Browsing by Author "Menard O"
Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
Results Per Page
Sort Options
- ItemA standardised static in vitro digestion method suitable for food - an international consensus(Royal Society of Chemistry, 7/04/2014) Minekus M; Alminger M; Alvito P; Ballance S; Bohn T; Bourlieu C; Carriere F; Boutrou R; Corredig M; Dupont D; Dufour C; Egger L; Golding M; Karakaya S; Kirkhus B; Le Feunteun S; Lesmes U; Macierzanka A; Mackie A; Marze S; McClements DJ; Menard O; Recio I; Santos CN; Singh RP; Vegarud GE; Wickham MSJ; Weitschies W; Brodkorb ASimulated gastro-intestinal digestion is widely employed in many fields of food and nutritional sciences, as conducting human trials are often costly, resource intensive, and ethically disputable. As a consequence, in vitro alternatives that determine endpoints such as the bioaccessibility of nutrients and non-nutrients or the digestibility of macronutrients (e.g. lipids, proteins and carbohydrates) are used for screening and building new hypotheses. Various digestion models have been proposed, often impeding the possibility to compare results across research teams. For example, a large variety of enzymes from different sources such as of porcine, rabbit or human origin have been used, differing in their activity and characterization. Differences in pH, mineral type, ionic strength and digestion time, which alter enzyme activity and other phenomena, may also considerably alter results. Other parameters such as the presence of phospholipids, individual enzymes such as gastric lipase and digestive emulsifiers vs. their mixtures (e.g. pancreatin and bile salts), and the ratio of food bolus to digestive fluids, have also been discussed at length. In the present consensus paper, within the COST Infogest network, we propose a general standardised and practical static digestion method based on physiologically relevant conditions that can be applied for various endpoints, which may be amended to accommodate further specific requirements. A frameset of parameters including the oral, gastric and small intestinal digestion are outlined and their relevance discussed in relation to available in vivo data and enzymes. This consensus paper will give a detailed protocol and a line-by-line, guidance, recommendations and justifications but also limitation of the proposed model. This harmonised static, in vitro digestion method for food should aid the production of more comparable data in the future.
- ItemHuman milk vs. Infant formula digestive fate: In vitro dynamic digestion and in vivo mini-piglet models lead to similar conclusions(Elsevier Ltd, 2024-11-01) Charton E; Menard O; Cochet M-F; Le Gouar Y; Jardin J; Henry G; Ossemond J; Bellanger A; Montoya CA; Moughan PJ; Dupont D; Le Huërou-Luron I; Deglaire AInfant formula (IF), the only nutritionally adequate substitute for human milk (HM), still needs to be improved to be more biomimetic with HM, including in terms of digestive fate. The latter can be explored using different digestion models. The present study aimed to compare IF and HM digestion using in vivo (mini-piglet) and in vitro (dynamic system, DIDGI®) models. Fresh mature HM was collected and compared with a standard bovine IF. In vivo, 18 Yucatan mini-piglets (24-day-old) received HM or IF and were euthanized 30 min after the last meal. The entire digestive content was collected from the stomach to the colon. In vitro, the same meals were fed to an in vitro dynamic digestion model simulating the term infant at four weeks of age. Digesta were sampled regularly in the gastric and intestinal compartments. Structure (confocal microscopy and laser light scattering) and proteolysis (SDS-PAGE for residual intact proteins, OPA for hydrolysis degree, LC-MS/MS for peptides) were investigated along digestion. The digesta microstructure differed between HM and IF in a similar way between in vitro and in vivo digestion. In vitro gastric proteolysis of caseins and α-lactalbumin was significantly slower for HM than for IF, such as for the early intestinal proteolysis degree. In vitro bioaccessibility of free AAs explained only 30 % of the true ileal digestibility of AAs. Peptide mapping of caseins differed between HM and IF along their digestion. The relative peptide mapping data over six proteins from HM and IF were highly correlated between in vitro and in vivo digestion, particularly at 80 and 120 min of in vitro gastric digestion vs. in vivo stomach data and at 20 and 40 min of in vitro intestinal digestion vs. in vivo proximal jejunum data (r = 0.7–0.9, p < 0.0001, n = 1604). 40 to 50 % of the bioactive peptides identified in vivo were also found in vitro, with a good correlation of their abundances (r = 0.5, p < 0.0001, n = 61). Overall, in vitro and in vivo digestion were in good agreement, both indicating a different digestive fate for HM and IF.