The interplay of glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide in adipose tissue.

Adipose tissue was once known as a reservoir for energy storage but is now considered a crucial organ for hormone and energy flux with important effects on health and disease. Glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide (GIP) is an incretin hormone secreted from the small intestinal K cells, responsible for augmenting insulin release, and has gained attention for its independent and amicable effects with glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP-1), another incretin hormone secreted from the small intestinal L cells. The GIP receptor (GIPR) is found in whole adipose tissue, whereas the GLP-1 receptor (GLP-1R) is not, and some studies suggest that GIPR action lowers body weight and plays a role in lipolysis, glucose/lipid uptake/disposal, adipose tissue blood flow, lipid oxidation, and free-fatty acid (FFA) re-esterification, which may or may not be influenced by other hormones such as insulin. This review summarizes the research on the effects of GIP in adipose tissue (distinct depots of white and brown) using cellular, rodent, and human models. In doing so, we explore the mechanisms of GIPR-based medications for treating metabolic disorders, such as type 2 diabetes and obesity, and how GIPR agonism and antagonism contribute to improvements in metabolic health outcomes, potentially through actions in adipose tissues.

Comparative Analysis of Endovascular Intervention and Endarterectomy in Patients with Femoral Artery Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Peripheral artery disease is a prevalent illness affecting more than 200 million people worldwide. A commonly used technique to manage the condition has been open endarterectomy. However, in recent times, a shift towards minimally invasive techniques has resulted in endovascular intervention as a popular alternative. This review aims to assess the safety and efficacy of endovascular intervention when compared with endarterectomy. A systematic review of the articles published in PubMed, Ovid, Embase, and Scopus within the last 10 years was conducted. The PRISMA guidelines were adhered to, and the Newcastle-Ottawa and NICE quality assessment scales were used. A meta-analysis of proportions was performed using the RStudio software (RStudio Team (2021). RStudio: Integrated Development Environment for R, PBC, Boston, MA, USA). Twenty-six studies were included, with a total of 7126 patients (endovascular, 2496; endarterectomy, 4630). Technical success was greater for endarterectomy than endovascular intervention with an odds ratio of 0.38; 95% CI [0.27-0.54]. In terms of safety as well endovascular intervention was better than endarterectomy with an odds ratio of 0.22; 95% CI [0.15 to 0.31] for wound infection. Endovascular intervention is a safe and effective procedure; however, it cannot be considered superior to endarterectomy.