Table 4.
Effect of feeding control 1 or two functional foods (FF1 and FF2) 2 for six months (T6) on body composition, renal function, and serum metabolite concentrations in cats compared with their baseline values (T0) 3.
Variables | Renal-Protective Foods | SEM | p-Values for Food Effect 4 | p-Values for Food Comparisons 5 | p-Values for Time Effect 4 | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Control | FF1 | FF2 | FF1 vs. Control | FF2 vs. Control | ||||
Body Mass and Composition: | ||||||||
Body Weight, kg 6 | ||||||||
Initial, T0 | 4.45 | 4.73 | 4.23 | 0.25 | ||||
Change, T6 − T0 | −0.07 | −0.10 | −0.03 | 0.07 | 0.58 | 0.37 | 0.83 | 0.98 |
Lean Body, % 7 | ||||||||
Initial, T0 | 75 | 75.4 | 80.4 | 2.1 | ||||
Change, T6 − T0 | 0.9 | 2.7 | 4.5 | 1.0 | <0.01 | <0.01 | <0.01 | <0.01 |
Renal Function: | ||||||||
Glomerular Filtration Rate, mL/min/kg | ||||||||
Initial, T0 | 1.85 | 2.01 | 1.85 | 0.04 | ||||
Change, T6 − T0 | 0.23 | 0.30 | 0.27 | 0.11 | 0.86 | 0.65 | 0.82 | <0.01 |
Serum Biochemistries: | ||||||||
Creatinine, mg/dL | ||||||||
Initial, T0 | 1.15 | 1.13 | 1.20 | 0.062 | ||||
Change, T6 − T0 | 0.04 | −0.19 | −0.05 | 0.047 | 0.07 | <0.01 | 0.2 | <0.01 |
SDMA, μg/dL | ||||||||
Initial, T0 | 10.9 | 10.9 | 11.1 | 0.29 | ||||
Change, T6 − T0 | −0.67 | −1.76 | −0.31 | 0.33 | <0.01 | <0.01 | 0.85 | <0.01 |
BUN, mg/dL | ||||||||
Initial, T0 | 19.8 | 20.1 | 20.3 | 0.6 | ||||
Change, T6 − T0 | 1.52 | 1.32 | 3.32 | 0.6 | 0.09 | 0.85 | 0.08 | <0.01 |
Total Protein, mg/dL | ||||||||
Initial, T0 | 7.22 | 6.44 | 6.39 | 0.05 | ||||
Change, T6 − T0 | −0.10 | 0.82 | 1.02 | 0.11 | <0.01 | <0.01 | <0.01 | <0.01 |
Albumin, mg/dL | ||||||||
Initial, T0 | 2.83 | 2.8 | 2.77 | 0.05 | ||||
Change, T6 − T0 | −0.33 | 0.04 | 0.01 | 0.05 | <0.01 | <0.01 | <0.01 | 0.04 |
1 Control food was prepared by Hill’s Pet Nutrition, Inc. and was similar to the pre-trial food in protein and fat content, but had added fiber, fish oil, α-tocopheryl acetate, and ascorbyl monophosphate. 2 The two functional foods differed from control food in degree of supplementation with functional lipids, botanicals (fruit and vegetables), as well as pea and chicken protein concentrations. 3 Values are LSM, n = 15 (control), n = 15 (FF1), n = 14 (FF2). 4 To determine food and time main effects, data were analyzed as repeated-measures-in-time, randomized design using GLM in PROC MIXED and the Satterthwaite approximation to determine the denominator degrees of freedom for the tests of fixed effects. 5 To determine whether food effects were different between control food and functional food diets, we compared changes (difference between values at six months and baseline; T6 − T0) for cats fed control food and experimental foods (change for cats fed FF1 vs. change for control; and change for cats fed FF2 vs. change for control), using an unpaired t-test. 6 Body mass and composition were determined by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry scan analysis.