Efficacy and Safety of Sodium-Glucose Cotransporter-2 Inhibitors in Patients With Refractory Cirrhotic Ascites and Diabetes: Scoping Review Protocol
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Hepatic cirrhosis is a complex condition leading to multiple complications, including ascites, hepatic encephalopathy, bleeding varices, and eventually liver failure. Patients with diabetes mellitus or insulin resistance are more likely to fail treatment, leading to the worsening of hepatic fibrosis. Sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitors are a new class of drugs with the potential for use in cirrhotic ascites. This scoping review will focus on the response of the addition of SGLT2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) on refractory ascites. Objective: The objective of this scoping review is to understand the extent and type of evidence in relation to the response of the addition of SGLT2i on refractory ascites in patients with diabetes mellitus or insulin resistance. Methods: A comprehensive literature search will be conducted across five databases using variations of the keywords "Sodium-glucose Cotransporter-2 Inhibitors" and "ascites" to identify original studies published from inception through December 2023. The search will be limited to English-language human studies evaluating the efficacy of SGLT2 inhibitors, excluding studies focused on other drugs or conducted in animal models. This review will include studies involving patients over 21 years of age with cirrhotic ascites and will exclude studies involving noncirrhotic causes. Only studies containing original patient data will be considered, regardless of health care setting, to ensure clinical relevance and consistency in interpretation. Results: The results of this scoping review will offer a comprehensive overview of the available evidence on the use of SGLT2i in the management of cirrhotic ascites. This review will summarize key study characteristics, patient populations, interventions, and outcomes, and identify existing knowledge gaps and research priorities. Findings will be presented narratively and in tabular format to facilitate interpretation and comparison. The review process began with protocol development and registration in February 2025. A structured literature search and database screening will follow, continuing through June. Title and abstract screening, along with full-text review and eligibility assessment, will be completed by July 2025. Data extraction and charting will take place in July, with synthesis and analysis of findings occurring through August. Manuscript drafting will begin in August, and the final review and submission of the completed scoping review are anticipated by September 2025. Conclusions: By systematically identifying and summarizing original studies that assess the efficacy of SGLT2i in this unique patient population, the review will provide insight into the therapeutic potential of this drug class beyond glycemic control. It will also highlight the strengths and limitations of the existing literature, identify key knowledge gaps, and suggest directions for future research. Ultimately, this review may support the rationale for further clinical investigation and the development of targeted therapies for a high-risk group of patients with limited treatment options.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.044 | 0.052 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.012 | 0.015 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.013 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.040 | 0.005 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".