Background: HVPG measurement is the gold standard for assessing portal hypertension. Many patients decline HVPG measurements due to associated pain. According to previous studies, propofol sedation during HVPG measurements potentially alters HVPG readings. However, opioid analgesics' effects on HVPG await full elucidation. This study aimed to evaluate fentanyl analgesia's effects on HVPG measurement accuracy in patients with cirrhosis. Methods: This prospective, multicenter study included patients with cirrhosis undergoing HVPG measurements, which were performed preanalgesia and under analgesia with fentanyl injection (1.0 or 1.5 μg/kg). Results: Of the 48 enrolled patients with cirrhosis, 23 were administered 1.0 μg/kg fentanyl analgesia during HVPG measurement. The HVPG was 13.4±4.9 mm Hg in preanalgesia and 13.5±5.2 mm Hg under analgesia. HVPG measurement accuracy was not altered after fentanyl analgesia (p = 0.801). The following measures also did not change: heart rate (p = 0.132), mean arterial pressure (p = 0.348), and blood oxygen saturation (p = 0.748); however, respiratory rate (p = 0.001) changes occurred. The Verbal Numerical Rating Score for comfort under analgesia was higher than that in preanalgesia (p = 0.001). Twenty-five patients were administered 1.5 μg/kg fentanyl analgesia during HVPG measurement. The HVPG was 19.5±5.7 mm Hg in preanalgesia and 19.6±5.6 mm Hg under analgesia. HVPG measurement accuracy did not alter after fentanyl analgesia (p = 0.469). Similarly, the following measures did not change: mean arterial pressure (p = 0.871) and oxygen saturation (p = 0.327); nevertheless, respiratory rate (p = 0.015) and heart rate (p = 0.019) changes occurred. The Verbal Numerical Rating Score for comfort under analgesia was higher than that in preanalgesia (p < 0.001). Conclusion: Fentanyl analgesia did not alter HVPG measurement accuracy, and fentanyl improved comfort in patients with cirrhosis during HVPG measurements.

Background: COVID-19 might be a risk factor for various chronic diseases. However, the association between COVID-19 and the risk of incident diabetes remains unclear. We aimed to meta-analyze evidence on the relative risk of incident diabetes in patients with COVID-19. Methods: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, the Embase, PubMed, CENTRAL, and Web of Science databases were searched from December 2019 to June 8, 2022. We included cohort studies that provided data on the number, proportion, or relative risk of diabetes after confirming the COVID-19 diagnosis. Two reviewers independently screened studies for eligibility, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. We used a random-effects meta-analysis to pool the relative risk with corresponding 95 % confidence intervals. Prespecified subgroup and meta-regression analyses were conducted to explore the potential influencing factors. We converted the relative risk to the absolute risk difference to present the evidence. This study was registered in advance (PROSPERO CRD42022337841). Main findings: Ten articles involving 11 retrospective cohorts with a total of 47.1 million participants proved eligible. We found a 64 % greater risk (RR = 1.64, 95%CI: 1.51 to 1.79) of diabetes in patients with COVID-19 compared with non-COVID-19 controls, which could increase the number of diabetes events by 701 (558 more to 865 more) per 10,000 persons. We detected significant subgroup effects for type of diabetes and sex. Type 2 diabetes has a higher relative risk than type 1. Moreover, men may be at a higher risk of overall diabetes than women. Sensitivity analysis confirmed the robustness of the results. No evidence was found for publication bias. Conclusions: COVID-19 is strongly associated with the risk of incident diabetes, including both type 1 and type 2 diabetes. We should be aware of the risk of developing diabetes after COVID-19 and prepare for the associated health problems, given the large and growing number of people infected with COVID-19. However, the body of evidence still needs to be strengthened.

Background:Pharmacotherapy provides an option for adults with overweight and obesity to reduce their bodyweight if lifestyle modifications fail. We summarised the latest evidence for the benefits and harms of weight-lowering drugs. Methods:This systematic review and network meta-analysis included searches of PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library (CENTRAL) from inception to March 23, 2021, for randomised controlled trials of weight-lowering drugs in adults with overweight and obesity. We performed frequentist random-effect network meta-analyses to summarise the evidence and applied the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation frameworks to rate the certainty of evidence, calculate the absolute effects, categorise interventions, and present the findings. The study was registered with PROSPERO, CRD 42021245678. Findings:14 605 citations were identified by our search, of which 132 eligible trials enrolled 48 209 participants. All drugs lowered bodyweight compared with lifestyle modification alone; all subsequent numbers refer to comparisons with lifestyle modification. High to moderate certainty evidence established phentermine-topiramate as the most effective in lowering weight (odds ratio [OR] of ≥5% weight reduction 8·02, 95% CI 5·24 to 12·27; mean difference [MD] of percentage bodyweight change -7·98, 95% CI -9·27 to -6·69) followed by GLP-1 receptor agonists (OR 6·33, 95% CI 5·00 to 8·00; MD -5·79, 95% CI -6·34 to -5·25). Naltrexone-bupropion (OR 2·69, 95% CI 2·10 to 3·44), phentermine-topiramate (2·40, 1·68 to 3·44), GLP-1 receptor agonists (2·22, 1·74 to 2·84), and orlistat (1·71, 1·42 to 2·05) were associated with increased adverse events leading to drug discontinuation. In a post-hoc analysis, semaglutide, a GLP-1 receptor agonist, showed substantially larger benefits than other drugs with a similar risk of adverse events as other drugs for both likelihood of weight loss of 5% or more (OR 9·82, 95% CI 7·09 to 13·61) and percentage bodyweight change (MD -11·40, 95% CI -12·51 to -10·29). Interpretation:In adults with overweight and obesity, phentermine-topiramate and GLP-1 receptor agonists proved the best drugs in reducing weight; of the GLP-1 agonists, semaglutide might be the most effective.

To evaluate the association between shift work and risk of type 2 diabetes mellitus, we searched PubMed, EMBASE and Web of Science from their inception to June 8, 2019. Observational studies examining the relationship between shift work and type 2 diabetes were included. Subgroup analyses were conducted to explore whether specific characteristics would affect the relationship. A dose-response relationship was estimated by using generalized least squares trend regression. Finally, twelve cohort studies and nine cross-sectional studies were included (inter-rater agreement, k = 0.96). The result of meta-analysis indicated that shift work was associated with an increased risk of type 2 diabetes (relative risk = 1.10, 95% confidence interval = 1.05-1.14). Subgroup analyses demonstrated that female shift workers have increased risk of type 2 diabetes while male not observed, health care workers showed the highest risk compared with civil servants and manual workers, and night shift and rotating shift were associated with an increased risk of type 2 diabetes. Dose-response meta-analysis based on three cohorts among female workers indicated that there might be a positive association between duration of shift work and the risk of type 2 diabetes. In conclusion, shift work is positively associated with an increased risk of type 2 diabetes. Among female workers, with the years of exposure to shift work prolonged, the risk of type 2 diabetes might increase accordingly. In the future, more studies are needed to confirm the results of dose-response analysis.