对α-硫辛酸和γ-亚麻酸治疗糖尿病周围神经病变的有效性和安全性进行排名:系统综述与网络元分析

IF 2.3 4区 医学 Q3 ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM Canadian Journal of Diabetes Pub Date : 2024-06-01 DOI:10.1016/j.jcjd.2024.01.007
Mario B. Prado Jr MD , Karen Joy B. Adiao MD
{"title":"对α-硫辛酸和γ-亚麻酸治疗糖尿病周围神经病变的有效性和安全性进行排名:系统综述与网络元分析","authors":"Mario B. Prado Jr MD ,&nbsp;Karen Joy B. Adiao MD","doi":"10.1016/j.jcjd.2024.01.007","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objectives</h3><p>Current medications for diabetic neuropathy (DN) recommended by the American Diabetes Association and American Academy of Neurology do not address the pathologic process of denervation among patients with DN, because ancillary treatments, such as reactive oxygen scavengers, may be needed. The purpose of this work was to summarize the available evidence about the efficacy and safety of alpha lipoic acid (ALA) and gamma linolenic acid (GLA) in the management of DN.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Using the search terms [(alpha lipoic acid or ALA or thioctic acid or thioctacid) or (gamma linolenic acid or GLA)] AND [(diabetes or diabetes mellitus) AND (polyneuropathy or neuropathy or sensorimotor polyneuropathy or radiculopathy)], 11 studies were included in this review and combined meta-analysis.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Eight of the 11 articles (73%) reported significant benefit of ALA vs placebo. In the meta-analysis, the Total Symptom Score (TSS) for ALA 600 mg/day (ALA600) was 1.05 points lower (standard mean difference [SMD] −1.05, 95% confidence interval [CI] −2.07 to −0.04, p=0.04, I<sup>2</sup>=98.18%) compared with control at the end of the study. In the network meta-analysis, ALA600 (SMD −1.68, 95% CI −2.8 to −0.6) and GLA (SMD −2.39, 95% CI −4.3 to −0.5) had significantly lower TSSs compared with placebo. Moreover, GLA had the highest probability of being the best (52.7%) for improving DN symptoms. In all studies, most adverse events include gastrointestinal disturbances. In terms of tolerability, no differences were detected between ALA and control groups.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>ALA and GLA appear to be safe and efficacious biofactors for improvement of DN symptoms.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":9565,"journal":{"name":"Canadian Journal of Diabetes","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Ranking Alpha Lipoic Acid and Gamma Linolenic Acid in Terms of Efficacy and Safety in the Management of Adults With Diabetic Peripheral Neuropathy: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis\",\"authors\":\"Mario B. Prado Jr MD ,&nbsp;Karen Joy B. Adiao MD\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jcjd.2024.01.007\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Objectives</h3><p>Current medications for diabetic neuropathy (DN) recommended by the American Diabetes Association and American Academy of Neurology do not address the pathologic process of denervation among patients with DN, because ancillary treatments, such as reactive oxygen scavengers, may be needed. The purpose of this work was to summarize the available evidence about the efficacy and safety of alpha lipoic acid (ALA) and gamma linolenic acid (GLA) in the management of DN.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Using the search terms [(alpha lipoic acid or ALA or thioctic acid or thioctacid) or (gamma linolenic acid or GLA)] AND [(diabetes or diabetes mellitus) AND (polyneuropathy or neuropathy or sensorimotor polyneuropathy or radiculopathy)], 11 studies were included in this review and combined meta-analysis.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Eight of the 11 articles (73%) reported significant benefit of ALA vs placebo. In the meta-analysis, the Total Symptom Score (TSS) for ALA 600 mg/day (ALA600) was 1.05 points lower (standard mean difference [SMD] −1.05, 95% confidence interval [CI] −2.07 to −0.04, p=0.04, I<sup>2</sup>=98.18%) compared with control at the end of the study. In the network meta-analysis, ALA600 (SMD −1.68, 95% CI −2.8 to −0.6) and GLA (SMD −2.39, 95% CI −4.3 to −0.5) had significantly lower TSSs compared with placebo. Moreover, GLA had the highest probability of being the best (52.7%) for improving DN symptoms. In all studies, most adverse events include gastrointestinal disturbances. In terms of tolerability, no differences were detected between ALA and control groups.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>ALA and GLA appear to be safe and efficacious biofactors for improvement of DN symptoms.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9565,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Canadian Journal of Diabetes\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Canadian Journal of Diabetes\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1499267124000236\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Canadian Journal of Diabetes","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1499267124000236","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景美国糖尿病学会(ADA)和美国神经病学学会(AAN)推荐的治疗糖尿病神经病变(DN)的现有药物并不能解决DN患者神经支配的病理过程,因此可能需要使用活性氧清除剂(ROS)等辅助治疗。本文旨在总结有关α-硫辛酸(ALA)和γ-亚麻酸(GLA)在治疗 DN 方面的有效性和安全性的现有证据。结果 11 篇论文中有 8 篇(73%)报告了 ALA 对安慰剂的显著疗效。在荟萃分析中,研究结束时,ALA600的症状总评分(TSS)比对照组低1.05分(SMD:-1.05,CI:-2.07至-0.04,P=0.04,I2=98.18%)。在网络荟萃分析中,与安慰剂相比,ALA600(SMD:-1.68,CI:-2.8至-0.6)和GLA(SMD:-2.39,CI:-4.3至-0.5)的TSS显著降低。此外,在改善 DN 症状方面,GLA 的最佳概率最高(52.7%)。在所有研究中,大多数不良反应包括消化道紊乱。在耐受性方面,ALA 组与对照组之间未发现差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Ranking Alpha Lipoic Acid and Gamma Linolenic Acid in Terms of Efficacy and Safety in the Management of Adults With Diabetic Peripheral Neuropathy: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis

Objectives

Current medications for diabetic neuropathy (DN) recommended by the American Diabetes Association and American Academy of Neurology do not address the pathologic process of denervation among patients with DN, because ancillary treatments, such as reactive oxygen scavengers, may be needed. The purpose of this work was to summarize the available evidence about the efficacy and safety of alpha lipoic acid (ALA) and gamma linolenic acid (GLA) in the management of DN.

Methods

Using the search terms [(alpha lipoic acid or ALA or thioctic acid or thioctacid) or (gamma linolenic acid or GLA)] AND [(diabetes or diabetes mellitus) AND (polyneuropathy or neuropathy or sensorimotor polyneuropathy or radiculopathy)], 11 studies were included in this review and combined meta-analysis.

Results

Eight of the 11 articles (73%) reported significant benefit of ALA vs placebo. In the meta-analysis, the Total Symptom Score (TSS) for ALA 600 mg/day (ALA600) was 1.05 points lower (standard mean difference [SMD] −1.05, 95% confidence interval [CI] −2.07 to −0.04, p=0.04, I2=98.18%) compared with control at the end of the study. In the network meta-analysis, ALA600 (SMD −1.68, 95% CI −2.8 to −0.6) and GLA (SMD −2.39, 95% CI −4.3 to −0.5) had significantly lower TSSs compared with placebo. Moreover, GLA had the highest probability of being the best (52.7%) for improving DN symptoms. In all studies, most adverse events include gastrointestinal disturbances. In terms of tolerability, no differences were detected between ALA and control groups.

Conclusion

ALA and GLA appear to be safe and efficacious biofactors for improvement of DN symptoms.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Canadian Journal of Diabetes
Canadian Journal of Diabetes ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM-
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
4.00%
发文量
130
审稿时长
54 days
期刊介绍: The Canadian Journal of Diabetes is Canada''s only diabetes-oriented, peer-reviewed, interdisciplinary journal for diabetes health-care professionals. Published bimonthly, the Canadian Journal of Diabetes contains original articles; reviews; case reports; shorter articles such as Perspectives in Practice, Practical Diabetes and Innovations in Diabetes Care; Diabetes Dilemmas and Letters to the Editor.
期刊最新文献
Masthead Table of Contents Editorial Board Calling All Clinicians: A Brief 5-Step Model for Exploring Diabetes Distress in Routine Diabetes Care Association of Sodium-Glucose Cotransporter-2 Inhibitors vs Dipeptidyl Peptidase-4 Inhibitors With Pneumonia, COVID-19, and Other Adverse Respiratory Events in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1