The effect of synbiotic supplementation on atherogenic indices, hs-CRP, and malondialdehyde, as major CVD-related parameters, in women with gestational diabetes mellitus: a secondary data-analysis of a randomized double-blind, placebo-controlled study

Table 2 Changes in atherogenic indices, hs-CRP and MDA levels at the baseline and at after the 6 weeks of synbiotic supplementation

Variable	Period	Placebo group (n = 45)	Synbiotic group (n = 45)	MD (95% CI)^a between groups	P value	Effect Size (Cohen’s d)^b
MDA (μmol/L)	Initial	1.78 (0.45)	1.82 (0.82)	0.04 (−0.24, 0.32)	0.78
	End	1.77 (0.46)	1.89 (0.42)	0.12 (−0.05, 0.29)	0.28	0.16
	MD (95% CI) within groups^c	0.01 (−0.16 to 0.15)	0.07 (−0.15 to 0.29)
	P value	0.9	0.49
hs-CRP (μg/mL)	Initial	5.17 (2.47, 7.46)	4.52 (2.9, 11.4)	−0.92	0.57
	End	5.9 (3.1, 8.3)	4.4 (2.68, 11.35)	−1.5	0.66	0.11
	Median difference	0.73	−0.12
	P value	–	–
TC/HDL-C	Initial	4.26 (1.25)	4.46 (1.95)	0.2 (−0.49, 0.88)	0.58
	End	4.45 (1.19)	4.18 (1.25)	−0.27, −0.78, 0.24)	0.06	0.12
	MD(95% CI) within groups^c	0.19 (−0.18, 0.54)	−0.28 (−0.75, 0.2)
	P value	0.31	0.25
LDL-C/HDL-C	Initial	2.54 (0.87)	2.73 (1.6)	0.19 (−0.36, 0.73)	0.73
	End	2.62 (0.88)	2.45 (0.96)	−0.17 (−0.56, 0.22)	0.06	0.1
	MD(95% CI) within groups^c	0.08 (−0.22, 0.36)	−0.28 (−0.76, 0.2)
	P value	0.59	0.19
logTG/HDL-C	Initial	0.48 (0.25)	0.48 (0.28)	0.001 (−0.11, −0.15)	0.97
	End	0.55 (0.26)	0.43 (0.25)	−0.11 (−0.21, 0)	0.003	0.25
	MD(95% CI) within groups^c	0.07 (0.02, 0.12)	−0.05 (−0.09, 0.01)
	P value	0.02	0.042

MD mean differences, MDA malondialdehyde, hs-CRP high-sensitivity C-reactive protein, TC total cholesterol, HDL-C high density of lipoprotein cholesterol, LDL-C low-density of lipoprotein cholesterol, TG triglycerides
Bold values indicate statistically significance (P < 0.05)
Data are shown as mean (SD); data for hs-CRP are presented as median (25, 75 percentiles)
^aIndependent student t-tests were used at beginning of the study for between-group comparison, except for hs-CRP measures which was estimated by Mann–Whitney U-tests. At the end of the study, differences between groups were assessed using analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) adjusted for baseline values, age, BMI and energy intake
^bCohen’s d values, were defined as the difference between the means after the intervention, divided by the pooled SD. Cohen’s d of 0.2, 0.5 and 0.8 locate at 58th, 69th and 79th percentile of the distribution of the control group, respectively
^cPaired student t-tests were used for within-group comparisons, except for hs-CRP measures which was estimated by non-parametric Wilcoxon signed ranks tests

ISSN: 1758-5996