Orlistat  reduced body weight ( weighted mean difference : −2.12 , p < 0.001 ) , total‐cholesterol ( weighted mean difference : −0.30 mmol/L , p < 0.001 ) , low‐density lipoprotein cholesterol ( weighted mean difference : −0.27 mmol/L , p < 0.001 ) , high‐density lipoprotein cholesterol ( weighted mean difference : −0.034 mmol/L , p < 0.001 ) and triglyceride ( weighted mean difference : −0.09 mmol/L , p < 0.001 ) concentrations , while no effect on lipoprotein(a ) was observed .
Total‐ and low‐density lipoprotein cholesterol‐lowering were associated negatively with duration of orlistat treatment and positively with body weight changes .
In conclusion , Orlistat treatment slightly reduces cholesterol and triglyceride levels , but not lipoprotein(a ) levels .
Total‐ and low‐density lipoprotein cholesterol levels reductions are more consistent in patients with greater body weight reduction and shorter duration of orlistat treatment .
We investigated the efficacy of orlistat on plasma lipids and body weight in a meta‐ analysis of 33 studies including 9732  participants .Orlistat  was associated with a slight but significant decrease in body weight , plasma cholesterol and triglyceride concentrations , whereas plasma Lp(a ) levels were not affected by orlistat treatment .
Greater body weight reduction and lower duration of orlistat treatment promoted more consistent plasma total‐ and LDL‐cholesterol lowering
& NA ; Orlistat , an inhibitor of intestinal lipase , promotes body weight reduction .
The lipid‐lowering efficacy of orlistat is controversial and the effect of orlistat‐induced body weight reduction on lipid changes has not been explored in meta‐regression analyses .
HighlightsOrlistat is an inhibitor of intestinal lipase promoting body weight reduction , but whose lipid‐lowering efficacy is controversial .
Effect of orlistat on weight and body composition in obese adolescents: a randomized controlled trial.
CONTEXT The prevalence of overweight and obesity in children and adolescents is increasing rapidly . In this population , behavioral therapy alone has had limited success in providing meaningful , sustained weight reduction , and pharmacological treatment has not been extensively studied . OBJECTIVE To determine the efficacy and safety of orlistat in weight management of adolescents . DESIGN , SETTING , AND PATIENTS Multicenter , 54-week ( August 2000-October 2002 ) , r and omized , double-blind study of 539 obese adolescents ( aged 12 - 16 years ; body mass index [ BMI ] > or=2 units above the 95th percentile ) at 32 centers in the United States and Canada . INTERVENTIONS A 120-mg dose of orlistat ( n = 357 ) or placebo ( n = 182 ) 3 times daily for 1 year , plus a mildly hypocaloric diet ( 30 % fat calories ) , exercise , and behavioral therapy . MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Change in BMI ; secondary measures included changes in waist and hip circumference , weight loss , lipid measurements , and glucose and insulin responses to oral glucose challenge . RESULTS There was a decrease in BMI in both treatment groups up to week 12 , thereafter stabilizing with orlistat but increasing beyond baseline with placebo . At the end of the study , BMI had decreased by 0.55 with orlistat but increased by 0.31 with placebo ( P = .001 ) . Compared with 15.7 % of the placebo group , 26.5 % of participants taking orlistat had a 5 % or higher decrease in BMI ( P = .005 ) ; 4.5 % and 13.3 % , respectively , had a 10 % or higher decrease in BMI ( P = .002 ) . At study end , weight had increased 0.53 kg with orlistat and 3.14 kg with placebo ( P<.001 ) . Dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry showed that this difference was explained by changes in fat mass . Waist circumference decreased in the orlistat group but increased in the placebo group ( -1.33 cm vs + 0.12 cm ; P<.05 ) . Generally mild to moderate gastrointestinal tract adverse events occurred in 9 % to 50 % of the orlistat group and in 1 % to 13 % of the placebo group . CONCLUSIONS In combination with diet , exercise , and behavioral modification , orlistat statistically significantly improved weight management in obese adolescents compared with placebo . The use of orlistat for 1 year in this adolescent population did not raise major safety issues although gastrointestinal adverse events were more common in the orlistat group
Orlistat  reduced body weight ( weighted mean difference : −2.12 , p < 0.001 ) , total‐cholesterol ( weighted mean difference : −0.30 mmol/L , p < 0.001 ) , low‐density lipoprotein cholesterol ( weighted mean difference : −0.27 mmol/L , p < 0.001 ) , high‐density lipoprotein cholesterol ( weighted mean difference : −0.034 mmol/L , p < 0.001 ) and triglyceride ( weighted mean difference : −0.09 mmol/L , p < 0.001 ) concentrations , while no effect on lipoprotein(a ) was observed .
Total‐ and low‐density lipoprotein cholesterol‐lowering were associated negatively with duration of orlistat treatment and positively with body weight changes .
In conclusion , Orlistat treatment slightly reduces cholesterol and triglyceride levels , but not lipoprotein(a ) levels .
Total‐ and low‐density lipoprotein cholesterol levels reductions are more consistent in patients with greater body weight reduction and shorter duration of orlistat treatment .
We investigated the efficacy of orlistat on plasma lipids and body weight in a meta‐ analysis of 33 studies including 9732  participants .Orlistat  was associated with a slight but significant decrease in body weight , plasma cholesterol and triglyceride concentrations , whereas plasma Lp(a ) levels were not affected by orlistat treatment .
Greater body weight reduction and lower duration of orlistat treatment promoted more consistent plasma total‐ and LDL‐cholesterol lowering
& NA ; Orlistat , an inhibitor of intestinal lipase , promotes body weight reduction .
The lipid‐lowering efficacy of orlistat is controversial and the effect of orlistat‐induced body weight reduction on lipid changes has not been explored in meta‐regression analyses .
HighlightsOrlistat is an inhibitor of intestinal lipase promoting body weight reduction , but whose lipid‐lowering efficacy is controversial .