Weekly Semaglutide vs. Liraglutide Efficacy Profile: A Network Meta-Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist (GLP-1 RA) is a class of hypoglycemic medications. Semaglutide once-weekly (QW) and liraglutide once-daily (OD) significantly improved glycemic control compared to placebo. To date, no long-term phase III trials directly comparing semaglutide and liraglutide are available. This network meta-analysis (NMA) aims to compare the long-term efficacy of semaglutide and liraglutide. METHODS: PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library were searched from inception until June 2019 to identify relevant articles. Nine long-term randomized controlled trials comparing once-weekly semaglutide or liraglutide with placebo or other active comparisons were identified. The outcomes of interest were changes in HbA1c and weight after 52 weeks. A Bayesian framework and NMA were used for data synthesis. This is a sub-study of the protocol registered in PROSPERO (number CRD42018091598). RESULTS: The data showed significant superiority in HbA1c reduction of semaglutide 1 mg QW over liraglutide 1.2 and 1.8 mg with a treatment difference of 0.47% and 0.3%, respectively. Semaglutide 0.5 mg QW was found to be significantly superior to liraglutide 1.2 mg in HbA1c reduction with a treatment difference of 0.17%. Regarding weight reduction analysis, semaglutide 0.5 and 1 mg QW were significantly associated with a greater reduction than liraglutide 0.6 mg with a treatment difference of 2.42 and 3.06 kg, respectively. However, no significant reduction was found in comparison to liraglutide 1.2 and 1.8 mg. CONCLUSIONS: Semaglutide improved the control of blood glucose and body weight. The capacity of long-term glycemic control and body weight control of semaglutide appears to be more effective than other GLP-1 RAs, including liraglutide. However, considering the number of included studies and potential limitations, more large-scale, head-to-head, well-designed randomized-controlled trials (RCTs) are needed to confirm these findings.

Outcome of diaphyseal pediatric forearm fractures following non-surgical treatment in a Level I Trauma Center.

OBJECTIVES: Pediatric diaphyseal forearm fractures are common injuries of childhood. Conservative modality of treatments is usually preferred when they are possible. We identified factors that may affect closed reduction success or lead to redisplacement in forearm diaphyseal fractures in children. METHODS: This was a retrospective study from a level I trauma center on patients up to 18 years of age who presented with forearm diaphyseal fractures from January 1, 2007, to December 31, 2015. Cases were obtained from medical records. Data were collected and confirmed by plain films and medical files. RESULTS: We included 145 patients in this study. The majority (86.2%) were boys. Around 29% of trials of closed reduction failed, and the patients were subsequently treated surgically. Following trials of closed reduction, 82.4% of both bone cases were successfully reduced compared to 42.9% of radius shaft cases (P = 0.006). Redisplacement following non-surgical treatment in the first follow-up was found in 32% of both bone cases and 13.3% of radial shaft cases. All Galeazzi cases that were successfully treated with closed reduction presented with no redisplacement on follow-up. CONCLUSION: Immediate surgical management might be considered in older children, especially above 12 years of age since they have a higher failure rate of closed reduction than younger ones. Fracture site should be taken into account when following pediatric diaphyseal forearm fractures following conservative treatments as cases with both bone involvement have a high success rate of closed reduction and considerably high rate of redisplacement compared to others.

Patterns of paediatric forearm fractures at a level I trauma centre in KSA.

OBJECTIVES: The current literature does not clearly elaborate the pattern of paediatric forearm fractures. This study aims to identify patterns of paediatric forearm fractures in KSA. METHODS: This retrospective study was conducted in a level I trauma centre. The study population comprised patients up to 18 years of age who presented with forearm fractures between 2007 and 2015. The demographic data of the recruited patients were obtained from medical files, and fractures were identified using plain films. Mean and standard deviations were used for continuous variables, whereas frequencies and percentages were used for categorical variables. RESULTS: This study included 318 patients, ranging in age from 1.2 to 18 years (average: 10.42 ± 4.56 years). The majority were boys (80.8%) and 53.1% were <12 years of age. Girls were significantly more prevalent in the <12-year-old group than in the ≥12-year-old group (p < 0.001). A fall was the mechanism of injury in the majority of patients (82.1%) in the <12-year-old group compared with the ≥12-year-old group (p < 0.001). There was no statistically significant difference in fracture site between the two age groups. The distal forearm was the most common site fractured (47.8%), followed by the distal third of the forearm diaphysis (34.2%). CONCLUSION: Forearm fractures are commonly seen in school-age boys. The distal radius is the most commonly fractured site reported in this study. A fall was the most common mechanism of injury, and safety measures should be implemented in places where children frequently gather.