Comparison of creatine monohydrate with other forms (ethyl ester, HCl, buffered, etc.): a systematic review
Jager R, et al.
High-confidence evidence from multiple solid studies
Summary
A review comparing creatine monohydrate with alternative forms (creatine ethyl ester, HCl, buffered creatine=Kre-Alkalyn, micronized, etc.) for efficacy, safety, and cost-effectiveness. Creatine monohydrate has the strongest evidence base; no alternative form has demonstrated superiority.
Key findings
- 1
Creatine monohydrate has the most extensive research base with the best-established efficacy and safety
- 2
No RCT has demonstrated creatine ethyl ester to be equal or superior to monohydrate
- 3
Creatine HCl may have better solubility and fewer GI side effects, but evidence of superior efficacy is insufficient
- 4
Considering cost-effectiveness, monohydrate remains the most rational choice
Related supplements
PR
CreatineView in official storeImproved high-intensity, repeated-effort performance
The links below include affiliate links (PR).
Related research
Creatine supplementation augments gains in strength and lean mass from resistance training (meta-analysis)
Open Access Journal of Sports Medicine, 2017
A pooled analysis of RCTs in older adults. Adding creatine to resistance training produced significantly greater gains in lean mass and upper/lower-body strength than placebo.
Creatine supplementation and cognitive function: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Experimental Gerontology, 2018
A systematic review and meta-analysis examining the effects of creatine supplementation on memory, executive function, and attention. Significant cognitive improvements were found under conditions of high cognitive load (sleep deprivation, psychological stress, aging), but effects in normally rested young adults were limited.
Last checked: