Rodríguez-Gutiérrez, René

Aim. To evaluate retinal vascular perfusion and density by optical coherence tomography angiography (OCTA) before, during, and after hypoglycemia in individuals with diabetes mellitus with or without diabetic retinopathy (DR). Methods. A focused clinical history was performed, followed by an ophthalmological examination to document retinopathy status. OCTA was performed at baseline, at hypoglycemia, and at glucose normalization. Eye tracking and eye alignment devices on the platform were used to obtain a macular thickness cube (512 × 128) and vascular perfusion and density protocols of 3 × 3 mm. Retinal vascular reactivity was analyzed with superficial plexus vascular perfusion and density protocols on OCTA. Results. Fifty-two participants encompassing 97 eyes fulfilled the eligibility criteria. Their mean age was 42.9 ± 15.1 years (range, 22 to 65), and 20 (38.2%) were men. We found a statistically significant difference in vascular perfusion and density when comparing all groups at baseline. The controls had higher vascular perfusion and density values than the cases. Vascular perfusion and density were significantly reduced in all groups during the hypoglycemia episode, except for vascular density in DR cases. Conclusion. Acute hypoglycemia significantly alters the retinal vascularity in DM patients with and without DR, suggesting that repeated episodes of acute hypoglycemia could exacerbate retinopathy in the long term.

Background: Combined therapy with levothyroxine (LT4)/L-triiodothyronine (LT3) has garnered attention among clinicians and patients as a potential treatment alternative to LT4 monotherapy. The objective of this study was to compare the benefits and harms of LT4/LT3 combined therapy and LT4 monotherapy for patients with hypothyroidism. Methods: A systematic search in MEDLINE, Scopus, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials was performed by a librarian from inception date until September 2020. Randomized clinical trials and quasiexperimental studies comparing combined therapy (LT4/LT3) versus monotherapy (LT4) for adult patients with hypothyroidism were considered for inclusion. Independent data extraction was performed by paired reviewers. A meta-analysis comparing standardized mean differences of the effect of each therapy was performed on clinical outcomes and patient preferences. Proportions of adverse events and reactions were assessed narratively. Results: A total of 1398 references were retrieved, from which 18 fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Results supported by evidence at low-to-moderate certainty evidence did not display a difference in treatment effect between therapies on clinical status, quality of life, psychological distress, depressive symptoms, and fatigue; all measured with standardized questionnaires. Furthermore, meta-analysis of patient preferences revealed higher proportions of choice for combined therapy (43%) when compared with monotherapy (23%) or having no preference (30%). When evaluating treatment adverse events or adverse reactions, similar proportions were observed between treatment groups; meta-analysis was not possible. Conclusions: The available evidence at low-to-moderate certainty demonstrates that there is no difference in clinical outcomes between LT4/LT3 combined therapy and LT4 monotherapy for treating hypothyroidism in adults, except for a higher proportion of patient preferring combined therapy. Adverse events and reactions appear to be similar across both groups, however, this observation is only narrative. These results could inform shared decision-making conversations between patients with hypothyroidism and their clinicians. PROSPERO Registration ID: CRD42020202658.