Every eleventh adult has diabetes, and every third has prediabetes. Over 95% of diabetics are of type 2. It is well established that diabetes doubles the risk of heart disease and stroke apart from increasing the risk of microvascular complications. Hence, strict glycemic control is necessary. However, it increases the risk of hypoglycemia, especially in patients with longstanding diabetes. Continuous glucose monitors (CGM) use a sensor to continuously measure the glucose levels in the interstitial fluid every 10 seconds and gives out mean values every five minutes. CGMs are emerging tools in the management of type 2 diabetes. The prime objective of this review is to find out if there is enough supporting evidence, suggesting that continuous glucose monitoring is more effective than self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) in type 2 diabetes. We conducted a systematic literature search in Medline (PubMed) looking for any studies addressing our objective. It is observed that there is a varying level of evidence supporting that employing a CGM can reduce glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c), hypoglycemic events, and increase patient satisfaction. However, some studies reported no significant benefits. This systematic review with meta-analysis concludes that the use of CGM in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is beneficial, as it significantly reduces HbA1c compared to the usual method of SMBG. The pooled mean difference in HbA1c was -0.25 (-0.45, -0.06) and statistically significant (at p = 0.01) when comparing CGM to SMBG.

Cancer of unknown primary (CUP) is a malignant widespread metastatic disease without an identifiable primary site after extensive clinical investigation. Recently, a decline is observed in the diagnosis of CUP, mainly due to improvement in detection of the primary tumors, thus decreasing the unknown primaries. Worldwide, CUP is the sixth to eighth most common malignancy, accounting for 2.3% to 5% of a new cancer diagnosis. CUP is third to fourth most common cause of death due to cancer-related mortality. The prognosis of CUP is depressing with the median survival of three to six months in the previous studies, but according to recent studies, median survival is less than one year. High risk for developing CUP is seen in heavy smokers (26 or more cigarettes/day) and individuals with the lowest quartiles of waist circumference. A weak association is observed with the use of alcohol consumption and low level of education. Human papillomavirus DNA plays a role in those with squamous cell carcinoma of unknown primaries in head and neck regions. In the diagnosis of CUP, comprehensive medical history, complete physical examination (including genitourinary, rectal exam, and breast examination in women) and necessary laboratory tests are crucial.Whole-body positron emission tomography-computed tomography (PET/CT) is the investigation of choice to assess the entire body for CUP. Multiparametric 3T-MRI (MP-MRI) is used to examine the local soft tissue status, helps in the staging of the tumor, and to determine the extent of involvement of tissue for medical as well as prognostic purposes. Immunohistochemistry outlines the specific markers, including caudal-related homeobox protein (CDX2), homeobox protein Nkx-3.1 (NKX3-1), paired box gene 8 (PAX8), special AT-rich sequence-binding protein 2 (SATB2), thyroid transcription factor 1 (TTF-1), and splicing factor 1 (SF1) with the focus on the effectiveness of lineage-restricted transcription factors. Patients response to treatment can be evaluated by the gene expression profiling (GEP) test that also predicts tissue of origin (TOO). Tumor identified through gene profiling is sensitive to platinum/taxane therapy, others that are not TOO tumors are resistant to platinum/taxane. The new therapeutic method based on molecular profiling is associated with higher treatment response. In comprehensive genomic profiling, it is observed that there is at least one clinically appropriate genomic alteration in CUP that can influence the targeted therapy. The targeted therapeutic approach will not only improve the disease outcome but will also be cost-effective and save time from finding the primary site.

Critically ill patients often develop multiorgan dysfunction syndrome. Acute kidney injury (AKI) is part of it. Renal replacement therapy (RRT) remains the primary choice of treatment in severely ill patients who develop AKI. Recent data have shown increased use of RRT in AKI patients. Therefore, the right choice of RRT plays an important role in the renal recovery of such patients. The question of which mode of RRT to apply has been the topic of study in the last two decades. Whether RRT should be conducted in intermittent mode, as intermittent hemodialysis (IHD), or in continuous mode, as continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT), is still being investigated. CRRT has a hypothetical advantage when compared to IHD, as it involves a process in which there is gradual removal of fluids, better control of urea, better maintenance of the acid/base balance, and hemodynamic stability. However, IHD is more practical, cost-effective, does not require anticoagulation, decreases the bleeding risk, and removes the solute efficiently and rapidly in acute life-threatening conditions.Other modalities of RRT like sustained low-efficiency daily dialysis (SLEDD) and prolonged intermittent renal replacement therapy (PIRRT) have shown to encompass the benefits of both CRRT in terms of hemodynamic stability and IHD in terms of cost-efficiency. Although SLEDD is progressively being used as an alternative to CRRT and IHD, very few studies have shown to support it. In this article, we try to summarize the advantages and disadvantages of the different techniques used in RRT. With SLEDD gaining more popularity among the different modalities of RRT, we want to assess the possibility of its routine implementation as the single-best choice for RRT.

Purpose The objective of the systematic review and meta-analysis is to evaluate the efficacy of radiofrequency neurotomy as a therapeutic lumbar facet joint intervention. Patients and Methods Utilizing the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) checklist, a systematic review and meta-analysis was performed. A comprehensive literature search of multiple data sources from 1966 to September 2020 including manual searches of bibliography of known review articles was performed. The inclusion criteria were based on the selection of patients with chronic low back pain with diagnosis confirmed based on controlled diagnostic blocks and with the publication of at least 6 months of results of appropriate outcome parameters. Quality assessment of the trials was performed with Cochrane review criteria and interventional pain management techniques-quality appraisal of reliability and risk of bias assessment (IPM-QRB). The level of evidence of effectiveness is classified at five levels ranging from Level I to Level V. The primary outcome measure was a significant reduction in pain, eg, short term (up to 6 months) and long term (more than 6 months). The secondary outcome measure was an improvement in functional status. Results A total of 12 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) met the inclusion criteria for evaluating the efficacy of lumbar radiofrequency neurotomy. Radiofrequency neurotomy showed Level II evidence for efficacy for both the short term and long term. Conclusion This systematic review of the assessment of the efficacy of radiofrequency neurotomy in managing chronic low back pain was based on the inclusion of 12 RCTs with a diagnostic block and at least 6 months of follow-up results that showed Level II evidence for both short-term and long-term improvement.

ObjectiveThe effects of stem cell therapy in patients with advanced heart failure is an ongoing debate. This study aimed to assess the effectiveness and safety of stem cell therapy plus the standard of care as compared to the placebo plus the standard of care in advanced heart failure patients.MethodsA comprehensive keyword search of PubMed between 2017 and 2019 was performed to extract trials conducted with stem cell therapy controlled with placebo in advanced heart failure. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with data on safety and efficacy in patients with advanced heart failure after stem cell transplantation.ResultsSix RCTs, consisting of 569 patients, were selected. Three-hundred sixty-seven (367) out of 369 participants from the eligible four out of six RCTs were included for efficacy analysis, as we lost two patients from the final analysis due to early death. Five-hundred twenty-six (526) out of 527 participants from the eligible five out of six RCTs were included for safety analysis, as we lost one patient from the final analysis for not being able to receive the intervention. Stem cell transplantation significantly improved left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) by 4.58% (95% CI: 3.73-5.43%; p = 0.00001), improved left ventricular end-systolic volume (LVESV) by -5.18 ml (95% CI: -9.74 to -0.63 ml; p =0.03), and there was no difference in the risk of all-cause mortality (OR 0.97; 95% CI: 0.52 to 1.78%; p = 0.91). The above results correlate with the previous meta-analysis data conducted in 2016.ConclusionsThis meta-analysis provided the cumulative efficacy and safety results of stem cell transplantation in advanced heart failure based on recent RCTs. The above results suggest that stem cell therapy was associated with a moderate improvement in LVEF, and the safety analysis indicates no increased risk of mortality in patients with advanced heart failure. This meta-analysis recommends conducting more RCTs comparing stem cell transplantation and placebo with a larger patient population and longer follow-up.