Clinical outcomes of opioid administration in acute and chronic heart failure: A meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Opioid use in heart failure (HF) management is controversial, and whether rapid symptomatic relief outweighs the risks of opioid use in HF remains unknown. This study aimed to explore the clinical outcomes of opioid administration in patients with acute or chronic HF. METHODS: A systematic search for eligible studies was conducted in databases (MEDLINE, Scopus, Web of Science, EBSCO) and registries (ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO Clinical Trial Registry) until June 8, 2022. Odds ratios (ORs) or adjusted OR (aORs) and mean difference (MD) or standardized MD were quantified for binary and continuous outcomes, respectively. Meta-regression was performed using the restricted maximum likelihood method. RESULTS: A total of 20 studies (154,736 participants) were included. In acute HF, opioid use presented a high risk for in-hospital mortality (OR = 2.35; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.03-5.38; I2 = 97%), invasive (OR = 2.78; 95%CI: 1.17-6.61; I2 = 93%) and noninvasive (OR = 2.97; 95%CI: 1.06-8.28; I2 = 95%) ventilations, intensive care unit admission (OR = 3.62; 95%CI: 3.11-4.21; I2 = 6%), and inotrope use (OR = 2.54; 95%CI: 1.94-3.32; I2 = 63%). In chronic HF New York Heart Association (NYHA) Class II/III, opioid use improved ventilatory efficiency (MD = -3.16; 95%CI: (-4.78)-(-1.54); I2 = 0%), and exercise test duration (MD = 69.24; 95%CI: 10.11-128.37; I2 = 89%). CONCLUSIONS: Opioids are not recommended for acute HF management; however, they showed an advantage in exercise testing by improving ventilatory efficiency, chemosensitivity, and exercise test duration in stable patients with chronic HF NYHA Class II/III. Nonetheless, larger randomized controlled trials and individual patient-level data meta-analyses are warranted.

Impact of COVID-19 Lockdown on the Metabolic Control Parameters in Patients with Diabetes Mellitus: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Abrupt implementation of lockdowns during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic affected the management of diabetes mellitus in patients worldwide. Limited access to health facilities and lifestyle changes potentially affected metabolic parameters in patients at risk. We conducted a meta-analysis to determine any differences in the control of metabolic parameters in patients with diabetes, before and during lockdown. METHODS: We performed searches of five databases. Meta-analyses were carried out using random- or fixed-effect approaches to glycaemic control parameters as the primary outcome: glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c), random blood glucose (RBG), fasting blood glucose (FBG), time-in-range (TIR), time-above-range (TAR), time-below-range (TBR). Mean difference (MD), confidence interval (CI), and P value were calculated. Lipid profile was a secondary outcome and is presented as a descriptive analysis. RESULTS: Twenty-one studies enrolling a total of 3,992 patients with type 1 or type 2 diabetes mellitus (T1DM or T2DM) were included in the study. Patients with T1DM showed a significant improvement of TIR and TAR (MD=3.52% [95% CI, 0.29 to 6.74], I2=76%, P=0.03; MD=-3.36% [95% CI, -6.48 to -0.25], I2=75%, P=0.03), while FBG among patients with T2DM significantly worsened (MD=3.47 mg/dL [95% CI, 1.22 to 5.73], I2=0%, P<0.01). No significant difference was found in HbA1c, RBG, and TBR. Use of continuous glucose monitoring in T1DM facilitated good glycaemic control. Significant deterioration of lipid parameters during lockdown, particularly triglyceride, was observed. CONCLUSION: Implementation of lockdowns during the COVID-19 pandemic did not worsen glycaemic control in patients with diabetes. Other metabolic parameters improved during lockdown, though lipid parameters, particularly triglyceride, worsened.