• <tr id="yyy80"></tr>
  • <sup id="yyy80"></sup>
  • <tfoot id="yyy80"><noscript id="yyy80"></noscript></tfoot>
  • 99热精品在线国产_美女午夜性视频免费_国产精品国产高清国产av_av欧美777_自拍偷自拍亚洲精品老妇_亚洲熟女精品中文字幕_www日本黄色视频网_国产精品野战在线观看 ?

    Effects of lncretin-based Therapies on Weight-related lndicators among Patients with Type 2 Diabetes: ANetwork Meta-analysis*

    2020-02-29 05:47:10XULuYUShuQingGAOLeHUANGYiWUShanShanYANGJunSUNYiXinYANGZhiRongCHAISanBaoZHANGYuanJILiNongSUNFengandZHANSiYan
    Biomedical and Environmental Sciences 2020年1期

    XU Lu, YU Shu Qing, GAO Le, HUANG Yi, WU Shan Shan, YANG Jun, SUN Yi Xin,YANG Zhi Rong, CHAI San Bao, ZHANG Yuan, JI Li Nong, SUN Feng,#, and ZHAN Si Yan,#

    1. Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Public Health, Peking University, Beijing 100191, China;2. Department of Mathematics and Statistics, University of Maryland Baltimore County, Baltimore MD 21250,Maryland, USA; 3. National Clinical Research Center of Digestive Diseases, Beijing Friendship Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing 100050, China; 4. The Primary Care Unit, School of Clinical Medicine, University of Cambridge, Cambridge CB2 1TN, UK; 5. Department of Endocrinology and Metabolism, Peking University International Hospital, Beijing 102206, China; 6. Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, McMaster University, Hamilton L8S 4L8, Ontario, Canada; 7. Department of Endocrinology and Metabolism, Peking University People’s Hospital, Beijing 100044, China

    Abstract

    Objective To evaluate the effects of incretin-based therapies on body weight as the primary outcome,as well as on body mass index (BMI) and waist circumference (WC) as secondary outcomes.

    Methods Databases including Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and clinicaltrials.gov (www.clinicaltrials.gov) were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Standard pairwise meta-analysis and network meta-analysis (NMA) were both carried out. The risk of bias (ROB) tool recommended by the Cochrane handbook was used to assess the quality of studies. Subgroup analysis, sensitivity analysis,meta-regression, and quality evaluation based on the Grading of Recommendations Assessment,Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) were also performed.

    Results A total of 292 trials were included in this study. Compared with placebo, dipeptidyl-peptidase IV inhibitors (DPP-4Is) increased weight slightly by 0.31 kg [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.05, 0.58] and had negligible effects on BMI and WC. Compared with placebo, glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) lowered weight, BMI, and WC by ?1.34 kg (95% CI: ?1.60, ?1.09), ?1.10 kg/m2 (95%CI: ?1.42, ?0.78), and ?1.28 cm (95% CI: ?1.69, ?0.86), respectively.

    Conclusion GLP-1 RAs were more effective than DPP-4Is in lowering the three indicators. Overall, the effects of GLP-1 RAs on weight, BMI, and WC were favorable.

    Key words: Body mass index; Body weight; Diabetes mellitus; Dipeptidyl-peptidase IV inhibitors;Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists; Network meta-analysis; Waist circumference

    INTRODUCTION

    Patients with type 2 diabetes (T2DM)constitute the largest proportion (> 85%)of all patients with diabetes[1]. In 2035, the number of patients with T2DM is expected to increase to 592 million[2], which has aroused widespread concern about related prevention and treatment.

    Weight management, which is a key step in T2DM prevention and treatment, has a great impact on blood glucose control[3]. Failed weight management can lead to poor glycemic control. In addition, metabolic syndrome, a widely recognized risk factor for cardiovascular diseases, is more common among patients with obesity and T2DM than among those with T2DM only[4,5].

    Currently, a new class of incretin-based antidiabetic drugs, including glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) and dipeptidyl-peptidase IV inhibitors (DPP-4Is), have been introduced into clinical practice. These incretin-based drugs can effectively lower blood glucose without raising the risk of hypoglycemia.Moreover, they can help control body weight,reduce blood pressure, and alleviate inflammation[6-8]. Glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) can reduce postprandial blood glucose by stimulating insulin secretion and suppressing glucagon secretion in a glucose-dependent manner[9]. However, GLP-1 in blood will be rapidly inactivated by dipeptidyl peptidase-4(DPP-4) or cleared by kidney, resulting in the short half-life of GLP-1[10]. Thus, GLP-1 RAs and DPP-4Is were manufactured to solve this problem[11].

    To date, several randomized controlled trials(RCTs) have been conducted to explore the effects of incretin-based therapies on weight, body mass index(BMI), and waist circumference (WC) among patients with T2DM[12-15], including the well-known Helping Evaluate Exenatide in Patients with Diabetes Compared with Long-acting Insulin (HEELA) study[16].The HEELA study reported that exenatide causes less weight gain in patients with overweight and T2DM,compared with long-acting insulin with similar glycemic control efficacy. Rosenstock, et al.[17]discovered that an additional alogliptin treatment in consistent insulin therapy with or without metformin could help achieve better glycemic control in patients with T2DM, while not increasing weight gain. However, almost no RCTs were specially designed for evaluating BMI[18-20]and WC[21-23]. In fact, these parameters were provided as supplementary results in previous studies. Although most of existing RCTs reported that incretin-based agents can lower weight, BMI, or WC, there are still several RCTs with opposite results. Thus, a metaanalysis on these topics is essential. Most of related meta-analyses[24-29]were standard pairwise metaanalyses, although there are several network metaanalyses (NMAs) as well. One study[30]tried to evaluate the effect of antidiabetic drugs added to metformin on body weight, and the original studies included were published before December 2011.Therefore, the results need to be updated,considering the growing number of trials. In 2015,our team published two NMAs in this area[31,32].However, the two previous studies only focused on GLP-1 RAs. Additionally, most of previous metaanalyses focused on the effects of GLP-1 RAs on weight. There have been few meta-analyses investigating DPP-4Is as well as outcomes including BMI and WC. Furthermore, the effects of GLP-1 RAs and DPP-4Is on weight-related indicators are expected to be clarified.

    This study adopted NMA to overcome the drawbacks of previous studies. Unlike in a standard pairwise meta-analysis, multiple treatments can be compared in a single NMA by combing direct and indirect evidence. The indirect evidence is formed by common comparators[33]. This study also included body weight, BMI, and WC as outcomes to allow an overall analysis of the effects of incretin-based therapies on indicators of overweightness and obesity, thereby providing more evidence and references for clinical decision-making.

    MATERIALS AND METHODS

    This study was registered on the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews(PROSPERO), number CRD42018115756. This NMA was reported based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses(PRISMA) for NMA, and the specific items are provided in Supplementary Files available in www.besjournal.com.

    Search Strategy

    Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and clinicaltrials.gov (www.clinicaltrials.gov) were searched from inception to June 23, 2017. RCTs associated with GLP-1 RAs and DPP-4Is were retrieved. The specific search strategy is provided in Supplementary Files.

    Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria

    Only RCTs with complete results on the effects of incretin-based therapies (GLP-1 RAs and DPP-4Is) on weight, BMI, or WC compared with other hypoglycemics or placebo were included. We excluded ongoing, unfinished, or suspended trials.Four reviewers (SSW, JY, LG, and FS) assessed the studies in duplicate.

    Data Extraction and Quality Evaluation

    The Aggregate Data Drug Information System(ADDIS) v1.16.5 was adopted to collect information regarding trial (author, publication year, sample size,trial duration, and types of intervention and control),population characteristics (age, diabetes duration,background therapy, gender, fasting plasma glucose,and baseline level of HbA1c), reported outcomes(changes in weight, BMI, and WC in each treatment group), and methodology.

    We used the risk of bias (ROB) tool recommended by the Cochrane handbook to evaluate the quality of included studies. The items considered are as follows: 1) random sequence generation; 2)allocation concealment; 3) blinding of participants and personnel; 4) blinding of outcome assessment;5) complete outcome data; 6) selective reporting; 7)company funding. The possible answers to items 1-5 are ‘yes’ (representing low risk), ‘no’ (representing high risk), or ‘unclear’ (representing unclear risk). For item 6, ‘yes’ represented high risk, ‘no’ represented low risk, and ‘unclear’ represented unclear risk.Furthermore, grading of recommendation assessment, development, and evaluation (GRADE),which includes five aspects (study limitation,indirectness, inconsistency, imprecision, and publication bias), was utilized to evaluate the quality of evidence contributing to each comparison and the overall ranking of treatment[34].

    Data extraction was conducted by four investigators (SSW, JY, LG, and FS) in duplicate.

    Statistical Analysis

    Standard Pairwise Meta-analysis The DerSimonian-Laird random effects model was utilized to carry out standard pairwise meta-analysis. Weighted mean differences (WMDs) of the three outcomes with 95%confidence intervals (CIs) were computed for measuring effects. I2statistic reflects the proportion of between-study heterogeneity in the overall variation.

    Network Meta-analysis A random-effects NMA within a frequentist framework[35]was performed to achieve the combined results in the form of WMDs with 95% CIs. To obtain a treatment hierarchy, we used surface under the cumulative ranking curve(SUCRA)[36]and mean ranks. SUCRA is a percentage indicating the probability of a treatment’s effectiveness ranking first without uncertainty. In this study, it is equivalent to 1 if the treatment is certain to be the best and 0 if it is certain to be the worst. The larger the SUCRA is, the lower the rank is.Subgroup analysis (grouping by age, years of T2DM,hemoglobin A1c level (HbA1c%), trial duration,sample size, and sponsorship), sensitivity analysis (by excluding studies with no allocation concealment or studies with a sample size of less than 50), as well as univariate and multivariate meta-regressions (by age, HbA1c%, and years of T2DM) were carried out.In NMA, sensitivity analysis is used to test the robustness of results by excluding studies that may bring inconsistency[33], which is different from traditional sensitivity analysis (leaving one study out at each time). Given that NMA involves multiple treatment comparison, traditional sensitivity analysis is not applicable in NMA, but it can be conducted in standard pairwise meta-analysis. In univariate metaregressions, every variate is added to the model separately each time, whereas in multivariate metaregression, all variates are added to the model at one time. We conducted NMA on the condition that direct and indirect comparisons were sufficiently similar. We detected the existence of inconsistency locally in all triangular or quadratic loops in the NMA model by the loop-specific approach[37-39].Discrepancy between the two types of evidence and their 95% CIs were used to detect inconsistency in all loops. We defined inconsistency as a difference between direct and indirect evidence with a 95% CI excluding 0. Additionally, we adopted the nodesplitting model[40]to detect a potential inconsistency between direct and indirect evidence. I2statistic was used to assess the extent of heterogeneity of all direct comparisons in different studies. We analyzed global heterogeneity (using I2statistic) and global inconsistency (using Q statistic) by using the R 3.5.0‘netmeta’ package[41]. Predictive interval plots were also used to evaluate global heterogeneity.

    In addition, we made comparison-adjusted funnel plots[42]to assess potential publication bias. If there were no publication biases, scatters of the same color should be distributed symmetrically on both sides of the longitudinal axis.

    A simple linear regression line was attached to the funnel plot to make it easier to visually distinguish publication bias between small and large studies.

    All statistical analyses were conducted by STATA 14.0 (pairwise meta-analysis, NMA, I2calculations,estimation of inconsistency, SUCRA graphs, funnel plots, model fit and meta-regressions) and R 3.5.0(global heterogeneity and global inconsistency).

    RESULTS

    Study Characteristics and Evidence Network

    A total of 292 RCTs were selected for this study,262, 91, and 56 of which were related to weight,BMI, and WC, respectively. The whole inclusion and exclusion processes are shown in Figure 1. All trial durations were longer than 4 weeks except for one study that lasted for 2.4 weeks, with 24 weeks being the longest duration. The mean ages of patients in these trials were between 28.9 and 74.2 years old. The boxplots in Supplementary Files show the distribution of baseline characteristics in these trials.

    Nine treatments were involved in this study,including GLP-1 RAs, DPP-4Is, insulin, metformin(Met), sodium-dependent glucose transporters 2(SGLT-2), sulfonylurea (SU), thiazolidinedione (TZD),α-glycosidase inhibitor (a-Glu), and placebo. Most of the studies were two-arm (n = 276), and the others were three-arm (n = 13) and four-arm (n = 2). The plots of evidence structures are provided in Figure 2.According to the contribution plots (Supplementary Files), DPP-4Is versus placebo and GLP-1 RAs versus placebo were the two most contributing direct comparisons in the entire network.

    Quality Evaluation

    Regarding random sequence generation, 227 studies were at low risk and there was no study at high risk. Regarding allocation concealment, there were 102, 118, and 71 studies at high, low, and unclear risk, respectively. Regarding blinding of participants and personnel, double-blind trials and open-label trials accounted for 46.39% and 35.05%of all studies, respectively. As for blinding of outcome assessment, 102 trials were at high risk and 183 trials were at low risk. A total of 269 trials were at low risk in terms of complete outcome data. In addition, 260 trials were at low risk in terms of selective reporting. Among all trials, 68.38% were sponsored by companies.

    Results of Standard Pairwise Meta-analysis

    Weight The results of standard pairwise metaanalysis on weight are shown in Figure 3. Compared with placebo, GLP-1 RAs and SGLT-2 reduced weight by ?1.04 kg (95% CI: ?1.14, ?0.95) and ?2.23 kg (95%CI: ?2.56, ?1.89), respectively. Compared with placebo, traditional hypoglycemic drugs, including insulin, SU, and TZD, increased weight by 2.02 kg(95% CI: 1.02, 3.02), 2.44 kg (95% CI: 1.81, 3.08), and 2.46 kg (95% CI: 1.81, 3.11), respectively. Compared with Met, SGLT-2, and a-Glu, DPP-4Is caused weight gain by 2.68 kg (95% CI: 2.59, 2.76), 2.61 kg (95% CI:2.30, 2.91), and 0.91 kg (95% CI: 0.71, 1.12),respectively. Compared with other traditional hypoglycemic drugs, including Insulin, SU, and TZD,DPP-4Is significantly decreased weight by ?1.61 kg(95% CI: ?2.18, ?1.04) to ?1.44 kg (95% CI: ?1.69,?1.19). GLP-1 RAs were observed to reduce weight significantly versus insulin (?3.35 kg, 95% CI: ?3.47,?3.24), SU (?3.88 kg, 95% CI: ?3.93, ?3.84), and TZD(?3.35 kg, 95% CI: ?3.63, ?3.06). Compared with GLP-1 RAs, DPP-4Is increased weight by 1.72 kg (95% CI:1.53, 1.92).

    BMI GLP-1 RAs decreased BMI by –0.85 kg/m2(95% CI: ?0.98, ?0.73) compared with placebo(Figure 3). DPP-4Is increased BMI significantly versus Met (0.28 kg/m2, 95% CI: 0.02, 0.55) and a-Glu (0.34 kg/m2, 95% CI: 0.22, 0.47). DPP-4Is reduced BMI,compared with SU (?0.42 kg/m2, 95% CI: ?0.60,?0.24) and TZD (?0.76 kg/m2, 95% CI: ?0.99, ?0.53).Compared with traditional hypoglycemic drugs except a-Glu, GLP-1 RAs effectively reduced BMI by?1.40 kg/m2(95% CI: ?1.47, ?1.32) to ?0.24 kg/m2(95% CI: ?0.46, ?0.02). Compared with GLP-1 RAs,DPP-4Is increased BMI by 1.29 kg/m2(95% CI: 1.13,1.45).

    WC Compared with placebo, DPP-4Is increased WC by 0.36 cm (95% CI: 0.01, 0.72), whereas GLP-1 RAs and SGLT-2 decreased WC by ?1.30 cm (95% CI:?1.64, ?0.97) and ?1.60 cm (95% CI: ?2.22, ?0.98),respectively (Figure 3). DPP-4Is increased WC by 1.90 cm (95% CI: 1.24, 2.56) compared with SGLT-2, and decreased WC by ?1.88 cm (95% CI: ?2.62, ?1.14)compared with SU. GLP-1 RAs reduced WC to a greater extent than insulin, Met, TZD, and a-Glu, by?7.05 cm (95% CI: ?13.15, ?0.95) to ?2.33 cm (95%CI: ?3.11, ?1.56). Compared with GLP-1 RAs, DPP-4Is increased WC by 1.75 cm (95% CI: 1.29, 2.21).

    Results of Network Meta-analysis

    Weight Compared with placebo, DPP-4Is increased weight slightly by 0.31 kg (95% CI: 0.05, 0.58) and GLP-1 RAs decreased weight by ?1.34 kg (95% CI:?1.60, ?1.09) (Figure 3). Compared with placebo,insulin, SU, and TZD induced weight gain of 2.42 kg(95% CI: 1.96, 2.89), 1.84 kg (95% CI: 1.40, 2.28), and 2.15 kg (95% CI: 1.53, 2.77), respectively. Met and SGLT-2 led to weight loss of ?0.79 kg (95% CI: ?1.52,?0.07) and ?2.23 kg (95% CI: ?3.27, ?1.19),respectively, versus placebo. Compared with insulin,

    SU, and TZD, DPP-4Is decreased weight by ?2.11 kg(95% CI: ?2.59, ?1.62), ?1.52 kg (95% CI: ?1.92,?1.13), and ?1.83 kg (95% CI: ?2.43, ?1.24),respectively. Compared with Met and SGLT-2, DPP-4Is increased weight by 1.11 kg (95% CI: 0.41, 1.81)and 2.54 kg (95% CI: 1.51, 3.58), respectively.Compared with traditional hypoglycemic drugs(including insulin, SU, TZD, and a-Glu), GLP-1 RAs resulted in weight loss of -3.76 kg (95% CI: ?4.16,?3.37) to ?1.09 kg (95% CI: ?1.94, ?0.23). A statistically significant weight gain was observed after treatment with DPP-4Is compared with that after treatment with GLP-1 RAs, with a mean difference of 1.66 kg (95% CI: 1.35, 1.96).

    BMI GLP-1 RAs decreased BMI by ?1.10 kg/m2(95% CI: ?1.42, ?0.78) compared with placebo(Figure 3). Compared with placebo, SU increased BMI by 0.58 kg/m2(95% CI: 0.08, 1.08). DPP-4Is decreased BMI by ?0.69 kg/m2(95% CI: ?1.15,?0.24), compared with SU. Compared with all other traditional hypoglycemic drugs, GLP-1 RAs decreased BMI by ?1.68 kg/m2(95% CI: ?2.15, ?1.20) to ?0.63 kg/m2(95% CI: ?1.21, ?0.04). Compared with GLP-1 RAs, DPP-4Is increased BMI by 0.98 kg/m2(95% CI:0.66, 1.30).

    WC Compared with placebo, GLP-1 RAs and SGLT-2 decreased WC by ?1.28 cm (95% CI: ?1.69, ?0.86)and ?1.57 cm (95% CI: ?2.74, ?0.40), respectively(Figure 3). Insulin, Met, SU, and TZD increased WC by 2.36 cm (95% CI: 1.59, 3.13), 2.16 cm (95% CI: 0.70,3.62), 2.12 cm (95% CI: 0.90, 3.33), and 1.13 cm (95%CI: 0.01, 2.24), respectively, compared with placebo.Compared with insulin, Met, and SU, DPP-4Is decreased WC by ?1.99 cm (95% CI: ?2.83, ?1.15),?1.79 cm (95% CI: ?3.28, ?0.31), and ?1.75 cm (95%CI: ?2.86, ?0.64), respectively. DPP-4Is increased WC by 1.93 cm (95% CI: 0.76, 3.11), compared to SGLT-2.Compared with insulin, Met, SU, and TZD, GLP-1 RAs decreased WC more effectively by ?3.63 cm (95% CI:?4.29, ?2.98) to ?2.40 cm (95% CI: ?3.44, ?1.37). In terms of decreasing WC, DPP-4Is were inferior to GLP-1 RAs, with a mean difference in WC of 1.64 cm(95% CI: 1.09, 2.19).

    Results of Subgroup Analysis, Sensitivity Analysis,and Meta-regression

    Subgroup analysis showed that DPP-4Is,compared with placebo, did not significantly reduce weight, BMI, and WC in all subgroups, but GLP-1 RAs lowered weight, BMI, and WC compared with placebo in every subgroup. The specific results of subgroup analysis are provided in Supplementary Files. According to the sensitivity analysis, the main results of this NMA were robust,as there were no large differences between the results before and after excluding certain RCTs(Supplementary Files). Based on the univariate meta-regression, it was found that DPP-4Is increased weight by 0.52 kg per 1% HbA1c rise,and that GLP-1RA caused weight loss of 0.08 kg per 1-year change in diabetes duration, compared with placebo. Multivariate meta-regression did not show similar results, but it indicated that,compared with placebo, GLP-1RA increased weight by 0.70 kg per 10-year increase in age. Limited by the number of studies, multivariate metaregression could not be performed for BMI and WC. Supplementary Files shows all metaregression results.

    Results of Ranking Hierarchy

    Table 1 shows that GLP-1 RAs ranked second and DPP-4Is ranked sixth in terms of inducing weight loss. According to Table 1, GLP-1 RAs had the highest efficacy in decreasing BMI and DPP-4Is ranked fourth in terms of efficacy in decreasing BMI. In reducing WC, the efficacy of GLP-1 RAs and DPP-4Is ranked second and fourth, respectively. Ranking results on weight after meta-regression are presented in Supplementary Files.

    Results of Inconsistency and Heterogeneity Tests

    We judged inconsistency by using the data in Supplementary Files. Regarding the studies onweight, the inconsistency test showed that 21 loops from all the 22 loops (including 1 quadratic loop and 21 triangular loops) were consistent (P > 0.05 with 95% CIs including 0). For the studies on BMI, 8 loops from all the 10 triangular loops were consistent. As for WC, 5 loops from all the 9 triangular loops were consistent. The results suggested that, for the three indicators (weight, BMI, and WC), direct estimates of the summary effects were not different from the indirect estimates. The node-splitting model revealed that there were 6, 0, and 2 comparisons with significant inconsistency on weight, BMI, and WC, respectively (Supplementary Files). The results of global inconsistency suggested that the consistency model was no different from the inconsistency model for all three indicators (weight:Q = 27.75, P = 0.479; BMI: Q = 5.26, P = 0.949; WC:Q = 3.79, P = 0.925). According to the predictive interval plots (Supplementary Files) and I2statistic,global heterogeneity existed in weight (I2statistic =91.4%) and BMI (I2statistic = 84.5%), but not in WC(I2statistic = 36.7%).

    Table 1. Ranking probability of the effectiveness of different treatments on weight,body mass index, and waist circumference

    Detection of Publication Bias

    In all three comparison-adjusted funnel plots(Supplementary Files), scatters of the same color were almost symmetrical visually, which meant that publication bias was relatively low for weight, BMI,and WC.

    Results of GRADE

    In light of the GRADE fr amework (Supplementary Files), the evidence quality ranking of treatments was low, very low, and moderate for weight, BMI,and WC, respectively. For each comparison, the evidence quality rank varied from very low to high,with low- and moderate-quality evidence showing larger proportions.

    DISCUSSION

    Obesity is a risk factor of diabetes that can incur insulin resistance[43]and cardiovascular diseases[44].BMI was reported to have a direct relationship with diabetes. Abdominal obesity, which can be measured by WC, is associated with dyslipidemia and hypertension[45]. Patients with obesity and diabetes are prone to worse outcomes; thus, losing weight is considered an effective way to treat diabetes[46]. Body weight, BMI, and WC are all indicators of overweightness or obesity.

    Several genres of traditional antidiabetic drugs(including insulin, TZD, and SU) may cause weight gain, which may be caused by ‘defensive snacking’ to deal with hypoglycemia risk[5]. Although, compared with these traditional drugs, incretin-based drugs can achieve similar results in reducing blood glucose,they may have fewer side effects, such as weight gain, by slowing down gastric emptying and inhibiting food intake[47]. Therefore, this study aimed to deeply explore the effects of incretin-based drugs on weight, BMI, and WC.

    Albeit there have been several evidence-based studies[24-32]on this topic, most of them were in the form of standard pairwise meta-analysis. Moreover,they mainly discussed body weight.

    An NMA published in 2012[30]aimed to evaluate the effects of antidiabetic drugs in combination with metformin on glycemic control, hypoglycemia risk,and body weight. That study found that, compared with placebo, GLP-1 RAs reduced weight by ?1.66 kg(95% CI: ?2.26, ?1.09) and that DPP-4Is had no significant effect on weight loss (0.23 kg, 95% CI:?0.13, 0.60). All the above results were consistent with our results, except that we discovered modest weight gain by 0.31 kg (95% CI: 0.05, 0.58) in DPP-4Is versus placebo. However, that study[30]by Liu et al.was somewhat different from our work. For starters,the study in 2012 only considered the agents in combination with metformin; thus, the study did not involve SGLT-2, but include glinides; moreover, the inclusion criterion of patients was different from ours. Our team also published an NMA on the effects of GLP-1 RAs on body weight in 2015[31]. A total of 51 trials were included in the final analysis in that study; however, 262 trials on weight were included in this study. The GLP-1 RAs concerned in that study were exenatide and liraglutide at varying dosages (exenatide: 5 μg twice daily, 10 μg twice daily, and 2 mg once weekly; liraglutide: 0.6 mg once daily, 0.9 mg once daily, 1.2 mg once daily,and 1.8 mg once daily). Compared with placebo, only exenatide (10 μg twice daily) and liraglutide (1.8 mg once daily) decreased weight by ?1.92 kg (95% CI:?2.61, ?1.24) and ?0.98 kg (95% CI: ?1.94, ?0.02),respectively.

    A previous NMA focusing on how GLP-1 RAs influence WC was also conducted by our team[32].That study only included 17 RCTs, whereas the present study included 56 RCTs on WC. In the previous study, the GLP-1 RAs studied included exenatide (5 μg twice daily, 10 μg twice daily, and 2 mg once weekly), liraglutide (0.6 mg once daily, 1.2 mg once daily, and 1.8 mg once daily), taspoglutide(10 mg once weekly and 20 mg once weekly), and sitagliptin. The results of the previous study showed that, compared with placebo, exenatide (10 μg twice daily), liraglutide (1.2 mg once daily), liraglutide (1.8 mg once daily), and sitagliptin significantly decreased WC.

    Regarding BMI, no meta-analysis on how incretin-based therapies affect BMI had been published. Thus, our study filled this gap.

    In this study, comparison of incretin-based therapies with six other traditional hypoglycemic drugs revealed that GLP-1 RAs were not less effective than any other traditional hypoglycemic drug in decreasing weight, BMI, and WC. However,DPP-4Is were not less effective than other traditional hypoglycemic drugs only in decreasing BMI. In inducing weight loss, DPP-4Is were less effective than Met and SGLT2, but more effective than insulin,SU, and TZD. In terms of lowering WC, DPP-4Is were less effective than SGLT2, but more effective than insulin, Met, and SU.

    Our study found that GLP-1 RAs were also more effective than DPP-4Is in decreasing all three indicators. Notably, a study reported that liraglutide, a type of GLP-1 RAs, primarily reduces fat mass (especially visceral fat and intrahepatic fat)[48], rather than lean tissue[49]mass, such as skeletal muscles[48]. It was reported that liraglutide reduces more visceral fat tissues than subcutaneous fat tissues[50-53]. Visceral adipose tissue is considered the source of inflammation and promoter of atherosclerosis[54], and it promotes the development of type 2 diabetes[55].Furthermore, elderly people deserve more attention as they are prone to type 2 diabetes[56].GLP-1 RAs can help improve cognitive performance in the elderly[57]and protect them from sarcopenia[58]. Thus, GLP-1 RAs can bring great benefits to patients with type 2 diabetes.Our study had several advantages. Firstly, a large number of trials related to incretin-based therapies on weight, BMI, and WC were included,making the evaluation reliable and accurate.Secondly, instead of adopting standard pairwise meta-analysis, we carried out NMA. Because standard pairwise meta-analysis can only combine the results of head-to-head comparisons, it can cause a waste of information in the studies without the direct comparisons that we wanted.However, NMA can achieve indirect comparisons between multiple treatments. In addition, through NMA, multiple treatments can be ranked. There is no doubt that the ranking results can assist clinicians in selecting appropriate treatments in their work.

    Nonetheless, there were still several drawbacks in this study. First, the documents included in this study were all published in English; thus, publication bias might exist. Second, most included studies were not especially designed to evaluate the effects of incretin-based therapies on weight, BMI, or WC,raising the potential of inaccurate measurement of the three indicators. Third, we did not consider the variations in products and dosages. Fourth, the placebos varied in the different studies, but this is common in NMA using wide inclusion criteria to gain generalized results[59]. This study reported the effectiveness of incretin-based therapies on weight,BMI, and WC, compared with other traditional therapies and placebo, which will be helpful for future clinical practice. Still, more high-caliber RCTs that emphasize blinding and allocation concealment are being expected to improve the current evidence quality.

    ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

    We are grateful to all cooperating organizations and their staff who have promoted the completion of the whole study. We also sincerely acknowledge all authors of the original studies who provided the materials we needed.

    CONFLICT OF INTEREST

    The authors declared no conflict of interest.

    AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS

    SUN Feng, ZHAN Si Yan, and XU Lu were involved in study conceptualization and design.HUANG Yi and YANG Zhi Rong were involved in the methodology. XU Lu, GAO Le, and YU Shu Qing were responsible for the formal analysis. XU Lu and YU Shu Qing were responsible for writing and preparing the original draft. All authors participated in the writing, review, and editing of the manuscript.

    Received: April 18, 2019;

    Accepted: September 24, 2019

    日韩熟女老妇一区二区性免费视频| 99国产精品免费福利视频| 91成人精品电影| 晚上一个人看的免费电影| 精品国产超薄肉色丝袜足j| 侵犯人妻中文字幕一二三四区| 色婷婷久久久亚洲欧美| 久久 成人 亚洲| 欧美人与善性xxx| 日本欧美视频一区| 久久久久久久亚洲中文字幕| 国产野战对白在线观看| 男人舔女人的私密视频| 狂野欧美激情性bbbbbb| 久久青草综合色| 桃花免费在线播放| 欧美精品一区二区大全| 97精品久久久久久久久久精品| 黄色视频在线播放观看不卡| 亚洲精品在线美女| 国产亚洲av片在线观看秒播厂| 免费黄频网站在线观看国产| 免费黄色在线免费观看| 麻豆乱淫一区二区| 婷婷色av中文字幕| 在线亚洲精品国产二区图片欧美| 自线自在国产av| 亚洲国产成人一精品久久久| 亚洲精品成人av观看孕妇| 97人妻天天添夜夜摸| 精品少妇一区二区三区视频日本电影 | 十八禁高潮呻吟视频| 欧美人与善性xxx| 免费人妻精品一区二区三区视频| 9色porny在线观看| 国产精品蜜桃在线观看| 欧美最新免费一区二区三区| 成人国产av品久久久| 久久久久精品性色| 免费少妇av软件| 免费高清在线观看日韩| 久久99精品国语久久久| 又大又黄又爽视频免费| 亚洲精品日韩在线中文字幕| 欧美激情极品国产一区二区三区| 亚洲久久久国产精品| 国产成人午夜福利电影在线观看| 精品人妻在线不人妻| 十八禁高潮呻吟视频| 成年av动漫网址| 精品99又大又爽又粗少妇毛片| 999精品在线视频| 中文字幕制服av| 丁香六月天网| 日韩精品免费视频一区二区三区| 久久毛片免费看一区二区三区| 免费看不卡的av| 日韩,欧美,国产一区二区三区| 成人亚洲精品一区在线观看| 国产97色在线日韩免费| 丰满少妇做爰视频| 欧美97在线视频| 亚洲欧美精品自产自拍| www.精华液| 9热在线视频观看99| 国产精品香港三级国产av潘金莲 | 99re6热这里在线精品视频| 免费高清在线观看视频在线观看| 久久久久久久精品精品| 精品亚洲乱码少妇综合久久| 午夜福利在线免费观看网站| 亚洲成国产人片在线观看| 春色校园在线视频观看| 精品人妻在线不人妻| 视频在线观看一区二区三区| 美女xxoo啪啪120秒动态图| 丰满饥渴人妻一区二区三| 亚洲国产精品999| 欧美日韩视频精品一区| 一级毛片我不卡| 久久久a久久爽久久v久久| 狠狠婷婷综合久久久久久88av| 各种免费的搞黄视频| 春色校园在线视频观看| 亚洲精华国产精华液的使用体验| 日本午夜av视频| 久久精品久久精品一区二区三区| 狠狠精品人妻久久久久久综合| 成人免费观看视频高清| 久久这里只有精品19| 亚洲国产最新在线播放| 亚洲人成网站在线观看播放| 成人国产麻豆网| videossex国产| 久久久国产欧美日韩av| 亚洲一区二区三区欧美精品| 精品第一国产精品| 久久精品国产鲁丝片午夜精品| 国产av精品麻豆| 国产男人的电影天堂91| 成人二区视频| 成人免费观看视频高清| 日韩av免费高清视频| 九色亚洲精品在线播放| 日韩视频在线欧美| 亚洲精品美女久久av网站| 寂寞人妻少妇视频99o| 久久精品国产亚洲av高清一级| 亚洲第一区二区三区不卡| 五月伊人婷婷丁香| 日本午夜av视频| 80岁老熟妇乱子伦牲交| 看免费成人av毛片| 欧美日韩成人在线一区二区| 老鸭窝网址在线观看| 精品国产露脸久久av麻豆| 精品福利永久在线观看| 人人妻人人澡人人爽人人夜夜| 亚洲av.av天堂| 国产男人的电影天堂91| 黑人欧美特级aaaaaa片| 人人妻人人添人人爽欧美一区卜| 亚洲四区av| 国产精品国产三级国产专区5o| 国产一级毛片在线| 久久这里有精品视频免费| 热99久久久久精品小说推荐| 色网站视频免费| 日韩三级伦理在线观看| 亚洲欧美精品综合一区二区三区 | 最新的欧美精品一区二区| 校园人妻丝袜中文字幕| 免费少妇av软件| 午夜日本视频在线| 丰满迷人的少妇在线观看| 一级a爱视频在线免费观看| 亚洲第一av免费看| 国产熟女欧美一区二区| 精品国产一区二区久久| 国产精品女同一区二区软件| 欧美日韩av久久| 亚洲国产欧美日韩在线播放| 国产又爽黄色视频| 日韩欧美一区视频在线观看| 夫妻性生交免费视频一级片| 一级,二级,三级黄色视频| 精品久久久久久电影网| 爱豆传媒免费全集在线观看| 亚洲国产精品一区三区| 亚洲精品日本国产第一区| 国产成人欧美| 男人添女人高潮全过程视频| 纵有疾风起免费观看全集完整版| 黄色毛片三级朝国网站| 80岁老熟妇乱子伦牲交| 菩萨蛮人人尽说江南好唐韦庄| 99久国产av精品国产电影| 热99久久久久精品小说推荐| 中文字幕另类日韩欧美亚洲嫩草| 国产熟女午夜一区二区三区| 美女主播在线视频| 精品久久蜜臀av无| 中国国产av一级| 性色avwww在线观看| 久久久久国产精品人妻一区二区| 亚洲图色成人| 成人午夜精彩视频在线观看| 国产探花极品一区二区| 亚洲av中文av极速乱| 久久精品久久久久久噜噜老黄| 黑人欧美特级aaaaaa片| 精品国产国语对白av| 久久久久国产精品人妻一区二区| 日本91视频免费播放| 国产在线视频一区二区| 免费久久久久久久精品成人欧美视频| 九九爱精品视频在线观看| 亚洲欧美一区二区三区黑人 | 久久久国产欧美日韩av| 欧美日韩精品成人综合77777| 国产精品久久久久久av不卡| 熟女av电影| 国产精品秋霞免费鲁丝片| 亚洲国产精品成人久久小说| 90打野战视频偷拍视频| 久久午夜综合久久蜜桃| 天天影视国产精品| av福利片在线| 亚洲欧美一区二区三区国产| 精品国产露脸久久av麻豆| 国产视频首页在线观看| 国产亚洲av片在线观看秒播厂| 18在线观看网站| 丝袜美足系列| 1024香蕉在线观看| 欧美日韩精品成人综合77777| 国产在视频线精品| 久久久久精品人妻al黑| 夫妻午夜视频| 老女人水多毛片| 一区二区三区精品91| 咕卡用的链子| 亚洲国产毛片av蜜桃av| 亚洲国产精品一区二区三区在线| 中文欧美无线码| 免费久久久久久久精品成人欧美视频| 在线观看美女被高潮喷水网站| 国产免费视频播放在线视频| 久久久久国产精品人妻一区二区| 国产日韩欧美亚洲二区| 国产成人午夜福利电影在线观看| 亚洲欧美精品自产自拍| 日韩大片免费观看网站| 午夜91福利影院| 国产一级毛片在线| 1024香蕉在线观看| 一级片免费观看大全| 日韩一卡2卡3卡4卡2021年| 国产av国产精品国产| 麻豆精品久久久久久蜜桃| 国产av一区二区精品久久| 日本-黄色视频高清免费观看| 十分钟在线观看高清视频www| 亚洲婷婷狠狠爱综合网| 婷婷色av中文字幕| 久久精品国产亚洲av涩爱| 国产极品天堂在线| 亚洲内射少妇av| 人妻人人澡人人爽人人| 亚洲图色成人| a级片在线免费高清观看视频| 母亲3免费完整高清在线观看 | 婷婷色综合www| 国产精品久久久久久久久免| 国产黄色免费在线视频| 99久国产av精品国产电影| 久久鲁丝午夜福利片| 日韩av免费高清视频| 18禁观看日本| 视频在线观看一区二区三区| 亚洲一区中文字幕在线| 久久久国产精品麻豆| 91久久精品国产一区二区三区| av在线app专区| 亚洲精品,欧美精品| 在线观看www视频免费| 国产成人精品在线电影| 在线观看美女被高潮喷水网站| 精品一区二区三卡| 日日撸夜夜添| 国产爽快片一区二区三区| 1024视频免费在线观看| 久久久久人妻精品一区果冻| 最近的中文字幕免费完整| 亚洲欧美色中文字幕在线| 欧美精品人与动牲交sv欧美| 国产人伦9x9x在线观看 | 午夜日本视频在线| 国产精品欧美亚洲77777| 老司机影院成人| 少妇的逼水好多| 男女啪啪激烈高潮av片| 波多野结衣一区麻豆| xxx大片免费视频| 欧美日韩国产mv在线观看视频| 国产欧美日韩一区二区三区在线| 亚洲精品一二三| 久久久亚洲精品成人影院| 久久ye,这里只有精品| 建设人人有责人人尽责人人享有的| 免费看不卡的av| 国产亚洲一区二区精品| 美国免费a级毛片| 久久这里有精品视频免费| 成人毛片60女人毛片免费| 日韩成人av中文字幕在线观看| 999精品在线视频| 国产白丝娇喘喷水9色精品| 亚洲伊人久久精品综合| 最近2019中文字幕mv第一页| 日本91视频免费播放| 黄片无遮挡物在线观看| 日韩免费高清中文字幕av| 18禁国产床啪视频网站| av免费在线看不卡| 丰满饥渴人妻一区二区三| 亚洲av电影在线进入| 18禁裸乳无遮挡动漫免费视频| 99久久精品国产国产毛片| 青春草视频在线免费观看| 亚洲精品久久久久久婷婷小说| 亚洲综合色网址| 999精品在线视频| 永久免费av网站大全| 久久午夜综合久久蜜桃| 午夜精品国产一区二区电影| 国产免费福利视频在线观看| 精品久久蜜臀av无| 亚洲三区欧美一区| 中文字幕人妻丝袜一区二区 | 亚洲美女黄色视频免费看| 亚洲国产欧美网| 在线观看免费视频网站a站| 免费观看a级毛片全部| 亚洲精品国产av成人精品| 成年动漫av网址| 国产精品无大码| 一本大道久久a久久精品| 日韩在线高清观看一区二区三区| 中文字幕人妻熟女乱码| 亚洲婷婷狠狠爱综合网| 丁香六月天网| av网站免费在线观看视频| 多毛熟女@视频| 少妇人妻精品综合一区二区| 秋霞伦理黄片| 日本色播在线视频| 日韩欧美精品免费久久| 久久女婷五月综合色啪小说| 大片免费播放器 马上看| 精品人妻熟女毛片av久久网站| 久久午夜综合久久蜜桃| 免费在线观看完整版高清| 丰满乱子伦码专区| 午夜免费男女啪啪视频观看| 91久久精品国产一区二区三区| 亚洲精品久久成人aⅴ小说| 在线观看三级黄色| 青春草视频在线免费观看| 中文字幕色久视频| 国产野战对白在线观看| 一本色道久久久久久精品综合| 狠狠精品人妻久久久久久综合| 中文天堂在线官网| 大话2 男鬼变身卡| 性高湖久久久久久久久免费观看| 久久99精品国语久久久| 成人漫画全彩无遮挡| 久久精品夜色国产| 国产精品二区激情视频| av在线观看视频网站免费| 制服人妻中文乱码| 精品国产超薄肉色丝袜足j| 国产精品二区激情视频| 免费在线观看黄色视频的| 超碰成人久久| 亚洲在久久综合| 叶爱在线成人免费视频播放| 欧美日本中文国产一区发布| 日韩精品有码人妻一区| av电影中文网址| 18禁国产床啪视频网站| 女人精品久久久久毛片| 丰满饥渴人妻一区二区三| 国产成人精品久久久久久| 亚洲色图综合在线观看| 国产日韩欧美亚洲二区| 日本免费在线观看一区| 男女边吃奶边做爰视频| 18禁动态无遮挡网站| 国产成人精品久久二区二区91 | 男女边摸边吃奶| 久久国内精品自在自线图片| 国产女主播在线喷水免费视频网站| av不卡在线播放| 欧美xxⅹ黑人| 777久久人妻少妇嫩草av网站| 边亲边吃奶的免费视频| 国产精品免费视频内射| av在线观看视频网站免费| 黄网站色视频无遮挡免费观看| 18在线观看网站| 韩国av在线不卡| 丝袜人妻中文字幕| 超碰97精品在线观看| 欧美日韩视频精品一区| 久久久久久人妻| 视频区图区小说| 亚洲图色成人| 国产97色在线日韩免费| 国产免费又黄又爽又色| 国产成人精品婷婷| 18+在线观看网站| 在线观看国产h片| 国产成人一区二区在线| 中文字幕av电影在线播放| 女性生殖器流出的白浆| 美国免费a级毛片| 欧美xxⅹ黑人| 最近的中文字幕免费完整| 18在线观看网站| 性色av一级| 日本色播在线视频| 国产深夜福利视频在线观看| 亚洲成国产人片在线观看| 国产日韩欧美在线精品| 久久久精品94久久精品| 中文字幕人妻丝袜一区二区 | 最近最新中文字幕大全免费视频 | 大片免费播放器 马上看| 黑丝袜美女国产一区| 国语对白做爰xxxⅹ性视频网站| 欧美日韩一区二区视频在线观看视频在线| 国产精品熟女久久久久浪| 日本-黄色视频高清免费观看| 超碰成人久久| 亚洲精品自拍成人| 成人二区视频| 日韩制服骚丝袜av| 在线观看一区二区三区激情| 大片电影免费在线观看免费| 热99久久久久精品小说推荐| 久久99热这里只频精品6学生| av有码第一页| 婷婷色综合www| 纵有疾风起免费观看全集完整版| 日韩一区二区三区影片| 少妇被粗大猛烈的视频| 高清在线视频一区二区三区| 又粗又硬又长又爽又黄的视频| 两个人免费观看高清视频| 中国国产av一级| 国产在线视频一区二区| 咕卡用的链子| 欧美精品人与动牲交sv欧美| 热re99久久精品国产66热6| av福利片在线| 日本91视频免费播放| 久久久国产一区二区| 国产精品国产av在线观看| 久久综合国产亚洲精品| 久久久国产精品麻豆| 春色校园在线视频观看| 一级片免费观看大全| 天堂俺去俺来也www色官网| 男人操女人黄网站| 男女午夜视频在线观看| 欧美国产精品一级二级三级| av电影中文网址| 夫妻性生交免费视频一级片| 男人爽女人下面视频在线观看| 一级片免费观看大全| 激情视频va一区二区三区| 日韩中字成人| 国产亚洲精品第一综合不卡| 又粗又硬又长又爽又黄的视频| 亚洲人成网站在线观看播放| 亚洲色图综合在线观看| av.在线天堂| 九色亚洲精品在线播放| 日本午夜av视频| 极品少妇高潮喷水抽搐| 亚洲内射少妇av| 久久av网站| 黄色毛片三级朝国网站| 国产成人精品久久久久久| 亚洲精品第二区| 日本午夜av视频| 男女午夜视频在线观看| 欧美国产精品一级二级三级| 成年人免费黄色播放视频| 一级毛片我不卡| 交换朋友夫妻互换小说| 成人二区视频| 亚洲伊人久久精品综合| 人妻 亚洲 视频| 人人妻人人添人人爽欧美一区卜| 人人妻人人爽人人添夜夜欢视频| 精品第一国产精品| 免费大片黄手机在线观看| 一级毛片我不卡| 大陆偷拍与自拍| 色播在线永久视频| 在线天堂最新版资源| 亚洲欧美一区二区三区国产| 久久精品国产自在天天线| 日本91视频免费播放| av一本久久久久| 国产一区二区三区综合在线观看| 日韩免费高清中文字幕av| 亚洲精品自拍成人| 亚洲美女搞黄在线观看| 久久久国产一区二区| 欧美+日韩+精品| 亚洲国产欧美网| 男的添女的下面高潮视频| 亚洲精品中文字幕在线视频| 亚洲av男天堂| 蜜桃在线观看..| 美女福利国产在线| 交换朋友夫妻互换小说| 国产精品蜜桃在线观看| 亚洲av福利一区| 欧美+日韩+精品| 美国免费a级毛片| 亚洲av中文av极速乱| 国产爽快片一区二区三区| 又粗又硬又长又爽又黄的视频| 伦精品一区二区三区| 精品久久久精品久久久| 日产精品乱码卡一卡2卡三| 久久精品国产亚洲av天美| 国产亚洲欧美精品永久| 久久久久精品人妻al黑| 热99国产精品久久久久久7| 久久99精品国语久久久| videos熟女内射| 免费av中文字幕在线| 日韩,欧美,国产一区二区三区| 99久久精品国产国产毛片| 在线观看免费日韩欧美大片| 国产亚洲av片在线观看秒播厂| 国产精品一区二区在线不卡| 久久精品人人爽人人爽视色| 狂野欧美激情性bbbbbb| 日本wwww免费看| 国产av一区二区精品久久| 久久国产亚洲av麻豆专区| 精品福利永久在线观看| 久久久久久久国产电影| www.精华液| 五月开心婷婷网| 欧美日韩精品网址| 少妇人妻 视频| 成人午夜精彩视频在线观看| 热re99久久国产66热| 日韩人妻精品一区2区三区| 成年av动漫网址| 夫妻午夜视频| 欧美最新免费一区二区三区| 亚洲精品成人av观看孕妇| 菩萨蛮人人尽说江南好唐韦庄| av视频免费观看在线观看| 91精品伊人久久大香线蕉| 伊人亚洲综合成人网| 国产欧美日韩一区二区三区在线| 免费久久久久久久精品成人欧美视频| 欧美激情极品国产一区二区三区| 欧美日韩av久久| 香蕉国产在线看| 在线亚洲精品国产二区图片欧美| 久久人妻熟女aⅴ| av片东京热男人的天堂| 黄网站色视频无遮挡免费观看| 男女啪啪激烈高潮av片| 亚洲国产色片| 伊人亚洲综合成人网| 色婷婷久久久亚洲欧美| 大陆偷拍与自拍| 国产1区2区3区精品| 国产高清不卡午夜福利| 一本大道久久a久久精品| 午夜福利在线观看免费完整高清在| 亚洲四区av| 交换朋友夫妻互换小说| 一级a爱视频在线免费观看| 2022亚洲国产成人精品| 超碰97精品在线观看| 欧美日韩视频精品一区| 如何舔出高潮| 一区二区av电影网| 精品亚洲成国产av| av网站在线播放免费| 久久毛片免费看一区二区三区| 国产日韩一区二区三区精品不卡| 久久精品国产亚洲av涩爱| 久久国产亚洲av麻豆专区| 精品国产露脸久久av麻豆| 国产片特级美女逼逼视频| 日韩一本色道免费dvd| 久久精品久久久久久久性| 国产熟女午夜一区二区三区| 熟妇人妻不卡中文字幕| 国产97色在线日韩免费| 久久精品熟女亚洲av麻豆精品| 精品一区在线观看国产| 99国产精品免费福利视频| 91在线精品国自产拍蜜月| 久热这里只有精品99| 亚洲第一区二区三区不卡| 女性被躁到高潮视频| a级毛片在线看网站| 亚洲精品第二区| 2022亚洲国产成人精品| 亚洲av综合色区一区| 少妇人妻 视频| 国产精品久久久av美女十八| www.精华液| 深夜精品福利| 国产免费视频播放在线视频| 国产有黄有色有爽视频| 黄色视频在线播放观看不卡| 两性夫妻黄色片| 日日啪夜夜爽| 777米奇影视久久| 另类亚洲欧美激情| 亚洲,一卡二卡三卡| 精品国产乱码久久久久久男人| 99热全是精品| 视频区图区小说| 午夜免费男女啪啪视频观看| 久久国内精品自在自线图片| 国产极品粉嫩免费观看在线| 久久亚洲国产成人精品v| 亚洲精品日本国产第一区| 精品久久久久久电影网| 在线精品无人区一区二区三| 亚洲国产精品成人久久小说| 国产成人91sexporn| 日韩,欧美,国产一区二区三区| 久久久久国产精品人妻一区二区| 亚洲精品乱久久久久久| 欧美97在线视频| 精品国产国语对白av| 国产熟女午夜一区二区三区|