scholarly journals Efficacy and Safety of Resveratrol Supplements on Blood Lipid and Blood Glucose Control in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

2021 ◽  
Vol 2021 ◽  
pp. 1-15
Author(s):  
Tianqing Zhang ◽  
Qi He ◽  
Yao Liu ◽  
Zhenrong Chen ◽  
Hengjing Hu

Background. Diabetes is a major public health concern. Resveratrol has shown great beneficial effects on hyperglycemia and insulin resistance and as an antioxidant. Methods. We searched the Chinese and English databases (such as CNKI, PubMed, and Embase) and extracted data from randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Then, RevMan 5.3 was used for bias risk assessment and meta-analysis. The primary outcome indicators include insulin-resistance-related indicators and blood-lipid-related indicators. This systematic review and meta-analysis was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42018089521). Results. Fifteen RCTs involving 896 patients were included. For insulin-resistance-related indicators, the summary results showed that, compared with the control group, homeostasis model assessment for insulin resistance (HOMA-IR) in the resveratrol group is lower (WMD: −0.99; 95% CI −1.61, −0.38; P = 0.002 ). For blood-lipid-related indicators, the total cholesterol (TC) and triglyceride (TG) in the resveratrol group is of no statistical significance (for TC, WMD: −7.11; 95% CI −16.28, 2.06; P = 0.13 ; for TG, WMD: −2.15; 95% CI −5.52, 1.22; P = 0.21 ). For adverse events, the summary results showed that there was no statistical difference in the incidence of adverse events between the resveratrol and control groups (WMD: 2; 95% CI 0.44, 9.03; P = 0.37 ). Conclusion. Based on the current evidence, resveratrol may improve insulin resistance, lower fasting blood glucose and insulin levels, and improve oxidative stress in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

2021 ◽  
Vol 5 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. A469-A470
Author(s):  
Jia Leng Lim ◽  
Georgina Bergero ◽  
Yogesh Acharya ◽  
James Shaw ◽  
Aaron Liew

Abstract Metformin monotherapy is often insufficient to achieve or sustain glycemic targets in people with type 2 diabetes. Therefore, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the efficacy, safety and tolerability of sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitors versus placebo as add-on therapy after metformin in type 2 diabetes. The systematic review was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. A search was performed in the PubMed, www.clinicaltrials.gov and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases for relevant randomized controlled trials up until 30th October 2020 that compared sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitors versus placebo as add-on therapy to metformin. A random-effects model was used. Thirteen randomized controlled trials (4270 participants) met the inclusion criteria. Compared with placebo, sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitor treatment, as add-on therapy to metformin, was associated with a significant reduction in HbA1c level (mean difference [MD]: -0.6%, 95% CI: -0.7, -0.5; p<0.01), fasting plasma glucose level (MD: -1.4mmol/l; 95% CI; -1.5, -1.3; p<0.01), weight (MD: -2.0kg; 95% CI: -2.2, -1.8; p<0.01), systolic blood pressure (MD: -4.7mmHg; 95% Cl: -5.4, -3.9; p<0.01) and diastolic blood pressure (MD: -2.0mmHg; 95% Cl: -2.5, -1.5; p<0.01). Significantly more participants achieved HbA1c <7% (odds ratio [OR]: 3.1; 95% CI: 2.6, 3.6; p<0.01) in the sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitor group. Genital mycotic infections (OR: 2.6; 95% CI: 1.4, 4.6; p<0.01) were more common with sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitors, but there was no significant statistical difference in urinary tract infections (OR: 1.4; 95% CI: 1.0, 2.0; p=0.06), in hypoglycemia (OR: 1.5; 95% CI: 1.0, 2.4; p=0.07), or in discontinuation rates due to adverse events (OR: 0.9; 95% CI: 0.6, 1.5; p=0.68) between the two groups. In summary, in comparison with placebo, add-on therapy with a sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitor is significantly more efficacious in lowering HbA1c, fasting plasma glucose, weight and blood pressure in people with type 2 diabetes following inadequate glycemic control with metformin. The rate of discontinuation due to adverse events was similar despite higher risk of genital mycotic infections.


2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Desye Gebrie ◽  
Desalegn Getnet ◽  
Tsegahun Manyazewal

AbstractDiabetes is a serious threat to global health and among the top 10 causes of death, with nearly half a billion people living with it worldwide. Treating patients with diabetes tend to become more challenging due to the progressive nature of the disease. The role and benefits of combination therapies for the management of type 2 diabetes are well-documented, while the comparative safety and efficacy among the different combination options have not been elucidated. We aimed to systematically synthesize the evidence on the comparative cardiovascular safety and efficacy of combination therapy with metformin-sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors versus metformin-sulfonylureas in patients with type 2 diabetes. We searched MEDLINE-PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov up to 15 August 2019 without restriction in the year of publication. We included randomized controlled trials of patients with type 2 diabetes who were on metformin-sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors or metformin-sulphonylureas combination therapy at least for a year. The primary endpoints were all-cause mortality and serious adverse events, and the secondary endpoints were cardiovascular mortality, non-fatal myocardial infarction, non-fatal stroke, hypoglycemia, and changes in glycated hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), body weight, fasting plasma glucose, blood pressure, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol. We used a random-effects meta-analysis model to estimate mean differences for continuous outcomes and risk ratio for dichotomous outcomes. We followed PICOS description model for defining eligibility and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 guidelines for reporting results. Of 3,190 citations, we included nine trials involving 10,974 participants. The pooled analysis showed no significant difference in all-cause mortality (risk ration [RR] = 0.93, 95% CI [0.52, 1.67]), serious adverse events (RR = 0.96, 95% CI [0.79, 1.17]) and adverse events (RR = 1.00, 95% CI [0.99, 1.02]) between the two, but in hypoglycemia (RR = 0.13, 95% CI [0.10, 0.17], P < 0.001). Participants taking metformin-sodium glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors showed a significantly greater reduction in HbA1c (mean difference [MD] = − 0.10%, 95% CI [− 0.17, − 0.03], body weight (MD = − 4.57 kg, 95% CI [− 4.74, − 4.39], systolic blood pressure (MD = − 4.77 mmHg, 95% CI [− 5.39, − 4.16]), diastolic blood pressure (MD = − 2.07 mmHg, 95% CI [− 2.74, − 1.40], and fasting plasma glucose (MD = − 0.55 mmol/L, 95% CI [− 0.69, − 0.41]), p < 0.001. Combination therapy of metformin and sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors is a safe and efficacious alternative to combination therapy of metformin and sulphonylureas for patients with type 2 diabetes who are at risk of cardiovascular comorbidity. However, there remains a need for additional long-term randomized controlled trials as available studies are very limited and heterogeneous.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document