Scientific evidence of sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors for heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: an umbrella review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses

Sodium-Glucose Transporter 2 Inhibitors in Heart Failure: An Overview of Systematic Reviews

Background: Several studies have shown that sodium-dependent glucose transporter 2 inhibitors can be used in the treatment of heart failure. This article summarized systematic reviews of sodium-dependent glucose transporter 2 inhibitors in the treatment of heart failure in order to evaluate efficacy and safety. Methods: We systematically searched eight electronic databases from inception to July 2023. We used Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews 2 to evaluate the methodological quality, the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses 2020 to assess report quality, Risk of Bias in Systematic Review to assess the risk of bias, and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation to rate the quality of evidence. Outcome: A total of 36 systematic reviews were included. Our results were classified as clear evidence of benefit: hospitalization for heart failure; possible benefit: cardiovascular death (mortality) and renal outcome composite; clear evidence of no effect or equivalence: atrial arrhythmias, ventricular arrhythmia, atrial fibrillation, and hypotension; possible harm: genital infection; insufficient evidence to draw a conclusion: atrial flutter, major adverse cardiovascular events, urinary tract infection, acute kidney injury, hypoglycemia, and bone fracture. Conclusions: Sodium-dependent glucose transporter 2 inhibitors are beneficial for the treatment of heart failure, especially in terms of heart failure hospitalization.

Stem Cell Therapy for Diabetic Foot: An Umbrella Review of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses

Objective: This umbrella review aims to summarize and evaluate the evidence from current systematic reviews/meta-analyses (SRs/MAs) on the effectiveness of stem cell therapy for diabetic foot (DF). Approach: We conducted a comprehensive search in four databases for SRs/MAs that included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on stem cell therapy for DF. Two separate researchers independently evaluated the methodological quality and evidence quality of the SRs/MAs that were included in the study. We conducted a quantitative synthesis of all RCTs included in the SRs/MAs to obtain objective and updated conclusions. Egger's test and sensitivity analysis are used to examine the reliability of the results. Results: This umbrella review includes eight SRs/MAs, and their methodological quality and evidence quality were all deemed unsatisfactory. Out of the 8 SRs/MAs, 26 RCTs were included, with a total corrected covered area of 21.4%, indicating a high degree of overlap. The test of super-significance did not yield any significant results. Our updated meta-analysis suggests that DF patients can benefit from stem cell therapy, as indicated by effectiveness in measures, including healing rate, amputation rate, ankle-brachial index, transcutaneous oxygen pressure, ulcer size reduction, complete healing time, pain-free walking distance, rest pain score, and new angiogenesis rate. Innovation: This study conducted a comprehensive evaluation and reanalysis of the current evidence regarding the effectiveness and safety of stem cell therapy for DF, which is the first of its kind. Conclusion: Based on the existing evidence, stem cell therapy is effective and safe for patients with DF.