IDF Diabetes Atlas: Estimation of Global and Regional Gestational Diabetes Mellitus Prevalence for 2021 by International Association of Diabetes in Pregnancy Study Group's Criteria.

AIMS: The approaches used to screen and diagnose gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) vary widely. We generated a comparable estimate of the global and regional prevalence of GDM by International Association of Diabetes in Pregnancy Study Group (IADPSG)'s criteria. METHODS: We searched PubMed and other databases and retrieved 57 studies to estimate the prevalence of GDM. Prevalence rate ratios of different diagnostic criteria, screening strategies and age groups, were used to standardize the prevalence of GDM in individual studies included in the analysis. Fixed effects meta-analysis was conducted to estimate standardized pooled prevalence of GDM by IDF regions and World Bank country income groups. RESULTS: The pooled global standardized prevalence of GDM was 14.0% (95% confidence interval: 13.97-14.04%). The regional standardized prevalence of GDM were 7.1% (7.0-7.2%) in North America and Caribbean (NAC), 7.8% (7.2-8.4%) in Europe (EUR), 10.4% (10.1-10.7%) in South America and Central America (SACA), 14.2% (14.0-14.4%) in Africa (AFR), 14.7% (14.7-14.8%) in Western Pacific (WP), 20.8% (20.2-21.4%) in South-East Asia (SEA) and 27.6% (26.9-28.4%) in Middle East and North Africa (MENA). The standardized prevalence of GDM in low-, middle- and high-income countries were 12.7% (11.0-14.6%), 9.2% (9.0-9.3%) and 14.2% (14.1-14.2%), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The highest standardized prevalence of GDM was in MENA and SEA, followed by WP and AFR. Among the three World Bank country income groups, high income countries had the highest standardized prevalence of GDM. The standardized estimates for the prevalence of GDM provide an insight for the global picture of GDM.

N-acetylcysteine for non-paracetamol drug-induced liver injury: a systematic review.

AIMS: N-acetylcysteine (NAC) may be useful in the management of non-paracetamol drug-induced liver injury (DILI). Our objective was to review systematically evidence for the use of NAC as a therapeutic option for non-paracetamol DILI. METHODS: We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and prospective cohort studies. We searched several bibliographic databases, grey literature sources, conference proceedings and ongoing trials. Our pre-specified primary outcomes were all cause and DILI related mortality, time to normalization of liver biochemistry and adverse events. Secondary outcomes were proportion receiving liver transplant, time to transplantation, transplant-free survival and hospitalization duration. RESULTS: We identified one RCT of NAC vs. placebo in patients with non-paracetamol acute liver failure. There was no difference in the primary outcomes of overall survival at 3 weeks between NAC [70%, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 60%, 81%, n = 81] and placebo (66%, 95% CI = 56%, 77%, n = 92). NAC significantly improved the secondary outcomes of transplant-free survival compared with placebo: 40% NAC (95% CI = 28%, 51%) vs. 27% placebo (95% CI = 18%, 37%). A subgroup analysis according to aetiology found improved transplant-free survival in patients with non-paracetamol DILI, NAC (58%, n = 19) vs. placebo (27%, n = 26), odds ratio (OR) 0.27 (95% CI = 0.076, 0.942). Overall survival was similar, NAC (79%) vs. placebo (65%);, OR 0.50 (95% CI = 0.13, 1.98). CONCLUSION: Current available evidence is limited and does not allow for any firm conclusions to be made regarding the role of NAC in non-paracetamol DILI. We therefore highlight the need for further research in this area.

N-acetylcysteine for non-paracetamol drug-induced liver injury: a systematic review protocol.

BACKGROUND: Drug-induced liver injury (DILI) refers to acute or chronic liver injury that may occur as a consequence of using drugs and herbal or dietary supplements. Specific therapies for DILI are limited. There is considerable evidence for efficacy and safety of N-acetylcysteine (NAC) in management of paracetamol-induced liver injury. More recently, research has explored the use of NAC in non-paracetamol drug-induced liver injury. It is important to summarise the evidence of NAC for non-paracetamol DILI to determine if NAC may be considered a therapeutic option in this condition. METHODS/DESIGN: We will conduct a systematic review of the benefit and harm of NAC in non-paracetamol drug-induced liver injury. Primary and secondary outcomes of interest are pre-specified. Primary outcomes include all-cause mortality, mortality due to DILI, time to normalisation of liver biochemistry (e.g. return of alanine transaminase to <100 U/l and/or international normalized ratio (INR) <1.5) and adverse events. Secondary outcomes include transplantation rate, time to transplantation, transplant-free survival and duration of hospitalisation. We will include randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and prospective cohort studies. RCTs will contribute to the evaluation of safety and efficacy of NAC, whereas, the cohort studies will contribute exclusively to the evaluation of safety. We will search several bibliographic databases (including PubMed, Scopus, CINAHL, CENTRAL), grey literature sources, conference proceedings and ongoing trials. Following data extraction and assessment of the risk of bias, we will conduct a meta-analysis if feasible, as well as subgroup analyses. We will assess and explore clinical and statistical heterogeneity. DISCUSSION: The aim of this review is to provide evidence on the effectiveness and safety of NAC in non-paracetamol DILI. We anticipate that the results could aid health care practitioners, researchers and policymakers in the decision-making regarding the use of NAC in patients with non-paracetamol DILI. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42014008771.