Methods: We systematically searched PubMed, EMBASE and Web of Science for studies published from their starting dates to Aug 7, 2018. The sex-specific hazard ratios (HRs) and their pooled ratio (women vs men) of all-cause and CHD mortality associated with type 2 diabetes were obtained through an inverse variance-weighted random-effects meta-analysis. Subgroup analyses were used to explore the potential sources of heterogeneity.
Results: The 35 analyzed prospective cohort studies included 2 314 292 individuals, among whom 254 038 all-cause deaths occurred. The pooled women vs men ratio of the HRs for all-cause and CHD mortality were 1.17 (95% CI: 1.12-1.23, I2 = 81.6%) and 1.97 (95% CI: 1.49-2.61, I2 = 86.4%), respectively. The pooled estimate of the HR for all-cause mortality was approximately 1.30 in articles in which the duration of follow-up was longer than 10 years and 1.10 in articles in which the duration of follow-up was less than 10 years. The pooled HRs for all-cause mortality in patients with type 2 diabetes was 2.33 (95% CI: 2.02-2.69) in women and 1.91 (95% CI: 1.72-2.12) in men, compared with their healthy counterparts.
Conclusions: The effect of diabetes on all-cause and CHD mortality is approximately 17 and 97% greater, respectively, for women than for men.
DESIGN: In the present SCOT-PA survey, we have investigated the diversity of approaches utilized for each diagnostic step in different expert centers through a survey using Google questionnaires. A total of 33 centers from 3 continents participated.
RESULTS: We demonstrated a prominent diversity in the conditions of blood sampling, assay methods for aldosterone and renin, and the methods and diagnostic cutoff for screening and confirmatory tests. The most standard measures were modification of antihypertensive medication and sitting posture for blood sampling, measurement of plasma aldosterone concentration (PAC) and active renin concentration by chemiluminescence enzyme immunoassay, a combination of aldosterone-to-renin ratio with PAC as an index for screening, and saline infusion test in a seated position for confirmatory testing. The cutoff values for screening and confirmatory testing showed significant variation among centers.
CONCLUSIONS: Diversity of the diagnostic steps may lead to an inconsistent diagnosis of PA among centers and limit comparison of evidence for PA between different centers. We expect the impact of this diversity to be most prominent in patients with mild PA. The survey raises 2 issues: the need for standardization of the diagnostic process and revisiting the concept of mild PA. Further standardization of the diagnostic process/criteria will improve the quality of evidence and management of patients with PA.