2023
DOI: 10.1097/md.0000000000035739
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Effect of long-acting versus short-acting glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists on improving body weight and related metabolic parameters in type 2 diabetes: A head-to-head meta-analysis

Xia Yuan,
Zhe Gao,
Zhihua Hao
et al.

Abstract: Background: Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) showed great value in treating nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD). We aimed to compare the effectiveness of long-acting and short-acting GLP-1RAs on improving body weight and related metabolic parameters in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2DM) as a reference for the treatment of NAFLD with T2DM. Methods: We searched eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in PubMed, Embase, Coch… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
0
0

Year Published

2024
2024
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
3

Relationship

0
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 29 publications
0
0
0
Order By: Relevance
“…There was no statistically significant difference in L/S, ALT, AST, GGT, TC, TG and HDL-C. In a meta-analysis, long-acting GLP-1RAs significantly reduced TC and LDL compared with short-acting GLP-1RAs, there was no significant difference in TG and HDL, but the forest plot indicated that long-acting drugs might be more valuable in reducing TG [18]. However, the meta-analysis did not compare the clinical indices between the ultra-long-acting group and the long-acting group.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 91%
“…There was no statistically significant difference in L/S, ALT, AST, GGT, TC, TG and HDL-C. In a meta-analysis, long-acting GLP-1RAs significantly reduced TC and LDL compared with short-acting GLP-1RAs, there was no significant difference in TG and HDL, but the forest plot indicated that long-acting drugs might be more valuable in reducing TG [18]. However, the meta-analysis did not compare the clinical indices between the ultra-long-acting group and the long-acting group.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 91%