Background. Artemisinin and its derivatives have potential antidiabetic effects. There is no evaluation of reported studies in the literature on the treatment of diabetic nephropathy (DN), one of the commonest diabetic microangiopathies, with artemisinins. Here, we aimed to evaluate preclinical evidence for the efficacy and possible mechanisms of artemisinins in reducing diabetic renal injury. Methods. We conducted an electronic literature search in fourteen databases from their inception to November 2021. All animal studies assessing the efficacy and safety of artemisinins in DN were included, regardless of publication or language. Overall, 178 articles were screened according to predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria. Finally, 18 eligible articles were included in this systematic review. The SYstematic Review Center for Laboratory animal Experimentation (SYRCLE) risk-of-bias tool was used to assess the risk of bias in the included studies. The primary outcomes were kidney function, proteinuria, and renal pathology. Secondary endpoints included changes in fasting plasma glucose (FPG) levels, body weight, and relevant mechanisms. Results. Of the 18 included articles involving 418 animal models of DN, 1, 2, 6, and 9 used dihydroartemisinin, artemether, artesunate, and artemisinin, respectively. Overall, artemisinins reduced indicators of renal function, including blood urea nitrogen ( P < 0.00001 ), serum creatinine ( P < 0.00001 ), and kidney index ( P = 0.0001 ) compared with control group treatment. Measurements of proteinuria ( P < 0.00001 ), microalbuminuria ( P < 0.05 ), and protein excretion ( P = 0.0002 ) suggested that treatment with artemisinins reduced protein loss in animals with DN. Artemisinins may lower blood glucose levels ( P = 0.01 ), but there is a risk of weight gain ( P < 0.00001 ). Possible mechanisms of action of artemisinins include delaying renal fibrosis, reducing oxidative stress, and exerting antiapoptotic and anti-inflammatory effects. Conclusion. Available evidence suggests that artemisinins may be protective against renal injury secondary to diabetes in preclinical studies; however, high-quality and long-term trials are needed to reliably determine the balance of benefits and harms.
PurposeWith type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) occurring at a younger age, a greater number of women with T2DM experience reproductive health problems. The prevalence of polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS), a common reproductive disease associated with T2DM, remains unknown in women with T2DM. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to determine the prevalence of PCOS in women with T2DM.MethodsStata 15.1 was used to perform a meta-analysis on the prevalence of PCOS in patients with T2DM included in this study. Additionally, a narrative review of the effects of different diagnostic methods, obesity, state, and other factors on the prevalence of PCOS was conducted.ResultsMeta-analysis showed that the overall prevalence of PCOS in women with T2DM was approximately 21%. Subgroup analysis showed that the incidence of PCOS in female patients aged 25-45 years was higher than that in female patients aged < 25 years. The prevalence of PCOS in obese women was 14%, which was lower than that in normal weight women and normal weight or overweight or obese women. Women with T2DM in Oceania had the highest incidence of PCOS, followed by those in Europe and Asia; women with T2DM in North America had the lowest incidence. In terms of PCOS diagnostic standards, the prevalence of PCOS diagnosed by the National Institutes of Health was the lowest. The prevalence of PCOS diagnosed on the basis of clinical symptoms and biochemical characteristics was the highest, and the prevalence of PCOS diagnosed on the basis of medical records was 20%.ConclusionsPCOS is a common disease in female patients with T2DM. The prevalence of PCOS in women with T2DM at childbearing age was higher than that in adolescent females. Women with T2DM at childbearing age should pay attention to the screening and prevention of PCOS to avoid the hazards of PCOS to reproductive health.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO, identifier CRD42022318657.
Objective: This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to determine the traumatic macular hole (TMH) closure rate and visual acuity (VA) improvement rate by comparing two treatment methods for TMH: vitrectomy and observation for spontaneous closure.Methods: PubMed, Cochrane, Web of Science Library, Embase, CNKI, Wanfang, VIP, and Sino Med were systematically searched from their inception to June 10, 2021. Studies in the surgery group (n = 32) and studies in the observation group (n = 12) were meta-analyzed. The primary outcomes were the TMH closure and VA improvement rates in the surgery and observation groups. The secondary outcomes were best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) improvement in the surgery group. Stata software (version 15.1) was used for the analyses.Results: Thirty-six studies that included 1,009 eyes were selected for this meta-analysis, among which 33 were retrospective studies and 3 were prospective studies. The meta-analysis showed that the random-model pooled event rate for TMH closure was 0.37 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.26–0.48) in the observation group, while it was 0.9 (95% CI, 0.85–0.94) in the surgery group. The fixed-model pooled event rate for VA improvement was 0.39 (95% CI, 0.33–0.45) in the observation group, while the random-model pooled event rate of VA improvement for the surgery group was 0.72 (95% CI, 0.63–0.80). The pooled event rate for BCVA improvement in the surgery group was 0.39 (95% CI, 0.33–0.46).Conclusions: This meta-analysis suggests that TMH hole closure and VA improvement rates in the surgery group were significantly higher than those in the observation group. Vitrectomy is an effective method for treating TMH. However, further randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are required to evaluate the efficacy and safety of surgery and observation for TMH treatment.Systematic Review Registration:https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/#recordDetails, identifier: CRD42021276684.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.