General anesthesia induction, tracheal intubation, extubation, and laryngoscopy are associated with specific hemodynamic changes. Tracheal intubation and laryngoscopy are related to sympathetic stimulation and lead to hypertension and tachycardia. Recent studies have shown that dexmedetomidine is safe and effective as it does not depress respiratory function. This meta-analysis aims to compare the efficacy of dexmedetomidine and fentanyl in preventing an increase in heart rate (HR) during intubation among patients undergoing general anesthesia. A systematic literature search was done using PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Embase to assess studies comparing the efficacy of dexmedetomidine and fentanyl in preventing an increase in HR during intubation. A meta-analysis was done utilizing a random-effects model, and mean differences of HR were determined between fentanyl and dexmedetomidine at baseline, one minute, five minutes, and 10 minutes of intubation. In this meta-analysis, eight randomized control trials were included, involving 548 patients (274 in the fentanyl group and 274 in the dexmedetomidine group). The findings showed that significant difference of HR was significantly lower in the dexmedetomidine group than the fentanyl group at one minute of intubation (mean difference = -8.46; P-value = 0.003), at five minutes of intubation (mean difference = -7.51; P-value = 0.001), and at 10 minutes of intubation (mean difference = -5.15; P-value = 0.030). In the current meta-analysis, dexmedetomidine was better than fentanyl in preventing tachycardia following endotracheal intubation. HR was significantly lower at one minute, five minutes, and 10 minutes after intubation in the dexmedetomidine group compared to the fentanyl group.

Sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitors are oral diabetes medications that enhance the excretion of glucose by preventing the renal proximal tubules from reabsorbing glucose, which lowers glucose levels in plasma. Currently, studies have shown that SGLT2 inhibitors have beneficial impacts on cardiovascular outcomes, but their effect varies between the individual SGLT2 inhibitors. Thus, the current meta-analysis was conducted to compare the efficacy of dapagliflozin and empagliflozin in preventing cardiovascular events in patients with type 2 diabetes. The current meta-analysis was conducted using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) reporting guidelines. A search of studies comparing cardiovascular events between dapagliflozin and empagliflozin in patients with type 2 diabetes published up to 1 July 2022 was done by two reviewers independently on PubMed, Embase and Cumulated Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHIL). The pre-specified primary endpoints were cardiovascular death, stroke, myocardial infarction and heart failure. Overall four studies were included in this meta-analysis. No significant difference was found in the incidence of myocardial infarction (risk ratio (RR)=0.81, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.60-1.09), heart failure (RR=0.76, 95% CI: 0.56-1.04), cardiovascular mortality (RR=0.46, 95% CI: 0.18-1.20) and stroke (RR=1.07, 95% CI: 0.84-1.38) between dapagliflozin and empagliflozin. Results have shown that the risk of developing stroke, heart failure, myocardial infarction and cardiovascular death were not significantly different in the two groups.

Atrial fibrillation is an irregular heart rhythm, and it is one of the most common cardiac arrhythmias. It is associated with a five times increase in the risk of stroke. Anti-coagulants are prescribed routinely to prevent strokes, especially in patients with atrial fibrillation for many years decreasing the risk of stroke among patients with atrial fibrillation. Non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants especially apixaban and rivaroxaban are frequently used and they are considered to be safe and more effective than warfarin. The aim of this metaanalysis is to compare the efficacy and safety of apixaban and warfarin in preventing stroke among patients with non-valvular arterial fibrillation. The current meta-analysis was conducted using the guidelines established by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). A systematic search was done using databases, including PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library, with no restrictions on language and year of publication. The current meta-analysis included randomized control trials and non-randomized control trials (prospective and retrospective cohort studies) comparing the efficacy and safety of apixaban and warfarin in preventing stroke in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation. The primary efficacy outcome was stroke or systemic embolism while the primary safety outcome was major bleeding events. Overall, nine articles were included in the current meta-analysis with a pooled sample size of 267998 patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation. The administration of apixaban was associated with a significant decrease in stroke or systemic embolism (RR: 0.77, 95% CI: 0.67-0.90) and major bleeding events (RR=0.63, 95% CI: 0.58-0.68) as compared to warfarin. However, no significant difference was reported in all-cause mortality (RR=0.80, 95% CI: 0.30-2.14) between the two groups. The current meta-analysis concluded that apixaban, compared to warfarin in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation showed a reduction in stroke and systemic embolism. Apixaban has also a better safety profile in terms of reduction in overall major bleeding events.