0
selected
-
1.
SGLT-2 inhibitors or GLP-1 receptor agonists for adults with type 2 diabetes: a clinical practice guideline.
Li, S, Vandvik, PO, Lytvyn, L, Guyatt, GH, Palmer, SC, Rodriguez-Gutierrez, R, Foroutan, F, Agoritsas, T, Siemieniuk, RAC, Walsh, M, et al
BMJ (Clinical research ed.). 2021;:n1091
Abstract
CLINICAL QUESTION What are the benefits and harms of sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT-2) inhibitors and glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists when added to usual care (lifestyle interventions and/or other diabetes drugs) in adults with type 2 diabetes at different risk for cardiovascular and kidney outcomes? CURRENT PRACTICE Clinical decisions about treatment of type 2 diabetes have been led by glycaemic control for decades. SGLT-2 inhibitors and GLP-1 receptor agonists are traditionally used in people with elevated glucose level after metformin treatment. This has changed through trials demonstrating atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (CVD) and chronic kidney disease (CKD) benefits independent of medications' glucose-lowering potential. RECOMMENDATIONS The guideline panel issued risk-stratified recommendations concerning the use of SGLT-2 inhibitors or GLP-1 receptor agonists in adults with type 2 diabetes• Three or fewer cardiovascular risk factors without established CVD or CKD: Weak recommendation against starting SGLT-2 inhibitors or GLP-1 receptor agonists.• More than three cardiovascular risk factors without established CVD or CKD: Weak recommendation for starting SGLT-2 inhibitors and weak against starting GLP-1 receptor agonists.• Established CVD or CKD: Weak recommendation for starting SGLT-2 inhibitors and GLP-1 receptor agonists.• Established CVD and CKD: Strong recommendation for starting SGLT-2 inhibitors and weak recommendation for starting GLP-1 receptor agonists.• For those committed to further reducing their risk for CVD and CKD outcomes: Weak recommendation for starting SGLT-2 inhibitors rather than GLP-1 receptor agonists. HOW THIS GUIDELINE WAS CREATED An international panel including patients, clinicians, and methodologists created these recommendations following standards for trustworthy guidelines and using the GRADE approach. The panel applied an individual patient perspective. THE EVIDENCE A linked systematic review and network meta-analysis (764 randomised trials included 421 346 participants) of benefits and harms found that SGLT-2 inhibitors and GLP-1 receptor agonists generally reduce overall death, and incidence of myocardial infarctions, and end-stage kidney disease or kidney failure (moderate to high certainty evidence). These medications exert different effects on stroke, hospitalisations for heart failure, and key adverse events in different subgroups. Absolute effects of benefit varied widely based on patients' individual risk (for example, from five fewer deaths in the lowest risk to 48 fewer deaths in the highest risk, for 1000 patients treated over five years). A prognosis review identified 14 eligible risk prediction models, one of which (RECODe) informed most baseline risk estimates in evidence summaries to underpin the risk-stratified recommendations. Concerning patients' values and preferences, the recommendations were supported by evidence from a systematic review of published literature, a patient focus group study, a practical issues summary, and a guideline panel survey. UNDERSTANDING THE RECOMMENDATION We stratified the recommendations by the levels of risk for CVD and CKD and systematically considered the balance of benefits, harms, other considerations, and practical issues for each risk group. The strong recommendation for SGLT-2 inhibitors in patients with CVD and CKD reflects what the panel considered to be a clear benefit. For all other adults with type 2 diabetes, the weak recommendations reflect what the panel considered to be a finer balance between benefits, harms, and burdens of treatment options. Clinicians using the guideline can identify their patient's individual risk for cardiovascular and kidney outcomes using credible risk calculators such as RECODe. Interactive evidence summaries and decision aids may support well informed treatment choices, including shared decision making.
-
2.
[Consensus statement of the Chilean endocrinological society on the role of bariatric surgery in type 2 diabetes].
Sapunar, J, Escalona, A, Araya, AV, Aylwin, CG, Bastías, MJ, Boza, C, Cárcamo, C, Csendes A, A, Davidof F, P, Funke, R, et al
Revista medica de Chile. 2018;(10):1175-1183
Abstract
Diabetes Mellitus (DM) and obesity are a public health problem in Chile. Bariatric surgery is the most effective treatment alternative to achieve a significant and sustained weight reduction in patients with morbid obesity. The results of controlled clinical trials indicate that, compared to medical treatment, surgery for obese patients with DM2 allows a better control of blood glucose and cardiovascular risk factors, reduces the need for medications and increases the likelihood for remission. Consensus conferences and clinical practice guidelines support bariatric surgery as an option to treat DM2 in Class III Obesity (Body Mass Index (BMI) > 40) regardless of the glycemic control and the complexity of pharmacological treatment and in Class II Obesity (BMI 35-39,9) with inadequate glycemic control despite optimal pharmacological treatment and lifestyle. However, surgical indication for patients with DM2 and BMI between 30-34.9, the most prevalent sub-group, is only suggested. The Chilean Societies of Endocrinology and Diabetes and of Bariatric and Metabolic Surgery decided to generate a consensus regarding the importance of other factors related to DM2 that would allow a better selection of candidates for surgery, particularly when weight does not constitute an indication. Considering the national reality, we also need a statement regarding the selection and characteristics of the surgical procedure as well as the role of the diabetologist in the multidisciplinary team.
-
3.
Consensus on Insulin Dose Modification During Fasting in Type 2 Diabetes.
Unnikrishnan, AG, Lodha, S, Sharma, SK
The Journal of the Association of Physicians of India. 2017;(3 Suppl):7-15
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Fasting for patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) carries a risk of an assortment of complications. The decision of T2DM patient to fast should be made after sufficient discussion with physician regarding the risks involved. The current consensus is developed to help physicians manage T2DM patients during fasting. OBJECTIVE To provide simple and easily implementable guidelines on insulin dose modification during fasting in T2DM patients. METHODS The expert group committee discussed and proposed six recommendations for the use of insulin regimens during fasting. The recommendations were proposed on diet, exercise and categorization of risks during fast, breaking fast, dose modification of basal insulins, premix insulins and prandial insulins. All these recommendations were based on established guidelines and published scientific literature. These evidences were then factored into the national context based on the expert committee representative's patient-physician experience in their clinical practice and common therapeutic practices followed in India to successfully achieve optimal glucose control. The final consensus-based recommendations were proposed and collectively recorded for each insulin regimen. RESULTS Recommendations based on insulin dose modification during fasting in T2DM patients has been developed. Patients with diabetes, who fast are recommended to keep themselves hydrated, consume low glycaemic and high fibre food but, avoid sugary and caffeinated drinks along with fried foods. The main goal of insulin therapy during fasting is to provide adequate insulin to prevent post meal hyperglycaemia and prevent hypoglycaemia during fast. CONCLUSIONS We hope that the consensus based recommendations mentioned in this paper will be a useful reference tool for health care practitioners to initiate and intensify insulin therapy in T2DM patients in order to successfully complete fasting without much complication.
-
4.
Lipoprotein management in patients with cardiometabolic risk: consensus statement from the American Diabetes Association and the American College of Cardiology Foundation.
Brunzell, JD, Davidson, M, Furberg, CD, Goldberg, RB, Howard, BV, Stein, JH, Witztum, JL, , , ,
Diabetes care. 2008;(4):811-22
-
5.
Nicotinic acid in the management of dyslipidaemia associated with diabetes and metabolic syndrome: a position paper developed by a European Consensus Panel.
Shepherd, J, Betteridge, J, Van Gaal, L, ,
Current medical research and opinion. 2005;(5):665-82
Abstract
Individuals with type 2 diabetes and metabolic syndrome are at markedly increased risk of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. The increasing prevalence of both conditions poses a major challenge for clinicians in the 21st century. Both diabetes and metabolic syndrome are associated with a clustering of cardiovascular risk factors. In particular, dyslipidaemia characterised by low plasma levels of high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), elevated triglycerides and an increase in small, dense low-density lipoprotein (LDL) particles (the lipid triad), has been established as the most important modifiable risk factor for coronary heart disease (CHD). Current treatment guidelines recognise the increased CHD risk associated with diabetes and metabolic syndrome and focus on LDL-C lowering with statin treatment, in addition to dietary and lifestyle modification, as the primary lipid-modifying therapy. However, while there is no doubt that statin therapy significantly reduces CHD risk in these patients, their residual absolute risk remains higher than in individuals without diabetes or metabolic syndrome. Thus, there is a clear need to target other aspects of lipoprotein metabolism, notably low HDL-C and hypertriglyceridaemia, to further reduce CHD risk. Combining statin therapy (targeting LDL-C) with interventions that also modify low HDL-C and elevated triglycerides could be a useful strategy to optimise CHD risk reduction. Cautious combination of a fibrate or nicotinic acid with a statin is useful for the management of combined dyslipidaemia. Nicotinic acid is the more potent agent for raising HDL-C (by up to 29% at clinically recommended doses). It also substantially reduces triglycerides and LDL-C, and promotes a shift from small, dense LDL to larger, more buoyant LDL particles. Preliminary clinical data suggest that combining nicotinic acid with a statin will produce a greater reduction in cardiovascular risk in patients with diabetes and metabolic syndrome than statin monotherapy alone. Nicotinic acid is also safe for use in patients with diabetes, with no evidence of clinically relevant deterioration in glycaemic control at recommended doses (< or = 2 g/day). On review of the available evidence, this European Consensus Panel recommends the combination of nicotinic acid and a statin, together with lifestyle modification, as a useful strategy to lower CHD risk in patients with diabetes and metabolic syndrome. Prolonged-release nicotinic acid with improved tolerability compared with previous formulations may have obvious advantages for use in this setting.