-
1.
The Influence of Val66Met Polymorphism in Brain-Derived Neurotrophic Factor on Stroke Recovery Outcome: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
Liu, X, Fang, JC, Zhi, XY, Yan, QY, Zhu, H, Xie, J
Neurorehabilitation and neural repair. 2021;(6):550-560
Abstract
Background and purpose. A single nucleotide polymorphism at nucleotide 196 (G/A) in the human brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) gene produces an amino acid substitution (valine to methionine) at codon 66(Val66Met). It is unclear whether carriers of this substitution may have worse functional outcomes after stroke. We aimed to explore the distribution of Val66Met polymorphism and evaluate the effect of different genotypes on stroke functional recovery. Methods. Several databases were searched using the keywords BDNF or brain-derived neurotrophic factor, codon66, G196A, rs6265, or Val66Met, and stroke. Results. A total of 25 articles were relevant to estimate the distribution of alleles; 5 reports were applied in the meta-analysis to assess genetic differences on recovery outcomes. The genetic model analysis showed that the recessive model should be used; we combined data for AA versus GA+GG (GG-Val/Val, GA-Val/Met, AA-Met/Met). The results showed that stroke patients with AA might have worse recovery outcomes than those with GA+GG (odds ratio = 1.90; 95% CI: 1.17-3.10; P = .010; I2 = 69.2%). Overall, the A allele may be more common in Asian patients (48.6%; 95% CI: 45.8%-51.4%, I2 = 54.2%) than Caucasian patients (29.8%; 95% CI: 7.5%-52.1%; I2 = 99.1%). However, in Caucasian patients, the frequency of the A allele in Iranians (87.9%; 95% CI: 83.4%-92.3%) was quite higher than that in other Caucasians (18.7%; 95% CI: 16.6%-20.9%; I2 = 0.00%). Conclusion. Val66Met AA carriers may have worse rehabilitation outcomes than GA+GG carriers. Further studies are needed to determine the effect of Val66Met polymorphism on stroke recovery and to evaluate this relationship with ethnicity, sex, age, stroke type, observe duration, stroke severity, injury location, and therapies.
-
2.
Biomechanical changes and recovery of gait function after total hip arthroplasty for osteoarthritis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Bahl, JS, Nelson, MJ, Taylor, M, Solomon, LB, Arnold, JB, Thewlis, D
Osteoarthritis and cartilage. 2018;(7):847-863
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To determine the change in walking gait biomechanics after total hip arthroplasty (THA) for osteoarthritis (OA) compared to the pre-operative gait status, and to compare the recovery of gait following THA with healthy individuals. METHODS Systematic review with meta-analysis of studies investigating changes in gait biomechanics after THA compared to (1) preoperative levels and (2) healthy individuals. Data were pooled at commonly reported time points and standardised mean differences (SMDs) were calculated in meta-analyses for spatiotemporal, kinematic and kinetic parameters. RESULTS Seventy-four studies with a total of 2,477 patients were included. At 6 weeks postoperative, increases were evident for walking speed (SMD: 0.32, 95% confidence intervals (CI) 0.14, 0.50), stride length (SMD: 0.40, 95% CI 0.19, 0.61), step length (SMD: 0.41, 95% CI 0.23, 0.59), and transverse plane hip range of motion (ROM) (SMD: 0.36, 95% CI 0.05, 0.67) compared to pre-operative gait. Sagittal, coronal and transverse hip ROM was significantly increased at 3 months (SMDs: 0.50 to 1.07). At 12 months postoperative, patients demonstrated deficits compared with healthy individuals for walking speed (SMD: -0.59, 95% CI -1.08 to -0.11), stride length (SMD: -1.27, 95% CI -1.63, -0.91), single limb support time (SMD: -0.82, 95% CI -1.23, -0.41) and sagittal plane hip ROM (SMD: -1.16, 95% CI -1.83, -0.49). Risk of bias scores ranged from seven to 24 out of 26. CONCLUSIONS Following THA for OA, early improvements were demonstrated for spatiotemporal and kinematic gait patterns compared to the pre-operative levels. Deficits were still observed in THA patients compared to healthy individuals at 12 months.
-
3.
Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs reduce the time to recovery of gut function after elective colorectal surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Milne, TGE, Jaung, R, O'Grady, G, Bissett, IP
Colorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland. 2018;(8):O190-O198
Abstract
AIM: Postoperative ileus causes significant patient morbidity after abdominal surgery. Some evidence suggests nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) may reduce time to gut recovery, but there has not been a meta-analysis to assess their efficacy. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to determine the benefit of NSAIDs for recovery of postoperative gut function in patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery. METHOD MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL and reference lists were searched with no date or language restrictions. Randomized controlled trials comparing the use of NSAIDs with placebo in the perioperative or postoperative period were identified. Included studies reported outcomes relevant to gut function: time to pass flatus or stool and time to tolerate an oral diet. The mean difference in time from surgery until passage of flatus, stool and tolerance of diet were meta-analysed using a random-effects model in RevMan 5.3. RESULTS This study identified 992 relevant articles. Five randomized controlled trials on patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery met our inclusion criteria and were meta-analysed. Compared with placebo, NSAIDs significantly improved the time to pass flatus (mean difference -9.44 h, 95% CI: -17.22, -1.65, I2 = 70%, P = 0.02), time to pass stool (mean difference -12.09 h, 95% CI: -17.16, -7.02, I2 = 0%, P < 0.001) and time to tolerate a diet (mean difference -11.95 h, 95% CI: -18.66, -5.24, I2 = 0%, P < 0.001). CONCLUSION NSAIDs significantly improve time to gut recovery after elective colorectal surgery. Current evidence is not adequate to identify whether selective or nonselective drugs should be recommended. Further high-power studies using selective drugs are required.
-
4.
Safety and efficacy of Cerebrolysin in motor function recovery after stroke: a meta-analysis of the CARS trials.
Guekht, A, Vester, J, Heiss, WD, Gusev, E, Hoemberg, V, Rahlfs, VW, Bajenaru, O, Popescu, BO, Doppler, E, Winter, S, et al
Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology. 2017;(10):1761-1769
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
This meta-analysis combines the results of two identical stroke studies (CARS-1 and CARS-2) assessing efficacy of Cerebrolysin on motor recovery during early rehabilitation. Cerebrolysin is a parenterally administered neuropeptide preparation approved for the treatment of stroke. Both studies had a prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled design. Treatment with 30 ml Cerebrolysin once daily for 3 weeks was started 24-72 h after stroke onset. In addition, patients participated in a standardized rehabilitation program for 21 days that was initiated within 72 h after stroke onset. For both studies, the original analysis data were used for meta-analysis (individual patient data analysis). The combination of these two studies by meta-analytic procedures was pre-planned, and the methods were pre-defined under blinded conditions. The nonparametric Mann-Whitney (MW) effect size of the two studies on the ARAT score on day 90 indicated superiority of Cerebrolysin compared with placebo (MW 0.62, P < 0.0001, Wei-Lachin pooling procedure, day 90, last observation carried forward; N = 442). Also, analysis of early benefit at day 14 and day 21 by means of the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale, which is regarded as most sensitive to early improvements, showed statistical significance (MW 0.59, P < 0.002). The corresponding number-needed-to-treat (NNT) for clinically relevant changes in early NIHSS was 7.1 (95% CI: 4 to 22). Cerebrolysin had a beneficial effect on motor function and neurological status in early rehabilitation patients after acute ischemic stroke. Safety aspects were comparable to placebo, showing a favourable benefit/risk ratio.
-
5.
Are compression garments effective for the recovery of exercise-induced muscle damage? A systematic review with meta-analysis.
Marqués-Jiménez, D, Calleja-González, J, Arratibel, I, Delextrat, A, Terrados, N
Physiology & behavior. 2016;:133-48
Abstract
PURPOSE The aim was to identify benefits of compression garments used for recovery of exercised-induced muscle damage. METHODS Computer-based literature research was performed in September 2015 using four online databases: Medline (PubMed), Cochrane, WOS (Web Of Science) and Scopus. The analysis of risk of bias was completed in accordance with the Cochrane Collaboration Guidelines. Mean differences and 95% confidence intervals were calculated with Hedges' g for continuous outcomes. A random effect meta-analysis model was used. Systematic differences (heterogeneity) were assessed with I(2) statistic. RESULTS Most results obtained had high heterogeneity, thus their interpretation should be careful. Our findings showed that creatine kinase (standard mean difference=-0.02, 9 studies) was unaffected when using compression garments for recovery purposes. In contrast, blood lactate concentration was increased (standard mean difference=0.98, 5 studies). Applying compression reduced lactate dehydrogenase (standard mean difference=-0.52, 2 studies), muscle swelling (standard mean difference=-0.73, 5 studies) and perceptual measurements (standard mean difference=-0.43, 15 studies). Analyses of power (standard mean difference=1.63, 5 studies) and strength (standard mean difference=1.18, 8 studies) indicate faster recovery of muscle function after exercise. CONCLUSIONS These results suggest that the application of compression clothing may aid in the recovery of exercise induced muscle damage, although the findings need corroboration.
-
6.
Enhanced recovery after gastro-intestinal surgery: The scientific background.
Mariani, P, Slim, K
Journal of visceral surgery. 2016;(6S):S19-S25
Abstract
Enhanced recovery programs (ERP) are without any doubt a major innovation in the care of surgical patients. This multimodal approach encompasses elements of both medical and surgical care. The goal of this in-depth review is to analyze the surgical aspects of ERP, underlining the scientific rationale behind each element of ERP after surgery and in particular, the role of mechanical bowel preparation before colorectal surgery, the place of minimal access surgery, the utility of nasogastric tube, abdominal drainage, bladder catheters and early re-feeding. Publication of factual data has allowed many dogmas to be discarded.
-
7.
Chewing gum for postoperative recovery of gastrointestinal function.
Short, V, Herbert, G, Perry, R, Atkinson, C, Ness, AR, Penfold, C, Thomas, S, Andersen, HK, Lewis, SJ
The Cochrane database of systematic reviews. 2015;(2):CD006506
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
BACKGROUND Ileus commonly occurs after abdominal surgery, and is associated with complications and increased length of hospital stay (LOHS). Onset of ileus is considered to be multifactorial, and a variety of preventative methods have been investigated. Chewing gum (CG) is hypothesised to reduce postoperative ileus by stimulating early recovery of gastrointestinal (GI) function, through cephalo-vagal stimulation. There is no comprehensive review of this intervention in abdominal surgery. OBJECTIVES To examine whether chewing gum after surgery hastens the return of gastrointestinal function. SEARCH METHODS We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE (via Ovid), MEDLINE (via PubMed), EMBASE (via Ovid), CINAHL (via EBSCO) and ISI Web of Science (June 2014). We hand-searched reference lists of identified studies and previous reviews and systematic reviews, and contacted CG companies to ask for information on any studies using their products. We identified proposed and ongoing studies from clinicaltrials.gov, World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and metaRegister of Controlled Trials. SELECTION CRITERIA We included completed randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that used postoperative CG as an intervention compared to a control group. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Two authors independently collected data and assessed study quality using an adapted Cochrane risk of bias (ROB) tool, and resolved disagreements by discussion. We assessed overall quality of evidence for each outcome using Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE). Studies were split into subgroups: colorectal surgery (CRS), caesarean section (CS) and other surgery (OS). We assessed the effect of CG on time to first flatus (TFF), time to bowel movement (TBM), LOHS and time to bowel sounds (TBS) through meta-analyses using a random-effects model. We investigated the influence of study quality, reviewers' methodological estimations and use of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) programmes using sensitivity analyses. We used meta-regression to explore if surgical site or ROB scores predicted the extent of the effect estimate of the intervention on continuous outcomes. We reported frequency of complications, and descriptions of tolerability of gum and cost. MAIN RESULTS We identified 81 studies that recruited 9072 participants for inclusion in our review. We categorised many studies at high or unclear risk of the bias' assessed. There was statistical evidence that use of CG reduced TFF [overall reduction of 10.4 hours (95% CI: -11.9, -8.9): 12.5 hours (95% CI: -17.2, -7.8) in CRS, 7.9 hours (95% CI: -10.0, -5.8) in CS, 10.6 hours (95% CI: -12.7, -8.5) in OS]. There was also statistical evidence that use of CG reduced TBM [overall reduction of 12.7 hours (95% CI: -14.5, -10.9): 18.1 hours (95% CI: -25.3, -10.9) in CRS, 9.1 hours (95% CI: -11.4, -6.7) in CS, 12.3 hours (95% CI: -14.9, -9.7) in OS]. There was statistical evidence that use of CG slightly reduced LOHS [overall reduction of 0.7 days (95% CI: -0.8, -0.5): 1.0 days in CRS (95% CI: -1.6, -0.4), 0.2 days (95% CI: -0.3, -0.1) in CS, 0.8 days (95% CI: -1.1, -0.5) in OS]. There was statistical evidence that use of CG slightly reduced TBS [overall reduction of 5.0 hours (95% CI: -6.4, -3.7): 3.21 hours (95% CI: -7.0, 0.6) in CRS, 4.4 hours (95% CI: -5.9, -2.8) in CS, 6.3 hours (95% CI: -8.7, -3.8) in OS]. Effect sizes were largest in CRS and smallest in CS. There was statistical evidence of heterogeneity in all analyses other than TBS in CRS.There was little difference in mortality, infection risk and readmission rate between the groups. Some studies reported reduced nausea and vomiting and other complications in the intervention group. CG was generally well-tolerated by participants. There was little difference in cost between the groups in the two studies reporting this outcome.Sensitivity analyses by quality of studies and robustness of review estimates revealed no clinically important differences in effect estimates. Sensitivity analysis of ERAS studies showed a smaller effect size on TFF, larger effect size on TBM, and no difference between groups for LOHS.Meta-regression analyses indicated that surgical site is associated with the extent of the effect size on LOHS (all surgical subgroups), and TFF and TBM (CS and CRS subgroups only). There was no evidence that ROB score predicted the extent of the effect size on any outcome. Neither variable explained the identified heterogeneity between studies. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS This review identified some evidence for the benefit of postoperative CG in improving recovery of GI function. However, the research to date has primarily focussed on CS and CRS, and largely consisted of small, poor quality trials. Many components of the ERAS programme also target ileus, therefore the benefit of CG alongside ERAS may be reduced, as we observed in this review. Therefore larger, better quality RCTS in an ERAS setting in wider surgical disciplines would be needed to improve the evidence base for use of CG after surgery.
-
8.
Neuromuscular electrical stimulation during recovery from exercise: a systematic review.
Malone, JK, Blake, C, Caulfield, BM
Journal of strength and conditioning research. 2014;(9):2478-506
Abstract
The use of subtetanic low-intensity neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES) for the purpose of promoting recovery from exercise has increased in recent years. The aim of this systematic review was to assess the effects of NMES on exercise recovery. A computerized database search of PubMed, CINAHL Plus, Sport Discus, and Cochrane Library electronic databases was conducted for the time period of January 1, 1970 to March 8, 2012. Only studies that used healthy uninjured humans and motor threshold electrical stimulation compared with at least one other recovery modality for the purpose of promoting recovery from exercise were eligible for selection. Thirteen studies satisfied the inclusion criteria and were included for analysis (11 randomized crossover trials, 1 randomized control trial [RCT], and 1 classified as other [OTH]). A quality assessment rating of the studies was performed using an extended version of The Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias. Because of the heterogeneity of the study protocols, a qualitative review (best evidence synthesis) was performed for all outcomes, whereas the results for blood lactate (BLa) were also included in a meta-analysis. Eight studies were classified as high quality, 4 as medium quality, and 1 as low quality. Three studies found a positive outcome for a subjective measure of muscle pain, 3 for BLa, 1 for lowering creatine kinase, and only 1 for a performance parameter. The meta-analysis showed no evidence in favor of NMES vs. active (ACT) and mixed evidence vs. passive (PAS) recovery for BLa. In conclusion, although there may be some subjective benefits for postexercise recovery, evidence is not convincing to support NMES for enhancing subsequent performance.
-
9.
Impact of herbal medicines on physical impairment.
Chrubasik, C, Black, A, Müller-Ladner, U, Chrubasik, S
Phytomedicine : international journal of phytotherapy and phytopharmacology. 2008;(6-7):536-9
Abstract
The usefulness of recording physical impairment during intervention studies in chronic low back patients has been questioned. A re-analysis of all of our studies investigating aqueous extracts of Harpagophytum procumbens and a proprietary ethanolic Salix extract for chronic non-specific low back pain revealed that the "physical impairment" component of the Arhus low back pain index changed very little during treatment despite appreciable changes in the other two components, "pain" and "disability", over time. For comparison, we also extracted data from the literature on the topical use of capsaicin, which showed the same thing. There may be little to lose from omitting the time-consuming assessments of "physical impairment" in studies of the (primarily analgesic) effectiveness of herbal preparations.