, non-randomized, controlled study. Diabetes Ther 2018;9:583–612
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  43. 43.↵
    1. Adam-Perrot A,
    2. Clifton P,
    3. Brouns F
    . Low-carbohydrate diets: nutritional and physiological aspects. Obes Rev 2006;7:49–58
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  44. 44.↵
    1. Trichopoulou A,
    2. Costacou T,
    3. Bamia C,
    4. Trichopoulos D
    . Adherence to a Mediterranean diet and survival in a Greek population. N Engl J Med 2003;348:2599–2608
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  45. 45.↵
    1. Esposito K,
    2. Maiorino MI,
    3. Ceriello A,
    4. Giugliano D
    . Prevention and control of type 2 diabetes by Mediterranean diet: a systematic review. Diabetes Res Clin Pract 2010;89:97–102
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  46. 46.↵
    1. Willett WC,
    2. Sacks F,
    3. Trichopoulou A, et al.
    Mediterranean diet pyramid: a cultural model for healthy eating. Am J Clin Nutr 1995;61(Suppl.):1402S–1406S
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  47. 47.↵
    1. Elhayany A,
    2. Lustman A,
    3. Abel R,
    4. Attal-Singer J,
    5. Vinker S
    . A low carbohydrate Mediterranean diet improves cardiovascular risk factors and diabetes control among overweight patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: a 1-year prospective randomized intervention study. Diabetes Obes Metab 2010;12:204–209
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  48. 48.↵
    1. O’Dea K
    . Marked improvement in carbohydrate and lipid metabolism in diabetic Australian aborigines after temporary reversion to traditional lifestyle. Diabetes 1984;33:596–603
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  49. 49.↵
    1. Andrikopoulos S
    . The Paleo diet and diabetes. Med J Aust 2016;205:151–152
    OpenUrl
  50. 50.↵
    1. Turton JL,
    2. Raab R,
    3. Rooney KB
    . Low-carbohydrate diets for type 1 diabetes mellitus: a systematic review. PLoS One 2018;13:e0194987
    OpenUrl
  51. 51.↵
    1. O’Neill DF,
    2. Westman EC,
    3. Bernstein RK
    . The effects of a low-carbohydrate regimen on glycemic control and serum lipids in diabetes mellitus. Metab Syndr Relat Disord 2003;1:291–298
    OpenUrlPubMed
  52. 52.↵
    1. Nielsen JV,
    2. Gando C,
    3. Joensson E,
    4. Paulsson C
    . Low carbohydrate diet in type 1 diabetes, long-term improvement and adherence: a clinical audit. Diabetol Metab Syndr 2012;4:23
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  53. 53.↵
    1. Priya G,
    2. Kalra S
    . A review of insulin resistance in type 1 diabetes: is there a place for adjunctive metformin? Diabetes Ther 2018;9:349–361
    OpenUrl
  54. 54.↵
    1. Canadian Diabetes Association Clinical Practice Guidelines Expert Committee.
    2. Clayton D,
    3. Woo V,
    4. Yale JF
    . Hypoglycemia. Can J Diabetes 2013;37(Suppl. 1):S69–S71
    OpenUrl
  55. 55.↵
    1. Ireland P,
    2. O’Dea K,
    3. Nankervis A
    . Short-term effects of alterations in dietary fat on metabolic control in IDDM. Diabetes Care 1992;15:1499–1504
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  56. 56.↵
    1. Krebs JD,
    2. Parry Strong A,
    3. Cresswell P,
    4. Reynolds AN,
    5. Hanna A,
    6. Haeusler S
    . A randomised trial of the feasibility of a low carbohydrate diet vs standard carbohydrate counting in adults with type 1 diabetes taking body weight into account. Asia Pac J Clin Nutr 2016;25:78–84
    OpenUrl
  57. 57.↵
    1. Bell KJ,
    2. Smart CE,
    3. Steil GM,
    4. Brand-Miller JC,
    5. King B,
    6. Wolpert HA
    . Impact of fat, protein, and glycemic index on postprandial glucose control in type 1 diabetes: implications for intensive diabetes management in the continuous glucose monitoring era. Diabetes Care 2015;38:1008–1015
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  58. 58.↵
    1. Bell KJ,
    2. Toschi E,
    3. Steil GM,
    4. Wolpert HA
    . Optimized mealtime insulin dosing for fat and protein in type 1 diabetes: application of a model-based approach to derive insulin doses for open-loop diabetes management. Diabetes Care 2016;39:1631–1634
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  59. 59.↵
    1. American Diabetes Association
    . 9. Pharmacologic approaches to glycemic treatment: Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes—2020. Diabetes Care 2020;43(Suppl. 1):S98–S110
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  60. 60.↵
    1. Boden G,
    2. Sargrad K,
    3. Homko C,
    4. Mozzoli M,
    5. Stein TP
    . Effect of a low-carbohydrate diet on appetite, blood glucose levels, and insulin resistance in obese patients with type 2 diabetes. Ann Intern Med 2005;142:403–411
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  61. 61.↵
    1. Yancy WS Jr.,
    2. Foy M,
    3. Chalecki AM,
    4. Vernon MC,
    5. Westman EC
    . A low-carbohydrate, ketogenic diet to treat type 2 diabetes. Nutr Metab (Lond) 2005;2:34
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  62. 62.↵
    1. Westman EC,
    2. Yancy WS Jr.,
    3. Mavropoulos JC,
    4. Marquart M,
    5. McDuffie JR
    . The effect of a low-carbohydrate, ketogenic diet versus a low-glycemic index diet on glycemic control in type 2 diabetes mellitus. Nutr Metab (Lond) 2008;5:36
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  63. 63.↵
    1. Saslow LR,
    2. Kim S,
    3. Daubenmier JJ, et al.
    A randomized pilot trial of a moderate carbohydrate diet compared to a very low carbohydrate diet in overweight or obese individuals with type 2 diabetes mellitus or prediabetes. PLoS One 2014;9:e91027
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  64. 64.↵
    1. Davis NJ,
    2. Tomuta N,
    3. Schechter C, et al.
    Comparative study of the effects of a 1-year dietary intervention of a low-carbohydrate diet versus a low-fat diet on weight and glycemic control in type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Care 2009;32:1147–1152
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  65. 65.↵
    1. Mayer SB,
    2. Jeffreys AS,
    3. Olsen MK,
    4. McDuffie JR,
    5. Feinglos MN,
    6. Yancy WS Jr.
    . Two diets with different haemoglobin A1c and antiglycaemic medication effects despite similar weight loss in type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Obes Metab 2014;16:90–93
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  66. 66.↵
    1. Saslow LR,
    2. Daubenmier JJ,
    3. Moskowitz JT, et al.
    Twelve-month outcomes of a randomized trial of a moderate-carbohydrate versus very low-carbohydrate diet in overweight adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus or prediabetes. Nutr Diabetes 2017;7:304
    OpenUrl
  67. 67.↵
    1. Shai I,
    2. Schwarzfuchs D,
    3. Henkin Y, et al; Dietary Intervention Randomized Controlled Trial (DIRECT) Group
    . Weight loss with a low-carbohydrate, Mediterranean, or low-fat diet. N Engl J Med 2008;359:229–241
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  68. 68.↵
    1. Tay J,
    2. Thompson CH,
    3. Luscombe-Marsh ND, et al.
    Effects of an energy-restricted low-carbohydrate, high unsaturated fat/low saturated fat diet versus a high-carbohydrate, low-fat diet in type 2 diabetes: a 2-year randomized clinical trial. Diabetes Obes Metab 2018;20:858–871
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  69. 69.↵
    1. Athinarayanan SJ,
    2. Adams RN,
    3. Hallberg SJ, et al.
    Long-term effects of a novel continuous remote care intervention including nutritional ketosis for the management of type 2 diabetes: a 2-year non-randomized clinical trial. Front Endocrinol (Lausanne) 2019;10:348
    OpenUrl
  70. 70.↵
    1. Buse JB,
    2. Caprio S,
    3. Cefalu WT, et al.
    How do we define cure of diabetes? Diabetes Care 2009;32:2133–2135
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  71. 71.↵
    1. Yancy WS Jr.,
    2. Crowley MJ,
    3. Dar MS, et al.
    Comparison of group medical visits combined with intensive weight management vs group medical visits alone for glycemia in patients with type 2 diabetes: a noninferiority randomized clinical trial. JAMA Intern Med. Epub ahead of print on 4 November 2019 (DOI: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2019.4802)
  72. 72.↵
    1. Esposito K,
    2. Maiorino MI,
    3. Petrizzo M,
    4. Bellastella G,
    5. Giugliano D
    . The effects of a Mediterranean diet on the need for diabetes drugs and remission of newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes: follow-up of a randomized trial. Diabetes Care 2014;37:1824–1830
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  73. 73.↵
    1. Hussain TA,
    2. Mathew TC,
    3. Dashti AA,
    4. Asfar S,
    5. Al-Zaid N,
    6. Dashti HM
    . Effect of low-calorie versus low-carbohydrate ketogenic diet in type 2 diabetes. Nutrition 2012;28:1016–1021
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  74. 74.↵
    1. Yancy WS Jr.,
    2. Olsen MK,
    3. Guyton JR,
    4. Bakst RP,
    5. Westman EC
    . A low-carbohydrate, ketogenic diet versus a low-fat diet to treat obesity and hyperlipidemia: a randomized, controlled trial. Ann Intern Med 2004;140:769–777
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  75. 75.↵
    1. Guldbrand H,
    2. Dizdar B,
    3. Bunjaku B, et al.
    In type 2 diabetes, randomisation to advice to follow a low-carbohydrate diet transiently improves glycaemic control compared with advice to follow a low-fat diet producing a similar weight loss. Diabetologia 2012;55:2118–2127
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  76. 76.↵
    1. Meng Y,
    2. Bai H,
    3. Wang S,
    4. Li Z,
    5. Wang Q,
    6. Chen L
    . Efficacy of low carbohydrate diet for type 2 diabetes mellitus management: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Diabetes Res Clin Pract 2017;131:124–131
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  77. 77.↵
    1. Poplawski MM,
    2. Mastaitis JW,
    3. Isoda F,
    4. Grosjean F,
    5. Zheng F,
    6. Mobbs CV
    . Reversal of diabetic nephropathy by a ketogenic diet. PLoS One 2011;6:e18604
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  78. 78.↵
    1. Cooper MA,
    2. Menta BW,
    3. Perez-Sanchez C, et al.
    A ketogenic diet reduces metabolic syndrome-induced allodynia and promotes peripheral nerve growth in mice. Exp Neurol 2018;306:149–157
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  79. 79.↵
    1. Nielsen JV,
    2. Westerlund P,
    3. Bygren P
    . A low-carbohydrate diet may prevent end-stage renal failure in type 2 diabetes: a case report. Nutr Metab (Lond) 2006;3:23
    OpenUrlPubMed
  80. 80.↵
    1. Bhanpuri NH,
    2. Hallberg SJ,
    3. Williams PT, et al.
    Cardiovascular disease risk factor responses to a type 2 diabetes care model including nutritional ketosis induced by sustained carbohydrate restriction at 1 year: an open label, non-randomized, controlled study. Cardiovasc Diabetol 2018;17:56
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  81. 81.↵
    1. Kirkpatrick CF,
    2. Bolick JP,
    3. Kris-Etherton PM, et al.
    Review of current evidence and clinical recommendations on the effects of low-carbohydrate and very-low-carbohydrate (including ketogenic) diets for the management of body weight and other cardiometabolic risk factors: a scientific statement from the National Lipid Association Nutrition and Lifestyle Task Force. J Clin Lipidol 2019;13:689–711.e1
    OpenUrl
  82. 82.↵
    1. Lagiou P,
    2. Sandin S,
    3. Weiderpass E, et al.
    Low carbohydrate-high protein diet and mortality in a cohort of Swedish women. J Intern Med 2007;261:366–374
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  83. 83.↵
    1. Trichopoulou A,
    2. Psaltopoulou T,
    3. Orfanos P,
    4. Hsieh CC,
    5. Trichopoulos D
    . Low-carbohydrate-high-protein diet and long-term survival in a general population cohort. Eur J Clin Nutr 2007;61:575–581
    OpenUrlPubMedWeb of Science
  84. 84.↵
    1. Fung TT,
    2. van Dam RM,
    3. Hankinson SE,
    4. Stampfer M,
    5. Willett WC,
    6. Hu FB
    . Low-carbohydrate diets and all-cause and cause-specific mortality: two cohort studies. Ann Intern Med 2010;153:289–298
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  85. 85.↵
    1. Kelemen LE,
    2. Kushi LH,
    3. Jacobs DR Jr.,
    4. Cerhan JR
    . Associations of dietary protein with disease and mortality in a prospective study of postmenopausal women. Am J Epidemiol 2005;161:239–249
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  86. 86.↵
    1. Kielb S,
    2. Koo HP,
    3. Bloom DA,
    4. Faerber GJ
    . Nephrolithiasis associated with the ketogenic diet. J Urol 2000;164:464–466
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  87. 87.
    1. Herzberg GZ,
    2. Fivush BA,
    3. Kinsman SL,
    4. Gearhart JP
    . Urolithiasis associated with the ketogenic diet. J Pediatr 1990;117:743–745
    OpenUrlPubMedWeb of Science
  88. 88.↵
    1. Paul E,
    2. Conant KD,
    3. Dunne IE, et al.
    Urolithiasis on the ketogenic diet with concurrent topiramate or zonisamide therapy. Epilepsy Res 2010;90:151–156
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  89. 89.↵
    1. Yamada Y,
    2. Uchida J,
    3. Izumi H, et al.
    A non-calorie-restricted low-carbohydrate diet is effective as an alternative therapy for patients with type 2 diabetes. Intern Med 2014;53:13–19
    OpenUrlPubMed
  90. 90.↵
    1. Tougaard NH,
    2. Faber J,
    3. Eldrup E
    . Very low carbohydrate diet and SGLT-2-inhibitor: double jeopardy in relation to ketoacidosis. BMJ Case Rep 2019;12:e227516
    OpenUrl
  91. 91.↵
    1. Hayami T,
    2. Kato Y,
    3. Kamiya H, et al.
    Case of ketoacidosis by a sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor in a diabetic patient with a low-carbohydrate diet. J Diabetes Investig 2015;6:587–590
    OpenUrlPubMed
  92. 92.↵
    1. Best TH,
    2. Franz DN,
    3. Gilbert DL,
    4. Nelson DP,
    5. Epstein MR
    . Cardiac complications in pediatric patients on the ketogenic diet. Neurology 2000;54:2328–2330
    OpenUrl
  93. 93.↵
    1. Zhang S,
    2. Zhuang X,
    3. Lin X, et al.
    Low-carbohydrate diets and risk of incident atrial fibrillation: a prospective cohort study. J Am Heart Assoc 2019;8:e011955
    OpenUrl
Back to top
View Selected Citations (0)
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Email Article
Citation Tools
Add to Selected Citations

Low-Carbohydrate and Very-Low-Carbohydrate Diets in Patients With Diabetes
Jennifer D. Merrill, Diana Soliman, Nitya Kumar, Sooyoung Lim, Afreen I. Shariff, William S. Yancy
Diabetes Spectrum May 2020, 33 (2) 133-142; DOI: 10.2337/ds19-0070
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo

Jump to section