Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Search Search PubMed

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

4 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2026

Hyperbaric oxygen for the treatment of traumatic incomplete spinal cord injury: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

The therapeutic efficacy of hyperbaric oxygen therapy for traumatic incomplete spinal cord injury remains a subject of debate. To comprehensively evaluate the impact of hyperbaric oxygen on motor function, sensory function, and activities of daily living in patients with traumatic incomplete spinal cord injury, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis. We performed a comprehensive search across PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and major Chinese databases for randomized controlled trials published through June 2025. A total of 15 randomized controlled trials were included. The pooled results indicated that hyperbaric oxygen therapy significantly improved the American Spinal Injury Association motor score (mean difference = 10.30, 95% confidence interval: 7.70-12.90), the total American Spinal Injury Association sensory score (mean difference = 29.29, 95% confidence interval: 18.82-39.75), the American Spinal Injury Association light touch score (mean difference = 9.84, 95% confidence interval: 6.15-13.53), and the American Spinal Injury Association pinprick score (mean difference = 8.75, 95% confidence interval: 4.40-13.11). Furthermore, hyperbaric oxygen therapy was associated with significant enhancements in the Barthel Index (mean difference = 16.60, 95% confidence interval: 10.51-22.68) and the Functional Independence Measure (mean difference = 17.41, 95% confidence interval: 10.83-23.98). In conclusion, adjunctive hyperbaric oxygen therapy appears to improve motor function, sensory function, and activities of daily living in patients with traumatic incomplete spinal cord injury compared to conventional treatments alone. However, due to methodological limitations and potential publication bias in the included studies, these findings should be interpreted with caution, and further high-quality, multi-center randomized controlled trials are warranted.

Humans↗
PubMed2026

Practical Saudi Guidelines on management of moderate-to-severe psoriasis: 2026 update.

BACKGROUND: Psoriasis is a chronic, immune-mediated inflammatory skin disease that affects approximately 5.3% of the population in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA). Thus, we aim to develop updated evidence-based clinical practice guidelines for the management of adults and pediatric patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis in the KSA. METHODS: These guidelines followed the "Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation" (GRADE) methodology. We conducted a systematic literature review of PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library for high-quality evidence published between 2020 and 2026. The panel developed 31 PICO questions that address key treatment considerations for moderate-to-severe psoriasis. RESULTS: We established 27 evidence-based recommendations and 4 good-practice statements addressing key aspects of moderate-to-severe psoriasis management. These guidelines strongly recommend adopting the Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) 90 as the primary treatment goal over PASI 75. For adult patients, the guidelines recommend biologic therapies, including interleukin (IL)-17 inhibitors, IL-23 inhibitors, IL-12/23 inhibitors, and tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α inhibitors, for better disease control. For pediatric patients, the guidelines recommend early initiation of biologic therapy, with etanercept, secukinumab, ixekizumab, and adalimumab as preferred options. CONCLUSION: These Saudi national guidelines offer a comprehensive, evidence-based framework for managing moderate-to-severe psoriasis in adults and pediatric patients.

Humans↗
PubMed2026

Interventions with a significant mortality difference in acute respiratory distress syndrome: A systematic review and comparison with Guidelines.

INTRODUCTION: Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) has a high mortality rate. European Society of Intensive Care Medicine (ESICM) and American Thoracic Society (ATS) Guidelines are the worldwide reference for clinicians in management of ARDS. Mortality represents one of the most important outcomes in intensive care practice and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) the highest level of evidence. We compared Guidelines recommendations with RCT results to highlight differences and find potential new therapeutic opportunities. METHODS: We performed a systematic review of all RCTs reporting a statistically significant mortality difference in ARDS and a subsequent comparison with ESICM and ATS Guidelines recommendations. RESULTS: We identified 33 RCTs and 23 interventions with mortality difference in ARDS patients. Seven interventions relate to invasive ventilation strategies, two to noninvasive ventilation strategies, one to extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO), 12 to drugs and one to nutritional support. In 25/33 (76%) RCTs the intervention was associated with mortality reduction and in 8/33 with mortality increase (24%). Multicenter studies were 24/33 (73%) while blinding was adopted in 19/33 (58%) studies. Guidelines recommendations supported by RCTs with mortality impact include: the use of low tidal volume ventilation, prone positioning, venovenous ECMO, steroids and the avoidance of high frequency oscillatory ventilation. Eight of the interventions identified were not mentioned by Guidelines but demonstrated reduced mortality, and five further interventions demonstrated increased mortality. CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review highlights potential gaps between RCTs results and Guidelines that could be used to plan future research or highlight topics to be discussed in future Guidelines.

Humans↗
PubMed2026

Skin cell suspension autograft as an evidence-based innovation in burn and wound treatment: A systematic review of global evidence across two decades.

BACKGROUND: Skin cell suspension autograft (SCSA) is a point-of-care approach to wound management facilitating epithelialization while reducing burden associated with conventional autografting. Despite growing clinical use of SCSA across diverse wound etiologies, the global clinical evidence describing its use has not yet been comprehensively synthesized. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyzes (PRISMA) guidelines to identify studies between January 2000 and December 2024 reporting clinical use of SCSA for wound closure. Data on patient demographics, wound characteristics, and treatment methods were extracted. Clinical, safety, and health economic outcomes were extracted for comparative studies evaluating SCSA against control treatments. RESULTS: Ninety-nine studies across 13 countries were included. Across the overall dataset, SCSA was used alone or in combination with autografting for burns, surgical wounds, traumatic injuries, inflammatory conditions, and chronic wounds. Among comparative studies (n=27), SCSA consistently reduced donor skin, and healing outcomes favored SCSA in 61%, while 39% reported equivalent outcomes. Pain and esthetic outcomes more frequently favored SCSA, while safety outcomes were generally similar, with some studies favoring comparators. Health-economic outcomes suggested potential reductions in length of stay and resource utilization, although findings were variable across studies. CONCLUSION: The available global evidence supports SCSA as a versatile modality for supporting epidermal coverage across wound types and clinical contexts. However, the findings should be interpreted in the context of the limitations of this review, which include heterogenous study designs, variable outcome reporting, predominance of non-randomized data, and the absence of a formal quantitative analysis. Nevertheless, the demonstrated clinical and economic benefits in comparative studies reinforce the role of SCSA as an evidence-based innovation for burn and wound treatment.

Humans↗