Diabetes is one of the leading causes of death and disability worldwide, and affects people regardless of country, age group, or sex. Using the most recent evidentiary and analytical framework from the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study (GBD), we produced location-specific, age-specific, and sex-specific estimates of diabetes prevalence and burden from 1990 to 2021, the proportion of type 1 and type 2 diabetes in 2021, the proportion of the type 2 diabetes burden attributable to selected risk factors, and projections of diabetes prevalence through 2050. Estimates of diabetes prevalence and burden were computed in 204 countries and territories, across 25 age groups, for males and females separately and combined; these estimates comprised lost years of healthy life, measured in disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs; defined as the sum of years of life lost [YLLs] and years lived with disability [YLDs]). We used the Cause of Death Ensemble model (CODEm) approach to estimate deaths due to diabetes, incorporating 25 666 location-years of data from vital registration and verbal autopsy reports in separate total (including both type 1 and type 2 diabetes) and type-specific models. Other forms of diabetes, including gestational and monogenic diabetes, were not explicitly modelled. Total and type 1 diabetes prevalence was estimated by use of a Bayesian meta-regression modelling tool, DisMod-MR 2.1, to analyse 1527 location-years of data from the scientific literature, survey microdata, and insurance claims; type 2 diabetes estimates were computed by subtracting type 1 diabetes from total estimates. Mortality and prevalence estimates, along with standard life expectancy and disability weights, were used to calculate YLLs, YLDs, and DALYs. When appropriate, we extrapolated estimates to a hypothetical population with a standardised age structure to allow comparison in populations with different age structures. We used the comparative risk assessment framework to estimate the risk-attributable type 2 diabetes burden for 16 risk factors falling under risk categories including environmental and occupational factors, tobacco use, high alcohol use, high body-mass index (BMI), dietary factors, and low physical activity. Using a regression framework, we forecast type 1 and type 2 diabetes prevalence through 2050 with Socio-demographic Index (SDI) and high BMI as predictors, respectively. In 2021, there were 529 million (95% uncertainty interval [UI] 500-564) people living with diabetes worldwide, and the global age-standardised total diabetes prevalence was 6·1% (5·8-6·5). At the super-region level, the highest age-standardised rates were observed in north Africa and the Middle East (9·3% [8·7-9·9]) and, at the regional level, in Oceania (12·3% [11·5-13·0]). Nationally, Qatar had the world's highest age-specific prevalence of diabetes, at 76·1% (73·1-79·5) in individuals aged 75-79 years. Total diabetes prevalence-especially among older adults-primarily reflects type 2 diabetes, which in 2021 accounted for 96·0% (95·1-96·8) of diabetes cases and 95·4% (94·9-95·9) of diabetes DALYs worldwide. In 2021, 52·2% (25·5-71·8) of global type 2 diabetes DALYs were attributable to high BMI. The contribution of high BMI to type 2 diabetes DALYs rose by 24·3% (18·5-30·4) worldwide between 1990 and 2021. By 2050, more than 1·31 billion (1·22-1·39) people are projected to have diabetes, with expected age-standardised total diabetes prevalence rates greater than 10% in two super-regions: 16·8% (16·1-17·6) in north Africa and the Middle East and 11·3% (10·8-11·9) in Latin America and Caribbean. By 2050, 89 (43·6%) of 204 countries and territories will have an age-standardised rate greater than 10%. Diabetes remains a substantial public health issue. Type 2 diabetes, which makes up the bulk of diabetes cases, is largely preventable and, in some cases, potentially reversible if identified and managed early in the disease course. However, all evidence indicates that diabetes prevalence is increasing worldwide, primarily due to a rise in obesity caused by multiple factors. Preventing and controlling type 2 diabetes remains an ongoing challenge. It is essential to better understand disparities in risk factor profiles and diabetes burden across populations, to inform strategies to successfully control diabetes risk factors within the context of multiple and complex drivers. Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

Peripheral artery disease is a growing public health problem. We aimed to estimate the global disease burden of peripheral artery disease, its risk factors, and temporospatial trends to inform policy and public measures. Data on peripheral artery disease were modelled using the Global Burden of Disease, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study (GBD) 2019 database. Prevalence, disability-adjusted life years (DALYs), and mortality estimates of peripheral artery disease were extracted from GBD 2019. Total DALYs and age-standardised DALY rate of peripheral artery disease attributed to modifiable risk factors were also assessed. In 2019, the number of people aged 40 years and older with peripheral artery disease was 113 million (95% uncertainty interval [UI] 99·2-128·4), with a global prevalence of 1·52% (95% UI 1·33-1·72), of which 42·6% was in countries with low to middle Socio-demographic Index (SDI). The global prevalence of peripheral artery disease was higher in older people, (14·91% [12·41-17·87] in those aged 80-84 years), and was generally higher in females than in males. Globally, the total number of DALYs attributable to modifiable risk factors in 2019 accounted for 69·4% (64·2-74·3) of total peripheral artery disease DALYs. The prevalence of peripheral artery disease was highest in countries with high SDI and lowest in countries with low SDI, whereas DALY and mortality rates showed U-shaped curves, with the highest burden in the high and low SDI quintiles. The total number of people with peripheral artery disease has increased globally from 1990 to 2019. Despite the lower prevalence of peripheral artery disease in males and low-income countries, these groups showed similar DALY rates to females and higher-income countries, highlighting disproportionate burden in these groups. Modifiable risk factors were responsible for around 70% of the global peripheral artery disease burden. Public measures could mitigate the burden of peripheral artery disease by modifying risk factors. Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

Background: Insulin resistance (IR) is a major metabolic disorder observed in heart failure (HF) and is tightly associated with patients’ poor prognosis. The triglyceride-glucose index (TyG) has been proposed as a surrogate marker of IR in HF. Yet, whether TyG is a reliable clinical marker is still under debate. Hence, we aimed to respond to this relevant question via a systematic review and meta-analysis of existing studies. Methods: A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Web of Science to find studies investigating the TyG index in patients with HF or its association with the incidence of HF. Adjusted hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were pooled through random-effect meta-analysis. HRs were calculated using TyG as a continuous variable (1 unit increase) and by comparing the group with the highest TyG to the lowest TyG group. Results: Thirty studies, involving 772,809 participants, were included in this systematic review. Meta-analysis of seven studies comparing the highest-TyG to the lowest-TyG group showed a significantly increased risk of HF in the former group (HR 1.21, 95% CI 1.14 to 1.29, P < 0.01). The same result was found when pooling the HRs for a one-unit increase in the TyG index (HR 1.17, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.26). Similarly, a more elevated TyG index was associated with a higher incidence of HF in patients with type 2 diabetes or coronary artery disease. Additionally, the incidence of adverse events (readmission and mortality) in patients with HF was associated with TyG. Conclusion: Our findings support the TyG index as a valuable marker to assess the risk of HF incidence in different populations and as a prognostic marker in patients with HF. Further studies should be conducted to confirm these associations and investigate the clinical utility of the TyG index.

The 2022 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association/Heart Failure Society of America (ACC/AHA/HFSA) and the 2021 European Society of Cardiology (ESC) both provide evidence-based guides for the diagnosis and treatment of heart failure (HF). In this review, we aimed to compare recommendations suggested by these guidelines highlighting the differences and latest evidence mentioned in each of the guidelines. While the staging of HF depends on left ventricular ejection fraction, the Universal Definition of HF, suggested in 2021, is described in 2022 ACC/AHA/HFSA guidelines. Both guidelines recommend invasive and non-invasive tests to diagnose. Despite being identical in the backbone, some differences exist in medical therapy and devices, which can be partially attributed to the recent trials published that are presented in the American guidelines. The recommendation of implantable cardioverter defibrillator for prevention in HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) patients, made by ACC/AHA/HFSA guidelines, is among the bold differences. It seems that ACC/AHA/HFSA guidelines emphasize the quality of life, cost-effectiveness, and optimization of care given to patients. On the other hand, the ESC guidelines provide recommendations for certain comorbidities. This comparison can guide clinicians in choosing the proper approach for their own settings and the writing committees in addressing the differences in order to have better consistency in future guidelines.

Background: Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) has a bidirectional association with metabolic syndrome, and insulin resistance (IR). The triglyceride-glucose (TyG) index could be a simply calculated marker of IR in OSA. However, its clinical application appears still limited. Hence, this systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to respond to this question by analyzing all the existing studies showing an association between OSA and the TyG index.Methods: Four online databases, including PubMed, Scopus, the Web of Science, and Embase were searched for studies evaluating the TyG index in OSA. After screening and data extraction, a random-effect meta-analysis was performed to compare the TyG index in OSA patients vs. healthy controls by calculating standardized mean difference (SMD) and 95% confidence interval (CI) and pooling the area under the curves (AUCs) for diagnosis of OSA based on this index.Results: Ten studies involving 16,726 individuals were included in the current systematic review. Meta-analysis indicated that there was a significantly higher TyG index in patients with OSA, compared with the healthy controls (SMD 0.856, 95% CI 0.579 to 1.132,P < 0.001). Also, TyG had a diagnostic ability for OSA representing a pooled AUC of 0.681 (95% CI 0.627 to 0.735). However, based on the two studies’ findings, no difference between different severities of OSA was observed. Finally, our data showed that the TyG index is a good potential predictor of adverse outcomes in these patients.Conclusion: Our study revealed that the TyG index is an easy-to-measure marker of IR for assessing OSA, both in diagnosis and prognosis. Our study supports its implementation in routine practice to help clinicians in decision-making and patient stratification.