ABSTRACT
Background: The antidiabetic potential of fenugreek has been highlighted in past literature, and various in-vitro and in-vivo studies have validated its glucose-lowering effects; however, very limited data are available on its effects on diabetic patients. Objective: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized control trials that assessed patients who were administered fenugreek. Methods: The PRISMA guidelines (Supplemental Digital Content 1, http://links.lww.com/MS9/A361) were followed when conducting this meta-analysis. PubMed, Scopus, Google Scholar and MEDLINE were searched from inception until June 2023, for randomized control trials that compared fenugreek with control in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM) and reported the following outcomes of interest: fasting blood glucose, glycated haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) and postprandial glucose levels. The findings were presented as mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) and were pooled using a random effects model. Results: Fenugreek significantly (P<0.001) reduced the fasting blood sugar (FBS), HbA1c levels and postprandial glucose levels in diabetic patients when compared to the control. Conclusion: Among patients with type 2 DM, our comparisons demonstrated a reduction in FBS, HbA1c levels and postprandial glucose levels with the administration of fenugreek seed at 2-5 mg dose in powder form.
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: The relative efficacy and safety of insulin neutral protamine Hagedorn (NPH) and detemir (IDet), in the management of diabetes in pregnancy remains unclear. We sought to conduct an updated systematic review and meta-analysis to study the effect of NPH versus IDet during pregnancy on clinically relevant maternal and fetal outcomes. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: MEDLINE and Google Scholar were queried from inception till September 2022 for original studies comparing NPH with IDet for management of diabetes during pregnancy. Data was pooled using a random-effects model, to generate risk ratios (RR) for dichotomous outcomes and weighted mean differences (WMDs) for continuous outcomes, along with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). I2 test was used to assess the magnitude of heterogeneity. Sensitivity analysis was conducted to explore the potential source of heterogeneity. As less than ten studies were included in our analysis, funnel plots were not made to evaluate publication bias. A P value of ≤0.05 was considered significant in all cases. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Our search of the literature yielded 1087 articles initially, of which seven articles comprising 1396 patients, were included in our analysis. All included articles were of reasonably high methodological quality. Our pooled analysis demonstrates no statistically significant difference between the efficacy of insulin Detemir and insulin NPH as assessed by the HbA1c values from baseline. For safety outcomes, insulin detemir was significantly associated with a greater gestational age at delivery (WMD=0.39, 95%CI: 0.07 to 0.71, P=0.02) and lower incidence of hypoglycemic events (RR=0.64, 95%CI: 0.48 to 0.86, P=0.003) in-contrast to insulin NPH. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings demonstrate that both, insulin IDet and insulin NPH have a similar efficacy in reducing HbA1c from baseline. However, insulin detemir was associated with lesser incidence of maternal hypoglycemic events and greater gestational age at delivery, compared to NPH.
ABSTRACT
Atopic dermatitis remains a widespread problem affecting various populations globally. While numerous treatment options have been employed, pimecrolimus remains a potent and viable option. Recently, there has been increasing interest in comparing the safety and efficacy of pimecrolimus with its vehicle. Methods: The authors conducted a comprehensive search of several databases, including PubMed, COCHRANE, MEDLINE, and Cochrane Central, from inception to May 2022, using a wide search strategy with Boolean operators. The authors also employed backward snowballing to identify any studies missed in the initial search. The authors included randomized controlled trials in our meta-analysis and extracted data from the identified studies. The authors used Review Manager (RevMan) Version 5.4 to analyze the data, selecting a random-effects model due to observed differences in study populations and settings. The authors considered a P-value of 0.05 or lower to be statistically significant. Results: The authors initially identified 211 studies, of which 13 randomized controlled trials involving 4180 participants were selected for analysis. Our pooled analysis revealed that pimecrolimus 1% was more effective at reducing the severity of atopic dermatitis than its vehicles. However, no significant difference was observed in adverse effects between pimecrolimus and vehicle, except for pyrexia, nasopharyngitis, and headache, which were increased with pimecrolimus. Conclusion: Our meta-analysis showed that pimecrolimus 1% is more effective than vehicle, although the safety profile remains inconclusive. Pimecrolimus reduced the Investigator's Global Assessment score, Eczema Area and Severity Index score, and severity of pruritus when compared to its vehicle, indicating a higher efficacy profile. This is one of the first meta-analyses to assess the efficacy and safety profile of pimecrolimus 1% against a vehicle and may assist physicians in making informed decisions.
