body fluid volume
Empagliflozin → body fluid volume
Empagliflozin → body fluid volume
Evidence profile
Key finding
A significant difference in body weight change was observed (empagliflozin, −0.58 [95%CI: -1.60, 0.43] kg; glimepiride, 1.20 [95%CI: 0.15, 2.26] kg; P = 0.02)
This study compared the effects of empagliflozin and glimepiride on endothelial function in individuals with type 2 diabetes, finding no significant differences in flow-mediated dilation but notable differences in body weight and fluid volume.
Evidence strength
Moderate confidence
Study type
RCTs
Follow-up
Long-Term (1–5 y)
Quick read
The essential study design details in one scan.
Population
Young Adult (19–39), Middle Aged (40-64), Male, Female, Asia-Pacific (APAC), with T2 Diabetes
Intervention
Empagliflozin, Glimepiride
Study type
RCTs
Follow-up
Long-Term (1–5 y)
Primary outcome
flow-mediated dilation (ΔFMDs)
Comparator
Glimepiride group
Plain-language summary
A plain-language read of the study's main message and where it applies.
Study focus
This study compared the effects of empagliflozin and glimepiride on endothelial function in individuals with type 2 diabetes, finding no significant differences in flow-mediated dilation but notable differences in body weight and fluid volume.
Understanding the differential effects of diabetes medications like empagliflozin and glimepiride is crucial for optimizing treatment strategies. The significant weight loss and fluid reduction associated with empagliflozin may improve cardiovascular health and overall management of type 2 diabetes, highlighting its potential as a preferred treatment option.
The study's sample size may limit the generalizability of the findings. The trial duration may not capture long-term effects of the medications. Potential confounding factors were not fully controlled for.
Published in
Publication details and source links for this paper.
Haruka T, Yoshinobu K, Kohei I, et al. Empagliflozin and Glimepiride Effects on Endothelial Function in Type 2 Diabetes. PLOS ONE. 2022;17(2):e0262831. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0262831
Save this study and add notes to your research library.
No significant differences in flow-mediated dilation were observed (empagliflozin: −0.11%; glimepiride: −0.34%; P = 0.73).
Empagliflozin resulted in a significant weight reduction of −0.58 kg compared to a weight increase of 1.20 kg with glimepiride (P = 0.02).
Body fluid volume significantly decreased by −0.33 L after empagliflozin treatment (P = 0.03).
Evidence network
Understand where this research contributes within the broader evidence network.
This study contributes evidence to Empagliflozin, Glimepiride and Body weight, Brachial artery flow-mediated dilation (FMD), HbA1c, and 1 more.
This study contributes evidence to
Primary intervention
Empagliflozin
Primary outcomes
Primary intervention
Primary outcomes
Intervention and outcome relationships this study adds to the evidence network.
Editorial context
See why this paper is useful beyond its individual results.
Evidence network role
This section describes how the study fits into the current evidence network. It does not determine whether an intervention works on its own.
4
Related topics
8
Evidence pairs
300
Related studies
Evidence topic
Contributes evidence
Evidence topic
Contributes evidence
Evidence topic
Contributes evidence
Evidence topic
Contributes evidence
Core evidence
The primary outcomes reported in this study.
Empagliflozin → body fluid volume
Empagliflozin → body fluid volume
Evidence profile
Empagliflozin → Body weight
Empagliflozin → Body weight
Evidence profile
Empagliflozin → Brachial artery flow-mediated dilation (FMD)
Empagliflozin → Brachial artery flow-mediated dilation (FMD)
Evidence profile
Empagliflozin → HbA1c
Empagliflozin → HbA1c
Evidence profile
Glimepiride → body fluid volume
Glimepiride → body fluid volume
Evidence profile
Glimepiride → Body weight
Glimepiride → Body weight
Evidence profile
Glimepiride → Brachial artery flow-mediated dilation (FMD)
Glimepiride → Brachial artery flow-mediated dilation (FMD)
Evidence profile
Glimepiride → HbA1c
Glimepiride → HbA1c
Evidence profile
Create a free account to access effectiveness ratings, evidence strength and depth scores, consistency analysis, and direct links to all supporting studies.
Create a free account to unlock the bias score, detailed effectiveness analysis, and clinical outcomes for this study.
Explore related studies, evidence collections, and research questions.
Relationships organized using the Dediabetes Evidence Intelligence™ framework.
This study contributes to evidence on SGLT2 Inhibitors and body fluid volume, SGLT2 Inhibitors and Body Weight.
This study contributes to the evidence on the following intervention-outcome relationships.
Curated evidence collections and hubs this study is part of.
All studies measuring Body Weight
Measures Body Weight as a key outcome.
All studies measuring body fluid volume
Measures body fluid volume as a key outcome.
All studies on SGLT2 Inhibitors
Contributes to SGLT2 Inhibitors evidence base.
Jump to pre-filtered views in the evidence archive.
1 results
2 results
1 results
1 results
2 results
Generated from the study's connected evidence using Evidence Intelligence™.
SGLT2 Inhibitors appears to improve Cardiovascular Outcomes.
ConsensusScore™: Consistency cannot yet be determined from the available evidence.
Ranked evidence signals
Brachial artery flow-mediated dilation (FMD)
EvidenceScore™ Limited | EvidenceScore™ 35.4 | neutral | ConsensusScore™ Unclear | 1 study
Why this answer: This answer is based on 5 supporting studies and existing graph evidence signals.
Limitations
SGLT2 Inhibitors may improve HbA1c.
ConsensusScore™: Results are consistent across studies.
Ranked evidence signals
HbA1c
EvidenceScore™ Emerging | EvidenceScore™ 41.7 | neutral | ConsensusScore™ Generally Consistent | 1 study
Why this answer: This answer is based on 9 supporting studies with consistent results and a positive effect signal.
Limitations
SGLT2 Inhibitors may improve Body Weight.
ConsensusScore™: Results are consistent across studies.
Ranked evidence signals
Body weight
EvidenceScore™ Emerging | EvidenceScore™ 48.4 | moderate positive | ConsensusScore™ Consistent | 1 study
Why this answer: This answer is based on 3 supporting studies with consistent results and a positive effect signal.
Limitations
Current evidence does not show a clear benefit of Sulfonylureas for HbA1c.
ConsensusScore™: Results are mixed and should be interpreted cautiously.
Ranked evidence signals
HbA1c
EvidenceScore™ Limited | EvidenceScore™ 39.9 | neutral | ConsensusScore™ Mixed | 1 study
Why this answer: This answer is cautious because the available studies report mixed findings.
Limitations
Next steps
Choose a next path through related evidence topics, archive views, and research summaries.
Follow the topics this study contributes to.
Open broader archive views for this relationship.
Read related research summaries.
Focused on evidence, not advertising.
Your data is always protected.
New studies added every day.