RESUMO
Epilepsy, a neurological disorder characterized by recurrent seizures, has witnessed a remarkable transformation in its classification paradigm, driven by advances in clinical understanding, neuroimaging, and molecular genetics. This narrative review navigates the dynamic landscape of epilepsy classification, offering insights into recent developments, challenges, and the promising horizon. Historically, epilepsy classification relied heavily on clinical observations, categorizing seizures based on their phenomenology and presumed etiology. However, the field has profoundly shifted from a symptom-based approach to a more refined, multidimensional system. One pivotal aspect of this evolution is the integration of neuroimaging techniques, particularly magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and functional imaging modalities. These tools have unveiled the intricate neural networks implicated in epilepsy, facilitating the identification of distinct brain abnormalities and the categorization of epilepsy subtypes based on structural and functional findings. Furthermore, the role of genetics has become increasingly prominent in epilepsy classification. Genetic discoveries have not only unraveled the molecular underpinnings of various epileptic syndromes but have also provided valuable diagnostic and prognostic insights. This narrative review delves into the expanding realm of genetic testing and its impact on tailoring treatment strategies to individual patients. As the classification landscape evolves, there are accompanying challenges. The narrative review underscores the transformative potential of artificial intelligence and machine learning in epilepsy classification. These technologies hold promise in automating the analysis of complex neuroimaging and genetic data, offering enhanced accuracy and efficiency in epilepsy diagnosis and classification. In conclusion, navigating the shifting landscape of epilepsy classification is a journey marked by progress, complexity, and the prospect of improved patient care. We are charting a course toward more precise diagnoses and tailored treatments by embracing advanced neuroimaging, genetics, and innovative technologies. As the field continues to evolve, collaborative efforts and a holistic understanding of epilepsy's diverse manifestations will be instrumental in harnessing the full potential of this dynamic landscape.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: The emergence of genetically-modified human proteins and glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists have presented a promising strategy for effectively managing diabetes. Due to the scarcity of clinical trials focusing on the safety and efficacy of semaglutide as an adjunctive treatment for patients with type 2 diabetes who had inadequate glycemic control with metformin, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis. This was necessary to fill the gap and provide a comprehensive assessment of semaglutide compared to sitagliptin, a commonly prescribed DPP-4 inhibitor, in this patient population. METHODS: A comprehensive and systematic search was carried out on reputable databases including PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and Elsevier's ScienceDirect to identify relevant studies that compared the efficacy of once-weekly Semaglutide with once-daily Sitagliptin in individuals diagnosed with type 2 diabetes mellitus. The analysis of the gathered data was performed utilizing the random-effects model, which considers both within-study and between-study variations. RESULTS: The meta-analysis incorporated three randomized controlled trials (RCTs), encompassing 2401 participants, with a balanced distribution across the treatment groups. The primary focus of the study revolved around evaluating changes in HbA1C, blood pressure, pulse rate, body weight, waist circumference, and BMI. The findings revealed that once-weekly Semaglutide showed substantially improved HbA1C (WMD: -0.98; 95% CI: -1.28, -0.69, p-value: < 0.0001; I2: 100%), systolic (WMD: -3.73; 95% CI: -5.42, -2.04, p-value: <0.0001; I2: 100%) and diastolic blood pressures (WMD: -0.66; 95% CI: -1.02, -0.29, p-value: 0.0005; I2: 100%), and body weight (WMD: -3.17; 95% CI: -3.84, -2.49, p-value: <0.00001; I2: 100%) compared to once-daily Sitagliptin. However, there was an observed increase in pulse rate (WMD: 3.33; 95% CI: 1.61, 5.06, p-value: <0.00001; I2: 100%) associated with Semaglutide treatment. Regarding secondary outcomes, there was an elevated risk of total adverse events and premature treatment discontinuation with Semaglutide. The risk of serious, severe, moderate, and mild adverse events did not significantly differ between the two treatments. CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, the administration of once-weekly Semaglutide exhibited a substantial reduction in HbA1c, average systolic blood pressure (SBP), mean diastolic blood pressure (DBP), body weight, waist circumference, body mass index (BMI), and a rise in pulse rate, as opposed to the once-daily administration of Sitagliptin.