1.
Effects of sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors in addition to insulin therapy on cardiovascular risk factors in type 2 diabetes patients: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Wu, B, Zheng, H, Gu, J, Guo, Y, Liu, Y, Wang, Y, Chen, F, Yang, A, Wang, J, Wang, H, et al
Journal of diabetes investigation. 2019;(2):446-457
Abstract
AIMS/INTRODUCTION In the present meta-analysis, we aimed to determine the effects of sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor (SGLT-2i) in addition to insulin therapy on cardiovascular risk factors in type 2 diabetes patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS Randomized controlled trials were identified by searching the PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library databases published before September 2017. The intervention group received SGLT-2i as add-on treatment to insulin therapy, and the control group received placebos in addition to insulin. We assessed pooled data, including weighted mean differences and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) using a random-effects model. RESULTS A total of 10 randomized controlled trials (n = 5,159) were eligible. The weighted mean differences for systolic blood pressure and diastolic blood pressure were -3.17 mmHg (95% CI -4.53, -1.80, I2 = 0%) and -1.60 mmHg (95% CI -2.52, -0.69, I2 = 0%) in the intervention groups. Glycosylated hemoglobin, fasting plasma glucose, postprandial glucose and daily insulin were also lower in the intervention groups, with relative weighted mean differences of -0.49% (95% CI -0.71, -0.28%, I2 = 92%), -1.10 mmol/L (95% CI -1.69, -0.51 mmol/L, I2 = 84%), -3.63 mmol/L (95% CI -4.36, -2.89, I2 = 0%) and -5.42 IU/day (95% CI -8.12, -2.72, I2 = 93%). The transformations of uric acid and bodyweight were -26.16 μmol/L (95% CI -42.14, -10.17, I2 = 80%) and -2.13 kg (95% CI -2.66, -1.60, I2 = 83%). The relative risk of hypoglycemia was 1.09 (95% CI 1.02, 1.17, P < 0.01). The relative risks of urinary tract and genital infection were 1.29 (95% CI 1.03, 1.62, P = 0.03) and 5.25 (95% CI 3.55, 7.74, P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS The results showed that in the intervention group, greater reductions were achieved for blood pressure, glucose control, uric acid and bodyweight. This treatment regimen might therefore provide beneficial effects on the occurrence and development of cardiovascular events.
2.
Chinese herbal medicine for diabetic peripheral neuropathy: an updated meta-analysis of 10 high-quality randomized controlled studies.
Hao, CZ, Wu, F, Lu, L, Wang, J, Guo, Y, Liu, AJ, Liao, WJ, Zheng, GQ
PloS one. 2013;(10):e76113
Abstract
BACKGROUND Diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN) is very common in people with diabetes. Chinese herbal medicine (CHM) therapy has been developed for DPN empirically over the years. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to assess the efficacy and safety of CHMs for patients suffering from DPN. METHODS We performed a meta-analysis of randomized-controlled clinical trials (RCTs) evaluating the efficacy and safety of CHM on DPN. Six databases were searched up to November 2012. The primary outcome measures were the absolute values or changing of motor or sensory nerve conduction velocity (NCV), and the secondary outcome measurements were clinical symptoms improvements and adverse events. The methodological quality was assessed by Jadad scale and the twelve criteria recommended by the Cochrane Back Review Group. RESULTS One hundred and sixty-three studies claimed RCTs. Ten studies with 653 individuals were further identified based on the Jadad score ≥ 3. These 10 studies were all of high methodological quality with a low risk of bias. Meta-analysis showed the effects of NCV favoring CHMs when compared with western conventional medicines (WCM) (P<0.05 or P<0.01). There is a significant difference in the total efficacy rate between the two groups (P<0.001). Adverse effects were reported in all of the ten included studies, and well tolerated in all patients with DPN. CONCLUSION Despite of the apparently positive findings and low risk of bias, it is premature to conclude the efficacy of CHMs for the treatment of DPN because of the high clinical heterogeneity and small sample sizes of the included studies. However, CHM therapy was safe for DPN. Further standardized preparation, large sample-size and rigorously designed RCTs are required.