Journal of diabetes and its complications · 2017
Bile acid sequestrants for glycemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes: A systematic review with meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
СтатьяМетаанализСистематический обзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Hansen Morten, Sonne David P, Mikkelsen Kristian H, Gluud Lise Lotte, Vilsbøll Tina, Knop Filip K
Аннотация
AIM: To evaluate the effects of bile acid sequestrants (BASs) versus placebo, no intervention or active comparators on glycemic control in type 2 diabetes.
METHODS: Data were retrieved and a systematic review with meta-analyses was performed. We evaluated bias control and subgroup and sensitivity analyses were performed to evaluate heterogeneity and bias.
RESULTS: We included 17 trials with a total of 2950 patients randomized to BASs (colesevelam or colestimide) versus placebo, no intervention, statins or sitagliptin. Random-effects meta-analysis showed that patients randomized to BASs had a lower hemoglobin A1c at the end of treatment compared with the control group (mean difference-0.55%; 95% confidence interval-0.64 to -0.46). Analysis of trials with low risk of bias in all domains confirmed the findings. Data on adverse events were limited. There were no differences between trials stratified by the control group and no evidence of publication bias or small study effects.
CONCLUSIONS: Our analyses found that BAS treatment improves glycemic control. The size of the effect was clinically relevant and despite limited safety data, our findings support the inclusion of BASs in current diabetes management algorithms for type 2 diabetes.
METHODS: Data were retrieved and a systematic review with meta-analyses was performed. We evaluated bias control and subgroup and sensitivity analyses were performed to evaluate heterogeneity and bias.
RESULTS: We included 17 trials with a total of 2950 patients randomized to BASs (colesevelam or colestimide) versus placebo, no intervention, statins or sitagliptin. Random-effects meta-analysis showed that patients randomized to BASs had a lower hemoglobin A1c at the end of treatment compared with the control group (mean difference-0.55%; 95% confidence interval-0.64 to -0.46). Analysis of trials with low risk of bias in all domains confirmed the findings. Data on adverse events were limited. There were no differences between trials stratified by the control group and no evidence of publication bias or small study effects.
CONCLUSIONS: Our analyses found that BAS treatment improves glycemic control. The size of the effect was clinically relevant and despite limited safety data, our findings support the inclusion of BASs in current diabetes management algorithms for type 2 diabetes.