As individuals age or contend with chronic diseases, shifts in body composition often emerge, characterized by a loss of muscle mass and an increase in fat mass, even among those with stable body weight. Both obesity and sarcopenia are key drivers of frailty, disability, and heightened morbidity and mortality. The simultaneous decline in skeletal muscle and accumulation of visceral fat can work synergistically, magnifying their detrimental effects on physical function and metabolic health. Today, dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) is widely recognized as one of the most versatile imaging techniques for assessing not only osteoporosis but also sarcopenia and obesity. Whole-body DEXA facilitates comprehensive analysis, offering detailed insights into fat mass, non-bone lean mass, and bone mineral content at both total and regional levels. DEXA is highly valued for its accuracy, reproducibility, speed, affordability, and low radiation exposure. Furthermore, advancements in DEXA technology and software now allow for precise estimation of visceral adipose tissue. This review underscores the clinical applications of whole-body DEXA, focusing on the use of muscle and fat mass indices in diagnosing low muscle mass, sarcopenia, and sarcopenic obesity, aligned with the latest research and guidelines.

Background: Atherogenic dyslipidemia, which is frequently associated with type 2 diabetes (T2D) and insulin resistance, contributes to the development of vascular complications. Statin therapy is the primary approach to dyslipidemia management in T2D, however, the role of non-statin therapy remains unclear. Ezetimibe reduces cholesterol burden by inhibiting intestinal cholesterol absorption. Fibrates lower triglyceride levels and increase high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) levels via peroxisome proliferator- activated receptor alpha agonism. Therefore, when combined, these drugs effectively lower non-HDL-C levels. Despite this, few clinical trials have specifically targeted non-HDL-C, and the efficacy of triple combination therapies, including statins, ezetimibe, and fibrates, has yet to be determined. Methods: This is a multicenter, prospective, randomized, open-label, active-comparator controlled trial involving 3,958 eligible participants with T2D, cardiovascular risk factors, and elevated non-HDL-C (≥100 mg/dL). Participants, already on moderate-intensity statins, will be randomly assigned to either Ezefeno (ezetimibe/fenofibrate) addition or statin dose-escalation. The primary end point is the development of a composite of major adverse cardiovascular and diabetic microvascular events over 48 months. Conclusion This trial aims to assess whether combining statins, ezetimibe, and fenofibrate is as effective as, or possibly superior to, statin monotherapy intensification in lowering cardiovascular and microvascular disease risk for patients with T2D. This could propose a novel therapeutic approach for managing dyslipidemia in T2D.

Gout is the most common form of arthritis, with the prevalence increasing worldwide. The present treatment guidelines provide recommendations for the appropriate treatment of acute gout, management during the inter-critical period, and prevention of chronic complications. The guidelines were developed based on evidence-based medicine and draft recommendations finalized after expert consensus. These guidelines are designed to provide clinicians with clinical evidence to enable efficient treatment of gout.

Gout is the most common form of arthritis, with the prevalence increasing worldwide. The present treatment guidelines provide recommendations for the appropriate treatment of acute gout, management during the inter-critical period, and prevention of chronic complications. The guidelines were developed based on evidence-based medicine and draft recommendations finalized after expert consensus. These guidelines are designed to provide clinicians with clinical evidence to enable efficient treatment of gout.

Aging and chronic disease are often accompanied by changes in body composition that lead to decreased muscle mass and increased fat mass, even in weight-stable individuals. Both obesity and sarcopenia are important causes of frailty, disability, morbidity, and mortality. Diminished skeletal muscle and expanded visceral fat can act synergistically, which might maximize their effects on physical impairments and metabolic disorders. Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) was regarded as one of the most versatile imaging techniques for evaluation of sarcopenia and obesity as well as osteoporosis. Whole-body DEXA allows total and regional assessment of the three compartments for fat mass, non-bone lean mass, and bone mineral content. Moreover, DEXA is accurate, reproducible, fast, relatively inexpensive, and involves very low radiation dose to the patient. Developments in DEXA equipment and software allow an accurate and differential estimate of visceral adipose tissue. This review summarizes the clinical practical application of whole-body DEXA values, with use of muscle and fat mass indices in the diagnostic workup of low muscle mass, sarcopenia, and sarcopenic obesity according to the most recent studies and guidelines.

Sulfonylureas (SUs) are widely prescribed in the treatment of type 2 diabetes. Despite the availability of several newer agents, SUs still play an important role in glucose-lowering therapy. However, over the last decade, there is a degrowth of older agents (SUs and thiazolidinediones) prescriptions with emergence of newer agents such as dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors, sodium glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists. The role of SUs in modern clinical practice poses ongoing clinical debate. With active marketing of these newer drugs, the concerns regarding hypoglycemia, secondary failure and cardiovascular safety tend to be overstated, especially when considering SUs. Some evidence has suggested that modern SUs (such as gliclazide modified release and glimepiride) have lower hypoglycemia and secondary failure rates and decreased risk of mortality from all-cause and cardiovascular disease compared to conventional SUs in patients with type 2 diabetes. Appropriate clinical judgement coupled with a patient-centered approach is crucial to achieve the best outcome in patients with type 2 diabetes. Modern SUs should also be considered based on their safety, efficacy, and low cost when choosing anti-hyperglycemic agents.

Only few studies have shown the efficacy and safety of glucose-control strategies using the quadruple drug combination. Therefore, the aim of the present study was to investigate the usefulness of the quadruple combination therapy with oral hypoglycemic agents (OHAs) in patients with uncontrolled type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM).

Only few studies have shown the efficacy and safety of glucose-control strategies using the quadruple drug combination. Therefore, the aim of the present study was to investigate the usefulness of the quadruple combination therapy with oral hypoglycemic agents (OHAs) in patients with uncontrolled type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM).

Background: Only few studies have shown the efficacy and safety of glucose-control strategies using the quadruple drug combination. Therefore, the aim of the present study was to investigate the usefulness of the quadruple combination therapy with oral hypoglycemic agents (OHAs) in patients with uncontrolled type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Methods: From March 2014 to December 2018, data of patients with T2DM, who were treated with quadruple hypoglycemic medications for over 12 months in 11 hospitals in South Korea, were reviewed retrospectively. We compared glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) levels before and 12 months after quadruple treatment with OHAs. The safety, maintenance rate, and therapeutic patterns after failure of the quadruple therapy were also evaluated. Results: In total, 357 patients were enrolled for quadruple OHA therapy, and the baseline HbA1c level was 9.0%±1.3% (74.9± 14.1 mmol/mol). After 12 months, 270 patients (75.6%) adhered to the quadruple therapy and HbA1c was significantly reduced from 8.9%±1.2% to 7.8%±1.3% (mean change, –1.1%±1.2%; P<0.001). The number of patients with HbA1c <7% increased significantly from 5 to 68 (P<0.005). In addition, lipid profiles and liver enzyme levels were also improved whereas no changes in body weight. There was no significant safety issue in patients treated with quadruple OHA therapy. Conclusion This study shows the therapeutic efficacy of the quadruple OHA regimen T2DM and demonstrates that it can be an option for the management of T2DM patients who cannot use insulin or reject injectable therapy.

BACKGROUND: There is limited information regarding the optimal third-line therapy for managing type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) that is inadequately controlled using dual combination therapy. This study assessed the efficacy and safety of pioglitazone or glimepiride when added to metformin plus alogliptin treatment for T2DM. METHODS: This multicenter, randomized, active-controlled trial (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02426294) recruited 135 Korean patients with T2DM that was inadequately controlled using metformin plus alogliptin. The patients were then randomized to also receive pioglitazone (15 mg/day) or glimepiride (2 mg/day) for a 26-week period, with dose titration was permitted based on the investigator's judgement. RESULTS: Glycosylated hemoglobin levels exhibited similar significant decreases in both groups during the treatment period (pioglitazone: −0.81%, P<0.001; glimepiride: −1.05%, P<0.001). However, the pioglitazone-treated group exhibited significantly higher high density lipoprotein cholesterol levels (P<0.001) and significantly lower homeostatic model assessment of insulin resistance values (P<0.001). Relative to pioglitazone, adding glimepiride to metformin plus alogliptin markedly increased the risk of hypoglycemia (pioglitazone: 1/69 cases [1.45%], glimepiride: 14/66 cases [21.21%]; P<0.001). CONCLUSION Among patients with T2DM inadequately controlled using metformin plus alogliptin, the addition of pioglitazone provided comparable glycemic control and various benefits (improvements in lipid profiles, insulin resistance, and hypoglycemia risk) relative to the addition of glimepiride.