English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Context The goal of the meta-analysis was to evaluate the effect of pioglitazone on the primary and secondary prevention of cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) and renal adverse events in patients with or at high risk of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Design Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing pioglitazone with any control were identified through PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library. Cardiovascular outcomes included major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs, defined as the composite of nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, and cardiovascular death), hospitalization for heart failure, and all-cause mortality. Renal outcomes included change in urinary albumin to creatinine ratio and 24-hour urinary protein excretion. Weighted mean difference (WMD) and risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were pooled. Results A total of 26 studies with 19 645 participants were enrolled. Pioglitazone reduced the risk of MACE (RR, 0.8 [95% CI, 0.7–0.9]), with benefit only seen in patients with a history of established CVDs (0.8 [0.7–0.9]) and not in those without (1.0 [0.7–1.3]). Regarding the individual components, pioglitazone reduced the risk of nonfatal myocardial infarction (0.8 [0.6–1.0]) and nonfatal stroke (0.8 [0.7–0.9]), which was confined to patients with a history of established CVDs, whereas no treatment effect was found on cardiovascular death (1.0 [0.7–1.2]) regardless of the presence of established CVDs. Pioglitazone increased the risk of hospitalization for heart failure (1.3 [1.1–1.6]) and had no treatment effect on all-cause mortality (1.0 [0.8–1.1]). Pioglitazone reduced albuminuria by 18.5% (WMD 18.5% [95% CI, 21.1-16.0]), with a similar benefit in patients with different renal function categories. Conclusions Pioglitazone should be considered in patients with or at high risk of T2DM for the prevention of cardiovascular endpoints, especially in those with a history of established CVD who might benefit the most. Robust reductions in progression of renal disease are seen regardless of baseline renal function degree.

the journal of clinical endocrinology and metabolism/journal of clinical endocrinology and metabolism

Pioglitazone for the Primary and Secondary Prevention of Cardiovascular and Renal Outcomes in Patients with or at High Risk of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: A Meta-Analysis