The introduction of continuous glucose monitoring inaugurated a new era in clinical practice by shifting the characterization of glycemic control from HbA1c to novel metrics. The one that gained widespread attention over the past decades was glycemic variability (GV), which typically refers to peaks and nadirs of blood glucose measured over a given time interval. GV can be dichotomized into two main categories: short-term and long-term. Short-term GV reflects within-day and between-day glycemic oscillations, and its contribution to diabetic complications remains an enigma. In this review, we summarize the available data about short-term GV and its possible association with both microvascular and macrovascular complications, evaluating different pathogenic mechanisms and demonstrating nonpharmaceutical, as well as pharmaceutical, therapeutic interventions.

Over the last few decades, metabolic syndrome coexisting with cardiovascular disease has evolved into a pandemic, making the need for more food-oriented therapeutic approaches and a redefinition of lifestyle imperative, with the Mediterranean diet being the linchpin of this effort. Extra virgin olive oil (EVOO), the key pillar of the Mediterranean diet and one of the most notorious edible oils worldwide, owes its popularity not only to its characteristic aromas and taste but mainly to a series of beneficial health attributes including anti-diabetic, hypolipidemic, anti-hypertensive and anti-obesity actions. In this narrative review, we aimed to illustrate and enlighten EVOO’s metabolic properties through a pathogenetic approach, investigating its potential role in metabolic and cardiovascular health.

Background/Objectives: Type 2 diabetes (T2D) and chronic kidney disease (CKD) frequently coexist in older adults. Sodium–glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) are recommended for renal and heart protection, yet their use in routine care remains inconsistent. We aimed to investigate differences in SGLT2i prescribing between regional and university hospital settings and assess whether such disparities persist after accounting for patient characteristics. Methods: In this retrospective analysis, patients were stratified by follow-up site (regional vs. university hospital). The primary outcome was SGLT2i use. Logistic regression models were adjusted for strong determinants of prescribing decisions, including age, sex, hypertension, dyslipidemia, heart failure, and estimated glomerular filtration rate. We tested the robustness of the results using additional analyses, including exclusion of frail patients and adjustment with propensity score methods, such as matching and inverse probability weighting (IPTW). Results: The study included 135 patients, of whom 80 were followed at the regional hospital and 55 at the university hospital. SGLT2i use was significantly lower in the regional setting (27.5% vs. 63.6%, p < 0.001). In adjusted models, university follow-up remained strongly associated with SGLT2i prescription [odds ratio 3.60, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.61–8.03, p = 0.0018]. IPTW demonstrated 4.40-fold higher odds of SGLT2i use in the university hospital setting (95% CI 2.07–9.36, p < 0.001). Conclusions: These findings indicate that the lower use of SGLT2i among older adults with T2D and CKD followed in regional hospitals may reflect patterns consistent with clinical inertia, underscoring the importance of efforts to promote equitable and guideline-aligned prescribing practices across levels of care.

Background/Objectives: Current guidelines for the management of type 2 diabetes (T2D) strongly recommend the use of sodium–glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2is) in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) to alleviate cardiorenal risk. However, the implementation of this guidance in daily practice remains limited. In a real-world setting, we evaluated the frequency of SGLT2i use in elderly people with T2D and CKD and compared patient profiles between SGLT2i users and non-users. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed the medical records of individuals over 65 years of age followed in outpatient internal medicine clinics in Greece. Demographic and laboratory parameters, comorbidity profiles, and medication use were recorded and compared between the SGLT2i and non-SGLT2i groups. Results: The analysis included 135 patients with T2D and CKD, of whom the majority (57.8%) did not receive SGLT2i treatment. The patients in the SGLT2i group were younger (p = 0.006), had higher creatinine (p = 0.001) and hemoglobin (p = 0.001) values, and lower levels of uric acid (p = 0.025) than the participants not treated with SGLT2is. Heart failure rates were similar between the groups (p = 0.252). There was no difference in the use of renin–angiotensin–aldosterone system inhibitors (p = 0.210); in contrast, treatment with glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists was more frequent in the group receiving SGLT2is compared to the group not treated with gliflozins (p = 0.002). Conclusions: Real-world data confirm the benefits of SGLT2i treatment for elderly people with T2D and CKD. However, our findings indicate that the use of gliflozins in this population of patients remains suboptimal, highlighting the need for greater vigilance among prescribers to align with existing guidelines.