The effect of preprandial versus postprandial physical activity on glycaemia: Meta-analysis of human intervention studies.

This meta-analysis aims to investigate the effect of preprandial physical activity (PA) versus postprandial PA on glycaemia in human intervention studies. Medline and Embase.com were searched until February 2023 for intervention studies in adults, directly comparing preprandial PA versus postprandial PA on glycaemia. Studies were screened using ASReview (34,837) and full texts were read by two independent reviewers (42 full text, 28 included). Results were analysed using pooled mean differences in random-effects models. Studies were either acute response studies (n = 21) or Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) over multiple weeks (n = 7). In acute response studies, postprandial outcomes followed the expected physiological patterns, and outcomes measured over 24 h showed no significant differences. For the RCTs, glucose area under the curve during a glucose tolerance test was slightly, but not significantly lower in preprandial PA vs postprandial PA (-0.29 [95 %CI:-0.66, 0.08] mmol/L, I2 = 64.36 %). Subgroup analyses (quality, health status, etc.) did not significantly change the outcomes. In conclusion, we found no differences between preprandial PA versus postprandial PA on glycaemia both after one PA bout as well as after multiple weeks of PA. The studies were of low to moderate quality of evidence as assessed by GRADE, showed contradictive results, included no long-term studies and used various designs and populations. We therefore need better RCTs, with more similar designs, in larger populations and longer follow-up periods (≥12 weeks) to have a final answer on the questions eat first, then exercise, or the reverse?

Epidemiology of heart failure in diabetes: a disease in disguise.

Left ventricular diastolic dysfunction (LVDD) without symptoms, and heart failure (HF) with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) represent the most common phenotypes of HF in individuals with type 2 diabetes mellitus, and are more common than HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), HF with mildly reduced ejection fraction (HFmrEF) and left ventricular systolic dysfunction (LVSD) in these individuals. However, diagnostic criteria for HF have changed over the years, resulting in heterogeneity in the prevalence/incidence rates reported in different studies. We aimed to give an overview of the diagnosis and epidemiology of HF in type 2 diabetes, using both a narrative and systematic review approach; we focus narratively on diagnosing (using the 2021 European Society of Cardiology [ESC] guidelines) and screening for HF in type 2 diabetes. We performed an updated (2016-October 2022) systematic review and meta-analysis of studies reporting the prevalence and incidence of HF subtypes in adults ≥18 years with type 2 diabetes, using echocardiographic data. Embase and MEDLINE databases were searched and data were assessed using random-effects meta-analyses, with findings presented as forest plots. From the 5015 studies found, 209 were screened using the full-text article. In total, 57 studies were included, together with 29 studies that were identified in a prior meta-analysis; these studies reported on the prevalence of LVSD (n=25 studies, 24,460 individuals), LVDD (n=65 studies, 25,729 individuals), HFrEF (n=4 studies, 4090 individuals), HFmrEF (n=2 studies, 2442 individuals) and/or HFpEF (n=8 studies, 5292 individuals), and on HF incidence (n=7 studies, 17,935 individuals). Using Hoy et al's risk-of-bias tool, we found that the studies included generally had a high risk of bias. They showed a prevalence of 43% (95% CI 37%, 50%) for LVDD, 17% (95% CI 7%, 35%) for HFpEF, 6% (95% CI 3%, 10%) for LVSD, 7% (95% CI 3%, 15%) for HFrEF, and 12% (95% CI 7%, 22%) for HFmrEF. For LVDD, grade I was found to be most prevalent. Additionally, we reported a higher incidence rate of HFpEF (7% [95% CI 4%, 11%]) than HFrEF 4% [95% CI 3%, 7%]). The evidence is limited by the heterogeneity of the diagnostic criteria over the years. The systematic section of this review provides new insights on the prevalence/incidence of HF in type 2 diabetes, unveiling a large pre-clinical target group with LVDD/HFpEF in which disease progression could be halted by early recognition and treatment.Registration PROSPERO ID CRD42022368035.