The efficacy and safety of metformin combined with simvastatin in the treatment of polycystic ovary syndrome: A meta-analysis and systematic review

Background:Several previous randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluated the efficacy of metformin combined with simvastatin in the treatment of polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS), yet the results of the researches are not consistent. It is necessary to conduct a meta-analysis to explore the efficacy and safety of metformin combined with simvastatin in the treatment of PCOS, to provide evidence supports for the treatment of PCOS.Methods:We searched PubMed, EMbase, Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang, and Chinese biomedical literature databases online to identify the RCTs evaluating the efficacy of metformin combined with simvastatin in the treatment of PCOS. Standardized mean difference (SMD) and 95% confidence interval (95% CI) were calculated to evaluate the synthesized effects.Results:Nine RCTs with a total of 746 PCOS patients were included. The synthesized results indicated that the combined use of metformin and simvastatin are more beneficial to reduce the total cholesterol (SMD –2.66, 95% CI –3.65 to –1.66), triglycerides (SMD –1.25, 95% CI –2.02 to –0.49), low density lipoprotein (SMD –2.91, 95% CI –3.98 to –1.84), testosterone (SMD –0.64, 95% CI –1.13 to –0.15), fasting insulin (SMD –1.17, 95% CI –2.09 to –0.26) than metformin alone treatment in PCOS patients (all P < .001), and there was no significant difference in the high density lipoprotein (SMD –0.05, 95% CI –0.56–0.46), luteinizing hormone (SMD –0.58, 95% CI –1.66 to –0.50), follicle stimulating hormone (SMD 0.41, 95% CI –0.78–1.59), prolactin (SMD –1.38, 95% CI –2.93–0.17), fasting blood sugar (SMD 0.23, 95% CI –0.52–0.97), and insulin sensitivity index (SMD –0.17, 95% CI –0.48–0.15) between experimental and control groups (all P > .05).Conclusions:Metformin combined with simvastatin is superior to metformin alone in the treatment of PCOS patients with more advantages in improving the levels of sex hormones, blood lipids, and blood sugar. However, the safety of this therapy still needs to be further explored in clinical studies with high-quality and large samples.     

The therapeutic effects of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists and metformin on polycystic ovary syndrome: A protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis

Background:Obesity and insulin resistance (IR) are common in polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS), which contribute to reproductive and metabolic abnormalities. Metformin increases insulin sensitivity, but it is associated with unsatisfied benefits of weight loss. Recent studies have reported that glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists improve IR and reduce weight in women with PCOS. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the effects between GLP-1 receptor agonists and metformin, and between GLP-1 receptor agonist-metformin combination and GLP-1 receptor agonists in overweight/obese women with PCOS on anthropometric, metabolic, reproductive outcomes.Methods:Databases including PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library were selected to search for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published in English up to March 2020. Eligible studies were identified according to the inclusion criteria. The primary outcomes included menstrual frequency, body mass index (BMI), total testosterone, and the homeostatic model assessment of insulin resistance. GRADE criteria were implemented to assess the quality of evidence for primary outcomes.Results:Seven RCTs were selected for analysis, comprising 464 overweight/obese women with PCOS. In the low-quality evidence, a meta-analysis demonstrated that GLP-1 receptor agonists showed better effects relative to metformin on the reduction of body mass index (mean difference − 1.72; 95% confidence interval −2.46 to −0.99, P < .001) and homeostatic model assessment of insulin resistance (standard mean difference −0.37; 95% confidence interval − 0.60,− 0.15, P = .001). Moreover, the combination therapy exhibited similar effects on primary outcomes relative to GLP-1 receptor agonist alone. GLP-1 receptor agonists were also found to be associated with lower abdominal girth compared to metformin. A meta-analysis of gastrointestinal discomfort showed no significant difference between GLP-1 receptor agonist and metformin therapies, and between the combination therapy and GLP-1 receptor agonist alone.Conclusions:GLP-1 receptor agonists appear to be more beneficial for weight loss and IR improvement compared to metformin for overweight/obese women with PCOS. However, the combination treatment displays comparable effects with GLP-1 receptor agonist alone. The incidence of gastrointestinal discomforts was similar in different groups. However, the quality of the body of evidence is “low.” Further prospective RCTs and cost-effectiveness analyses are also warranted to guide GLP-1 receptor agonists to treat women with PCOS.     

Remote Ischemic Preconditioning Fails to Benefit Pediatric Patients Undergoing Congenital Cardiac Surgery: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Remote ischemic preconditioning (RIPC) has been proven to reduce the ischemia-reperfusion injury. However, its effect on children receiving congenital cardiac surgery (CCS) was inconsistent. We therefore performed the current meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to comprehensively evaluate the effect of RIPC in pediatric patients undergoing CCS.PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane library were searched to identify RCTs assessing the effect of RIPC in pediatric patients undergoing CCS. The outcomes included the duration of mechanical ventilation (MV), intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay, postoperative cardiac troponin (cTnI) level, hospital length of stay (HLOS), postoperative inotropic score, and mortality. Subgroup and sensitivity analysis were also performed as predesigned. The meta-analysis was performed with random-effects model despite of heterogeneity. Sensitivity and subgroup analysis were predesigned to identify the robustness of the pooled estimate.Nine RCTs with 697 pediatric patients were included in the meta-analysis. Overall, RIPC failed to alter clinical outcomes of duration of MV (standard mean difference [SMD] −0.03, 95% confidence interval [CI] −0.23–0.17), ICU length of stay (SMD −0.22, 95% CI −0.47–0.04), or HLOS (SMD −0.14, 95% CI −0.55–0.26). Additionally, RIPC could not reduce postoperative cTnI (at 4–6 hours: SMD −0.25, 95% CI −0.73–0.23; P = 0.311; at 20–24 hours: SMD 0.09, 95% CI −0.51–0.68; P = 0.778) or postoperative inotropic score (at 4–6 hours: SMD −0.19, 95% CI −0.51–0.14; P = 0.264; at 24 hours: SMD −0.15, 95% CI −0.49–0.18; P = 0.365).RIPC may have no beneficial effects in children undergoing CCS. However, this finding should be interpreted with caution because of heterogeneity and large-scale RCTs are still needed.     

Low vision rehabilitation in improving the quality of life for patients with impaired vision: A systematic review and meta-analysis of 52 randomized clinical trials

Background & aim:Low vision rehabilitation optimizes the use of residual vision after severe vision loss, but also teaches skills to improve visual functioning in daily life. These skills promote independence and active participation in society. This meta-analysis was designed to evaluate the efficacy of low vision rehabilitation in improving the quality of life (QoL) in visually impaired adults.Methods:We searched the Cochrane Library, PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science up to January 1, 2020. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared rehabilitation interventions with active or inactive controls were included. The standardized mean difference (SMD) with a 95% confidence interval (CI) was estimated to compare outcomes. Two reviewers extracted data and assessed trial quality independently. All statistical analyses were performed using the standard statistical procedures of RevMan 5.2.Results:A total of 52 RCTs with 6,239 participants were included in this meta-analysis. Compared to inactive comparators including waiting list or no care, low vision rehabilitation improved vision-related QoL, visual functioning (QoL: psychological aspect), and self-efficacy or self-esteem (QoL: psychological aspect), with pooled SMDs of −0.61 (95% CI −0.95 to −0.26; P = .0006), -1.14 (95% CI −1.69 to −0.59; P < .0001), and −0.84 (95% CI −1.47 to −0.22; P < .0001), respectively. Compared to active comparators, low vision rehabilitation improved vision-related QoL (SMD −0.26; 95% CI −0.46 to −0.06; P = .01) and activities of daily living (QoL: physical aspect) (SMD −0.39; 95% CI −0.67 to −0.12 P < .0001). However, no significant difference in health-related QoL and adaptation to vision loss (QoL: psychological aspect) was found between low vision rehabilitation and inactive comparators.Conclusions:This meta-analysis indicated that low vision rehabilitation interventions, particularly psychological therapies and methods of enhancing vision, may improve vision-related QoL and visual functioning in people with sight loss compared to usual care. Further studies should explore longer maintenance effects and the costs of several types of low vision rehabilitation. Studies characterizing the mechanisms of rehabilitation interventions in different settings, including low-income countries, are also required.     

Effectiveness of empowerment-based intervention on HbA1c and self-efficacy among cases with type 2 diabetes mellitus: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Objective:The aim of this study was to determine the effect of empowerment-based interventions on glucose metabolism control and psychosocial self-efficacy in people with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM).Methods:The Cochrane Library, Embase, PubMed, and Web of Science electronic databases were searched up to 22 February 2021 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated the effectiveness of empowerment-based intervention versus conventional treatment in type 2 diabetes cases. At least two investigators independently screened the literature, extracted data and evaluated the methodological quality. We calculated the pooled effect size using the mean difference (MD) or standard mean difference (SMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) through RevMan V 5.4.1.Results:Fifteen randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were eligible for inclusion in the present study. A total of 2344 adults (1128 in the intervention groups and 1216 in the control) were covered. Five of these studies involved 671 cases of psychosocial self-efficacy, and 4 studies included 622 cases of diabetes knowledge. The meta-analysis showed that compared to routine care, empowerment-based intervention was associated with reduced glycated hemoglobin levels (SMD −0.20; 95% CI −0.31 to −0.08; Z = 3.40, P < .001, I² = 42%), increased diabetes empowerment scores (SMD 0.24; 95% CI 0.10–0.37; Z = 3.42, P < .001, I² = 0%), and increased diabetes knowledge scores (SMD 0.96; 95% CI 0.55–1.36; Z = 4.61, P < .001, I² = 80%).Conclusions:Empowerment-based intervention in adults with T2DM results in improvements in glycated hemoglobin, psychosocial self-efficacy and diabetes knowledge.     

Efficacy and safety of sacubitril-valsartan in patients with heart failure: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials: A PRISMA-compliant article

Background:To investigate the efficacy and safety of sacubitril-valsartan in patients with heart failure, relevant randomized clinical trials (RCTs) were analyzed.Methods:We used Cochrane Library, PubMed web of science, CNKI, VIP, Medline, ISI Web of Science, CBMdisc, and Wanfang database to conduct a systematic literature research. A fixed-effects model was used to evaluate the standardized mean differences (SMDs) with 95% confidence intervals. We conducted sensitivity analysis and analyzed publication bias to comprehensively estimate the efficacy and safety of sacubitril-valsartan in patients with heart failure.Results:Among 132 retrieved studies, 5 relevant RCTs were included in the meta-analysis. The result showed that left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) was improved after sacubitril-valsartan in patients with heart failure, with an SMD (95% CI of 1.1 [1.01, 1.19] and P < .00001 fixed-effects model). Combined outcome indicators showed that, combined outcome indicators showed that, compared with control group, the left ventricular volume index (LAVI) (WMD = −2.18, 95% CI [−3.63, −0.74], P = .003), the E/e’ (WMD = −1.01, 95% CI [−1.89, −0.12], P = .03), the cardiovascular death (RR = 0.89, 95% CI [0.83, 0.96], P = .003], and the rehospitalization rate of heart failure (RR = 0.83, 95% CI [0.78, 0.88], P < .01) decreased more significantly, but it had no effect on renal function (WMD = 0.74, 95% CI [0.54, 1.01], P = .06).Conclusions:The present meta-analysis suggested that sacubitril-valsartan may improve the cardiac function of heart failure. Given the limited number of included studies, additional large sample-size RCTs are required to determine the long-term effect of cardiac function of sacubitril-valsartan in patients with heart failure.     

Efficacy and safety of intra-articular injection of mesenchymal stem cells in the treatment of knee osteoarthritis: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Objective:To evaluate the effects and safety of intra-articular injection of mesenchymal stem cells on patients with knee osteoarthritis by a systematic review and meta-analysis.Methods:PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library were retrieved. An assessment of the risk of bias was done through the Cochrane Collaborative Bias Risk Tool, publication bias was assessed by plotting funnel plots and Egger tests. Pain and functional improvements in patients with knee osteoarthritis were determined by changes in VAS scores and WOMAC scores at baseline and follow-up endpoints. For the evaluation of MRI, the WORMS score and changes in cartilage volume were used. In addition, the number of adverse events in the intervention group and the control group were counted to explore the safety.Results:A total of 10 randomized controlled trials involving 335 patients were included. In the pooled analysis, compared with the control groups, the VAS scores of MSC groups decreased significantly (MD,−19.24; 95% CI: −26.31 to −12.18, P < .00001. All of the WOMAC scores also improved significantly: the total scores (SMD, − 0.66; 95% CI: − 1.09 to −0.23, P = .003), pain scores (SMD, − 0.46; 95% CI: − 0.75 to −0.17, P = .002), stiffness scores (SMD, −0.32; 95% CI: −0.64 to 0.00 P = 0.05), and functional scores (SMD, −0.36; 95% CI: −0.69 to −0.04, P = .03). Two studies with non-double-blind designs were the main source of heterogeneity. In terms of cartilage repair, there was no significant difference in the WORMS score, but there was a significant increase in cartilage volume in the MSC group (SMD, 0.69; 95% CI: 0.25 to 1.13, P = .002). The proportion of patients with adverse events in the MSCs treatment group was significantly higher than that in the control group (OR, 3.20; 95% CI: 1.50 to 6.83, P = .003).Conclusions:Intra-articular injection of mesenchymal stem cells is effective and safety to relieve pain and improve motor function of patients with knee osteoarthritis in a short term which is different to conclusions of previous study.     

The analgesic evaluation of gabapentin for arthroscopy: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Introduction:The efficacy of gabapentin for pain management of arthroscopy remains controversial. We conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to explore the influence of gabapentin versus placebo on the postoperative pain intensity of arthroscopy.Methods:We search PubMed, EMbase, Web of science, EBSCO, and Cochrane library databases through April 2020 for randomized controlled trials assessing the effect of gabapentin versus placebo on pain control of arthroscopy. This meta-analysis is performed using the random-effect model.Results:Five randomized controlled trials are included in the meta-analysis. Overall, compared with control group for arthroscopy, gabapentin remarkably decreases pain scores at 24 hour (standard mean difference [SMD]=-0.68; 95% confidence interval [CI]=-1.15 to -0.02; P = .21), analgesic consumption (SMD = -18.24; 95% CI=-24.61 to -11.88; P < .00001), nausea and vomiting (OR = 0.42; 95% CI = 0.21 to 0.84; P = .01), but has no obvious influence on pain scores at 6 h (SMD = −1.30; 95% CI = −2.92 to 0.31; P = .11) or dizziness (OR = 1.12; 95% CI = 0.56 to 2.24; P = .75).Conclusions:Gabapentin is effective for pain control after arthroscopy.     

Femoral nerve block versus fascia iliaca block for pain control in knee and hip arthroplasties: A meta-analysis

Background:This meta-analysis aimed to compare the efficiency of fascia iliaca compartment block (FICB) and femoral nerve block (FNB) for pain management in knee and hip surgeries.Methods:We searched four electronic databases (Pubmed, Embase, Cochrane library database, Web of Science) from inception to January 2019. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included. Two review authors independently extracted data for each included study. Primary outcomes were visual analogue scale at 12 hours, 24 hours, 48 hours, total morphine consumption, the length of hospital stay and the occurrence of nausea and vomiting. Standardized mean difference (SMD) or risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for continuous outcomes and discontinuous outcomes respectively. We used the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool to assess risk of bias. Stata 12.0 was used for meta-analysis.Results:Finally, 7 RCTs involving 508 patients (FICB = 254, FNB = 254) were included in this meta-analysis. Compared with FNB group, FICB has no benefit for visual analogue scale at 12 hours (SMD = 0.02, 95% CI, −0.15 to 0.19; P = .820), 24 hours (SMD = −0.02, 95% CI, −0.22 to 0.18; P = .806), and 48 hours (SMD = −0.02, 95% CI, −0.22 to 0.19; P = .872). No significant differences were found regarding total morphine consumption (SMD = −0.07, 95% CI, −0.29 to 0.15; P = .533). What''s more, there was no significant difference between the length of hospital stay and the occurrence of nausea and vomiting (P > .05).Conclusion:FICB has equivalent pain control and morphine-sparing efficacy when compared with FNB. More high-quality RCTs are needed to identify the optimal drugs and volume of local infiltration protocols.     

Clinical efficacy and safety of traditional Chinese medicine Xiao Yao San in insomnia combined with anxiety

Background:Patients with long-term insomnia generally experience anxiety and depression. Traditional sleeping pills and anti-anxiety drugs have certain limitations. Xiao Yao San (XYS), a complementary and alternative therapy, has been widely used to treat insomnia combined with anxiety. This study aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of XYS in the treatment of insomnia combined with anxiety.Methods:Related literature was retrieved from 8 electronic databases from the establishment time to March 2021. The subjects were diagnosed with insomnia combined with anxiety. We assessed the methodological quality of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) according to the Cochrane Handbook. Data analysis was conducted using RevMan 5.3 software.Results:The analysis includes 9 RCTs involving 681 patients. Meta-analysis supported that as an auxiliary drug for Western medicine (WM), XYS could enhance the clinical efficacy of insomnia calculated according to the traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) syndrome score scale (risk ratio [RR]: 1.26; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.13–1.43; P = .0002) and reduced the scores of Hamilton Anxiety Scale (mean difference [MD]: −5.19; 95% CI: −7.78 to −2.60; P < .001), Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (MD: −3.35; 95% CI: −4.86 to −1.84; P < .001), Self-rating Anxiety Scale (MD: −9.38; 95% CI: −10.20 to −8.75; P < .001), TCM syndrome score scale for insomnia (MD: −4.45; 95% CI: −6.65 to −2.24; P < .001), and TCM syndrome score scale for anxiety (MD: −5.54; 95% CI: −9.48 to −1.6; P = .006). The summary analysis also shows that the separate use of XYS was advantageous in reducing the scores of the Hamilton Anxiety Scale (MD: −3.70; 95% CI: −6.31 to −1.09; P = .005), Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (MD: −1.82; 95% CI: −2.39 to −1.24; P < .001), and Self-rating Anxiety Scale (MD: −10.79; 95% CI: −14.09 to −7.49; P < .001). The incidence of adverse events with XYS as an ancillary drug or used separately was lower than that in the WM.Conclusion:Our systematic evaluation and meta-analysis showed that XYS combined with WM or XYS alone was beneficial for improving sleep quality and relieving anxiety. Due to the low methodological quality, small sample size, and significant heterogeneity of RCTs, more rigorous and scientific clinical trials are required to further evaluate the efficacy and safety of XYS.PROSPERO registration number:CRD42020190613.     

Efficacy and safety of nitrate supplementation on exercise tolerance in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background:Exercise intolerance was prevalent in people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and had a detrimental effect on the quality of life. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of nitrate supplementation in exercise tolerance of people with COPD.Methods:We searched medical databases including Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and PubMed from inception to October 2020 for randomized control trials in treating COPD with nitrate supplementation.Results:Nine trials were identified. Compared with placebo, nitrate supplementation has no significant effect on the following variables: exercise endurance time (standard mean difference [SMD]: 0.06; 95% confidence interval [CI]: –0.39 to 0.52; P = .79), exercise capacity (SMD: 0.30; 95% CI: –0.21 to 0.80; P = .25), oxygen consumption (SMD: –0.04; 95% CI: –0.33 to 0.25; P = .80), resting systolic blood pressure (MD: –2.84; 95% CI: –8.46 to 2.78; P = .32), systolic blood pressure after exercise (MD: –4.66; 95% CI –15.66 to 6.34; P = .41), resting diastolic blood pressure (MD: 0.89; 95% CI: –4.41 to 6.19; P = .74), diastolic blood pressure after exercise (MD: –0.21; 95% CI: –5.51 to 5.10; P = .94), heart rate (MD: –2.52; 95% CI: –7.76 to 2.73; P = .35), and arterial oxygen saturation (MD: –0.44; 95% CI: –2.38 to 1.49; P = .65). No severe adverse effects from nitrate supplementation were reported in the included trails.Conclusion:Current evidence suggests that nitrate supplementation may be safe but ineffective for improving exercise tolerance in people with COPD.     

Quality of Life After Surgery or Surveillance for Asymptomatic Primary Hyperparathyroidism: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

A number of studies have investigated the effects of surgery on symptoms and quality of life in patients with hyperparathyroidism. However, the results are inconsistent. We conducted this meta-analysis to quantitatively assess changes in quality of life among patients with asymptomatic primary hyperparathyroidism.Different databases were searched for randomized controlled trials comparing surgery with surveillance. Quality of life was measured by the Short Form-36 general health survey. The pooled random-effects estimates of standardized mean difference (SMD) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated.Three trials involving 294 participants were included. At 1 year, patients undergoing parathyroidectomy had significantly better physical role functioning (SMD, 0.31; 95% CI 0.04–0.57; P = 0.02) and emotional role functioning (SMD, 0.29; 95% CI 0.02–0.55; P = 0.03). At 2 years, the surgery group had significantly better emotional role functioning (SMD, 0.35; 95% CI 0.02–0.67; P = 0.04) than the surveillance group. Furthermore, compared with baseline, emotional role functioning improved after surgery (SMD, 0.31; 95% CI 0.02–0.60; P = 0.04), whereas emotional role functioning tended to get worse in patients assigned to medical surveillance (SMD, −0.27; 95% CI −0.55 to 0.02; P = 0.07).Although Short Form-36 is a generic instrument, our results suggest that parathyroidectomy may be associated with better quality of life, especially in the emotional aspects of well-being.     

The effectiveness of dextrose prolotherapy in plantar fasciitis: A systemic review and meta-analysis

Background:Dextrose prolotherapy (DPT) is considered to be a type of regenerative therapy and is widely used in various musculoskeletal disorders. Plantar fasciitis is a common cause of heel pain that affects the quality of life of many people. We aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of DPT for plantar fasciitis.Methods:PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched from their respective inception dates to June 2021. Only randomized controlled trials comparing DPT and other interventions for plantar fasciitis were included in this review. Standardized mean differences (SMDs) with 95% confidence intervals were calculated for comparison. The outcome measurements included visual analog score, numeric rating scale, Foot Function index, Revised Foot Function index, American Orthopedic Foot and Ankle Score, and plantar fascia thickness. Post-treatment duration was classified as short-term (1–2 months), medium-term (3 months), or long-term (6 months).Results:Six studies with 388 adult patients diagnosed with plantar fasciitis were included for the meta-analysis. In terms of pain scores improvement, DPT was superior to placebo or exercise in the short-term (SMD: −1.163, 95%CI: −2.17 to −0.156) and the medium-term (SMD: −1.394, 95%CI: −2.702 to −0.085). DPT was inferior to corticosteroid injection in the short-term (SMD: 0.781, 95%CI: 0.41 to 1.152). For functional improvement, DPT was superior to placebo or exercise in the short-term (SMD: −1.51, 95%CI: −2.96 to −0.059), but inferior to corticosteroid injection (SMD: 0.526, 95%CI: 0.161 to 0.89) and extracorporeal shock wave therapy in the short-term (SMD: 0.484, 95%CI: 0.145 to 0.822). Randomized controlled trials showed a better pain improvement in the long-term for patients treated with DPT compared to corticosteroid (P = .002) and exercise control (P < .05). No significant differences were found between patients treated with DPT and patients treated with platelet-rich plasma.Conclusion:Dextrose prolotherapy was a safe and effective treatment option for plantar fasciitis that may have long-term benefits for patients. The effects were comparable to extracorporeal shock wave therapy or platelet-rich plasma injection. Further studies with standardized protocols and long-term follow-up are needed to address potential biases.     

Effectiveness of low-level gallium aluminium arsenide laser therapy for temporomandibular disorder with myofascial pain: A systemic review and meta-analysis

Purpose:Temporomandibular disorder (TMD) causes masticatory muscle pain and mouth opening limitations and affects patients’ ability to eat, practice oral health and perform other activities of daily living. Although the benefits of low-energy lasers in treating TMD have been reported, the results vary greatly depending on the equipment used and the energy output. This study systematically evaluated the efficacy of a low-level gallium aluminium arsenide (GaAlAs) laser treatment for TMD with myofascial pain and maxillary pain.Methods:We searched the PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published since database inception to April 5, 2020, that compared low-level laser treatment to sham/placebo treatment or no intervention in patients suffering from TMD with myofascial pain. Three reviewers independently screened the literature, extracted data, and assessed the quality of the included studies according to the risk-of-bias tool recommended by the Cochrane Handbook V.5.1.0 (Cochrane Collaboration, London, UK). Then, a meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.3 and Stata 15.1 software.Results:The data from 8 randomized controlled trials including 181 patients were analyzed. The severity of myofascial TMD pain (measured on a visual analogue scale, VAS) at the end of treatment was significantly different between the control laser therapy and the low-level GaAlAs laser therapy (weighted mean difference [WMD] = −0.76, 95% confidence interval [CI] −1.51 to 0.01, P = .046); at 3 to 4 weeks after treatment, there was no significant difference (WMD = 1.24, 95% CI −0.04 to 2.51, P = .057). In addition, there was no significant improvement in maximum mouth opening (MMO) at the end of treatment (WMD = −0.03, 95% CI −4.13 to 4.06, P = .987) or at 3 to 4 weeks after treatment (WMD = 1.22, 95% CI −2.94 to 5.39, P = .565).Conclusions:The results of this study suggest that there is insufficient evidence to indicate an efficacy of low-level GaAlAs laser therapy in improving TMD pain and maximal oral opening. These results suggest that clinicians should make appropriate recommendations to inform patient decision-making.     

Analgesic comparison of dezocine plus propofol versus fentanyl plus propofol for gastrointestinal endoscopy: A meta-analysis

Introduction:As the adjunctive anesthesia to propofol, both dezocine and fentanyl showed some potential for gastrointestinal endoscopy. This meta-analysis aimed to compare their efficacy and safety.Methods:PubMed, EMbase, Web of science, EBSCO, and Cochrane library databases were systematically searched. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the effect of dezocine versus fentanyl for the anesthesia of patients undergoing gastrointestinal endoscopy were included.Results:Five RCTs involving 677 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Overall, compared with fentanyl plus propofol for gastrointestinal endoscopy, dezocine plus propofol resulted in the reduction in propofol dose(mean difference [MD] = −11.72; 95% confidence interval [CI] = −22.83 to −0.61; P = .04), awakening time (std. MD = −1.79; 95% CI = −3.31 to −0.27; P = .02) and hypopnea (risk ratio [RR] = 0.16; 95% CI = 0.06–0.41; P = .0002), but had no remarkable effect on induction time (MD = 1.20; 95% CI = −0.98 to 3.39; P = .28), postoperative pain score (MD = −0.38; 95% CI = −1.00 to 0.24; P = .24), nausea or vomiting (RR = 0.45; 95% CI = 0.10–1.98; P = .29).Conclusion:Dezocine plus propofol may be better for the anesthesia of gastrointestinal endoscopy than fentanyl plus propofol.     

Effects of ACEIs Versus ARBs on Proteinuria or Albuminuria in Primary Hypertension: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials

Although angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) belong to a family of therapies that block the renin–angiotensin system and are suggested to improve proteinuria/albuminuria, it is unclear which is more effective.To compare the effects of ACEIs and ARBs on proteinuria in primary hypertension by performing a meta-analysis covering randomized controlled trials (RCTs).We systematically searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from January 1990 to November 2014. Eligible studies were RCTs of ACEI therapy versus ARB therapy that reported the albumin excretion rate (AER), albumin (Alb), and urinary albumin excretion (UAE) as outcomes.Seventeen RCTs, including 17,951 patients (without limit of race, age, or sex) with a mean duration of 62.6 weeks, were included. Pooled analysis suggested that ACEIs and ARBs showed no significant differences in AER/Alb/UAE/24-h urine protein/24-h urine total protein in a comparison of 10 trials (SMD 0.09; 95% CI –0.18–0.36; P = 0.52). No significant differences were observed in urinary protein/creatinine ratio (UPCR)/urinary albumin/creatinine ratio (UACR), or albumin/creatinine ratio (ACR) in 7 trials (SMD 0.15; 95% CI –1.88–2.19; P = 0.88). The total outcome of ACEIs and ARBs also showed no significant difference (SMD 0.13; 95% CI –1.03–1.29; P = 0.83). The efficacies of ACEIs and ARBs in controlling blood pressure as a secondary indicator were also similar (SMD –0.50; 95% CI –1.58–0.58; P = 0.37).Based on a meta-analysis of 17 randomized controlled trials including 17,951 patients, we found that ACEIs and ARBs can reduce urine protein levels, improve blood pressure, and were similarly effective in terms of reducing urinary protein excretion.     

Effects of inhalation and propofol anaesthesia on postoperative cognitive dysfunction in elderly noncardiac surgical patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background:Postoperative cognitive dysfunction (POCD) is a very common event in elderly noncardiac surgical patients. The effects of inhalational anaesthetics and propofol on the incidence of POCD and postoperative cognitive status at different time points after surgery are currently unclear.Methods:We searched the Embase, Medline, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs), in which inhalation anaesthesia and propofol anaesthesia were compared. The incidence of POCD or postoperative cognitive status was assessed in elderly patients undergoing noncardiac surgery.Results:Fifteen RCTs with 1854 patients were included in this meta-analysis. The incidence of POCD on postoperative Days 2–6 after propofol anaesthesia was markedly lower than that after inhalation anaesthesia (risk ratio (RR): 0.37, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.15–0.88, P = .025), and Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) scores after propofol anaesthesia were substantially higher than those after inhalation anaesthesia (standard mean difference (SMD): 0.59, 95% CI: 0.07–1.11, P = .026). The levels of interleukin-6 (IL-6) and tumour necrosis factor-α (TNF-α) were much lower after propofol anaesthesia than after inhalation anaesthesia (SMD: -2.027, 95% CI: -3.748– -0.307, P = .021; SMD: -0.68, 95% CI: -0.93– -0.43, P < .001).Conclusions:The moderate evidence from this meta-analysis shows that, in elderly noncardiac surgical patients, propofol anaesthesia is superior to inhalation anaesthesia for attenuating of early POCD incidence, and low-level evidence shows that cognitive status is higher and systemic inflammation is less severe after propofol anaesthesia in the early days after surgery.Limitations:The sample size was not sufficiently large for systemic inflammation, and the tools to identify POCD were not uniform in the included studies.     

Efficacy and safety of unilateral biportal endoscopy compared with microscopic decompression in the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis: A protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis

Objective:Systematic evaluation of the efficacy and safety of unilateral biportal endoscopic decompression in the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis.Methods:We conducted a systematic literature search and compared the randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and retrospective studies of unilateral biportal endoscopy (UBE) and microscopic decompression (MD) in the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis from several databases.Results:Seven studies were included. The results of meta-analysis showed that the operation time of UBE was shorter than that of MD. [SMD = −0.443, 95% CI (−0.717, −0.169), P = .002]. Compared with MD, the patients’ back pain was slighter on the 1st day, 1–2 months and 6 months after UBE. During the long-term follow-up, there was no significant difference in back pain between MD and UBE [SMD = −0.519, 95% CI (−0.934, −0.104), P = .014]. There was no significant difference in lower limb visual analogue score (VAS) score between UBE decompression and MD [SMD = −0.105, 95% CI (−0.356, 0.146), P = .412]. The results of meta-analysis showed that the C-reactive protein (CRP) level of UBE was lower than that of MD [weighted mean difference = −1.437, 95% CI (−2.347, −0.527), P = .002]. There was no significant difference in other clinical effects between the 2 groups.Conclusion:The operation time of UBE was shorter than that of MD, and it was superior to micro decompression in early back VAS score, lower limb VAS score and early postoperative CRP level. There was no statistical difference between UBE and MD in other outcomes.     

The risk factors of gestational diabetes mellitus in patients with polycystic ovary syndrome: What should we care

The influencing factors of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) in the polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) patients remain unclear, we aimed to investigate the risk factors of GDM in patients with PCOS, to provide reliable evidence for the prevention and treatment of GDM in PCOS patients.PCOS patients treated in our hospital from January 1, 2019 to October 31, 2020 were included. The personal and clinical treatment details of GDM and no GDM patients were analyzed. Logistic regressions were performed to analyze the factors influencing the occurrence of GDM.A total of 196 PCOS patients were included, the incidence of GDM in patients with PCOS was 23.98%. There were significant differences in the age, body mass index, insulin resistance index, fasting insulin, testosterone, androstenedione, and sex hormone-binding protein between GDM and no GDM patients with PCOS (all P < .05), and no significant differences in the family history of GDM, the history of adverse pregnancy, and multiple pregnancies were found (all P > .05). Age ≥30 years (odds ratio (OR) 2.418, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.181–3.784), body mass index ≥24 kg/m² (OR 1.973, 95%CI 1.266–3.121), insulin resistance index ≥22.69 (OR 2.491, 95%CI 1.193–4.043), fasting insulin ≥22.71 mIU/L (OR 2.508, 95%CI 1.166–5.057), testosterone ≥2.85 nmol/L (OR 1.821, 95%CI 1.104–2.762), androstenedione ≥6.63 nmol/L (OR 1.954, 95%CI 1.262–2.844), sex hormone-binding protein <64.22 nmol/L (OR 1.497, 95%CI 1.028–2.016) were the independent risk factors of GDM in patients with PCOS (all P < .05). The incidence of preeclampsia, premature delivery, premature rupture of membranes, polyhydramnios, and postpartum hemorrhage in the GDM group was significantly higher than that of the no-GDM group (all P < .05). There was no significant difference in the incidence of oligohydramnios between the 2 groups (P = .057).The incidence of GDM in PCOS patients is high, and the measures targeted at the risk factors are needed to reduce the occurrence of GDM in patients with PCOS.     

Safety and Efficacy of the Moderate Sedation During Flexible Bronchoscopic Procedure: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Moderate sedatives have been increasingly used to improve patient comfort during flexible bronchoscopy (FB). However, routine use of moderate sedation during FB is controversial because its efficacy and safety are not well established.This study aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of moderate sedation during FB.A search was made of Medline, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library to May 2014.Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs were included.The main analysis was designed to examine the efficacy of moderate sedation during FB in sedation than no-sedation.The willingness to repeat FB was significantly more in sedation than no-sedation (odds ratio [OR] 2.30; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.11–4.73; P = 0.02; I² = 22.5). The duration of FB was shorter in sedation group than no-sedation group (standardized mean difference [SMD] −0.21; 95% CI −0.38 to −0.03; P = 0.02; I² = 78.3%). Event of hypoxia was not significantly different between sedation and no-sedation groups (OR 0.86; 95% CI 0.42–1.73; P = 0.67; I² = 0%). The SpO₂ during procedure was not different between sedation and no-sedation groups (SMD −0.14; 95% CI −0.37 to 0.08; P = 0.21; I² = 49.9%). However, in subgroup analysis without supplemental oxygen, the SpO₂ was significantly lower in sedation than no-sedation group (SMD −0.45; 95% CI −0.78 to −0.11; P = 0.01; I² = 0.0%).According to this meta-analysis, moderate sedation in FB would be useful in patients who will require repeated bronchoscopies as well as safe in respiratory depression. To our knowledge, although the various sedative drugs are already used in the real field, this analysis was the first attempt to quantify objective results. We anticipate more definite and studies designed to elucidate standardized outcomes for moderate sedation in FB.