One-year outcomes of a novel venous stent for symptomatic iliofemoral venous obstruction: prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: A stent with characteristics of a hybrid design may have advantages in improving the patency of symptomatic iliofemoral vein obstruction. This study assessed the safety and effectiveness of the V-Mixtent Venous Stent in treating symptomatic iliofemoral outflow obstruction. METHODS: Eligible patients had a Clinical-Etiologic-Anatomic-Physiologic (CEAP) C classification of ≥ 3 or a Venous Clinical Severity Score (VCSS) pain score of ≥ 2. The primary safety endpoint was the rate of major adverse events within 30 days. The primary effectiveness endpoint was the 12-month primary patency rate. Secondary endpoints included changes in VCSS from baseline to 6 and 12 months, alterations in CEAP C classification, Chronic Venous Disease Quality of Life Questionnaire (CIVIQ-14) scores at 12 months, and stent durability measures. RESULTS: Between December 2020 and November 2021, 171 patients were enrolled across 15 institutions. A total of 185 endovenous stents were placed, with 91.81% of subjects receiving one stent and 8.19% receiving 2 stents. Within 30 days, only two major adverse events occurred (1.17%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.14-4.16%), below the literature-defined performance goal of 11% (P < .001). The 12-month primary patency rate (91.36%; 95% CI, 85.93-95.19%; P < .001) exceeded the literature-defined performance goal. VCSS changes from baseline demonstrated clinical improvement at 6 months (- 4.30 ± 3.66) and 12 months (- 4.98 ± 3.67) (P < .001). Significant reduction in symptoms, as measured by CEAP C classification and CIVIQ-14, was observed from pre-procedure to 12 months (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: The 12-month outcomes confirm the safety and effectiveness of the V-Mixtent Venous Stent in managing symptomatic iliofemoral venous outflow obstruction, including clinical symptom improvement compared to before treatment.

The efficacy of Da Chaihu decoction combined with metformin tablets for type 2 diabetes mellitus: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy of Da Chaihu decoction combined with metformin tablets on patients with type 2 diabetes compared with metformin alone. METHODS: This systematic review and meta-analysis is written based on 2020 PRISMA Extension for Chinese Herbal Medicines 2020 (PRISMA-CHM 2020) reporting guidelines. We reviewed all the relevant studies from a search of the following databases from inception to February 2022 without any language restriction: Excerpta Medica Database (EMBASE), Google Scholar, PubMed, Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), VIP Information, Wanfang Data, and the Chinese Biomedical Literature Database(CBM). Data were extracted and the quality was independently evaluated by two reviewers, based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Data were analyzed using the Cochrane software RevMan 5.3. RESULTS: Six randomized controlled trials comprising 516 participants were included. The meta-analysis revealed the Da Chaihu decoction combined with metformin tablets group was significantly superior to the metformin tablets group in terms of fasting blood glucose(FPG) (-0.66 mmol/L; 95 % CI (confidence intervals) [- 1.28, - 0.04]), plasma glucose 2 h after meal (2-h PG) (-1.18 mmol/L; 95 % CI [-1.94, -0.42]) in six RCTs, body mass index (BMI) (-3.07 mmol/L; 95 % CI [-6.89, 0.75]) in three RCTs, glycosylated hemoglobin (HbAlc) (-0.36 mmol/L; 95 % CI [-1.04, 0.31]) in three RCTs, and triglycerides (TG) (-0.76 mmol/L; 95 % CI [-1.37, -0.15]) in two RCTs. In two RCTs, there were significant differences in terms of total cholesterol (TC) (-0.97 mmol/L; 95 % CI [-1.18, -0.76]). CONCLUSIONS: Very low-quality research shows that Da Chaihu decoction combined with metformin tablets exert a certain level of efficacy on patients with type 2 diabetes compared with metformin alone. However, random sequence generation methodology was reported in five studies leading to the low quality of the included studies. None of the six studies depicted the blinding method, allocation concealment, selective reporting, and assessed the purity and potency of the product. This observation requires verification through high-quality, multi-center, double-blinded randomized controlled trials, and assesses the purity and potency of the product.