Search PubMedSearch

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Hair-like projections”

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.

345 records · Page 20Linked to original sources

Effects of six weeks of guanidinoacetic acid supplementation with and without creatine monohydrate on cognitive function and markers of health in healthy adults.

BACKGROUND: Guanidinoacetic acid (GAA) supplementation has been reported to increase brain creatine content more effectively than creatine monohydrate (CrM). However, the effects on cognitive function are unclear. PURPOSE: The purpose of this proof-of-concept exploratory clinical trial was to determine whether GAA supplementation with and without CrM affects cognitive function and/or markers of health. METHODS: In a double-blind, randomized, and counterbalanced manner, 58 healthy and active adults (33 females, 35.5&#x2009;&#xb1;&#x2009;14 years, 76.2&#x2009;&#xb1;&#x2009;14 kg) ingested a PLA (PLA, 2 &#xd7; 6 g/d maltodextrin), GAA (2 &#xd7; 1 g/d)&#x2009;+&#x2009;PLA (2 &#xd7; 5 g/d), or GAA (2 &#xd7; 1 g/d)&#x2009;+&#x2009;CrM (2 &#xd7; 5 g/d) for six weeks. The participants donated fasting blood samples and completed a battery of tests and questionnaires assessing various aspects of function, mood, stress, sleep quality, and markers of health at baseline and after six weeks of supplementation. Data were analyzed using General Linear Model (GLM) multivariate and univariate with repeated measures, and mean changes from baseline with 95% confidence intervals, and Chi-squared analysis, and considered significant when the probability of error was 0.05 or less, and approaching significance (p&#x2009;>&#x2009;0.05-p&#x2009;<&#x2009;0.10). RESULTS: GAA supplementation tended to improve overall reaction time (-241.8&#x2009;ms [-533, 50], p&#x2009;=&#x2009;0.10) while significant interaction effects were observed in overall reaction time (p&#x2009;=&#x2009;0.031-330 ms [-629, -31]) and YES reaction time (-290&#x2009;ms [-484, -96], p&#x2009;=&#x2009;0.004) while recalled correct reaction time (-178&#x2009;ms [-374, 21], p&#x2009;=&#x2009;0.078) and recalled correct YES (7.4 % [-1, 15.8], p&#x2009;=&#x2009;0.084) approached significance compared to PLA. Limited to no effects were observed on the Delayed Picture Recognition Task Test, Digit Vigilance Task Test, Corsi Block Task Test, or Stroop Color-Word Task Test. The amount of time engaged in moderate physical activity was significantly greater (p&#x2009;<&#x2009;0.05) in the GAA group compared to PLA. Participants in the GAA group reported a lower frequency of controlling irritations (p&#x2009;=&#x2009;0.036), and feeling like difficulties are mounting (p&#x2009;=&#x2009;0.053) on the Perceived Stress Scale. Some positive and potentially undesirable effects were observed in sleep quality assessments. The quality of life assessment revealed that participants in the GAA group reported less frequent feelings of being worn out (p&#x2009;=&#x2009;0.068) and that their health was excellent (p&#x2009;=&#x2009;0.092) while those in the GAA&#x2009;+&#x2009;CrM group reported more frequent limitations when bending, kneeling, or stooping (p&#x2009;=&#x2009;0.053), more often feeling full of life (p&#x2009;=&#x2009;0.081), and less frequency in feeling downhearted and depressed (p&#x2009;=&#x2009;0.066). No clinically meaningful changes were observed in blood markers or self-reported side effects among the groups. CONCLUSION: Dietary supplementation with GAA (2 g/d) and the combination of CrM (10 g/d&#x2009;+&#x2009;GAA 2 g/d) for six weeks improved delayed verbal episodic recognition memory and retrieval speed and some measures of perceived stress, sleep quality, and quality of life. However, most cognitive tests were not affected, particularly when comparing the GAA to the PLA group; there were some inconsistencies in the findings, and several differences only approached significance. Additional research is needed before conclusions can be drawn. Clinical trial registration: ISRCTN68542582.

Humans

Prevalence of unruptured intracranial aneurysms according to comorbidities, risk factors, country, and time period: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The incidence of aneurysmal subarachnoid haemorrhage declined between 1980 and 2010, which coincided with a decline in smoking and prevalence of hypertension. We aimed to investigate whether the decrease in subarachnoid haemorrhage incidence is paralleled by declines in unruptured intracranial aneurysm (UIA) prevalence. METHODS: For this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched Embase, PubMed, and Web of Science for articles published in any language from Jan 1, 2011 to Dec 31, 2025, and reassessed 68 articles published before March 1, 2011 from a 2011 systematic review and meta-analysis. Articles were eligible for inclusion if they used a cross-sectional or case-control design and provided the crude number of participants and those with UIA. We only included studies reporting numbers of UIA separately from ruptured aneurysms and with ten or more patients. Summary data were independently extracted by JD with AZ or CB and conflicts were resolved by GJER. The primary outcome was proportion of participants with UIA. Relative to a hypothetical reference population (mean age 50 years, 50% women, and no comorbidities), age and/or sex-adjusted prevalence ratios (PRs) for regions, comorbidities, and risk ratios (RRs) for female sex, smoking, and hypertension were estimated using generalised linear mixed models. A time trend analysis was done by binomial meta regression using the mid-year of data acquisition. We assessed the certainty of evidence using GRADE. The study was registered with PROSPERO, number CRD420261296728. FINDINGS: Our search screened 4708 studies. 67 reassessed and 95 newly identified articles, reporting on 316&#x2008;131 participants and 11&#x2008;822 people with UIAs, were included in our meta-analysis. In the reference population, the estimated prevalence of UIAs was 3&#xb7;9% (95% CI 3&#xb7;0-5&#xb7;1). The prevalence of UIAs in individuals with atherosclerosis was 5&#xb7;5% (4&#xb7;7-6&#xb7;4; 2229 of 40970 participants) and the adjusted PR was 1&#xb7;3 (95% CI 0&#xb7;8-2&#xb7;0) compared with the reference population. For positive family history of aneurysmal subarachnoid haemorrhage (aSAH) or UIA, the UIA prevalence was 7&#xb7;9% (5&#xb7;6-11&#xb7;1; 412 of 4252 participants) and the adjusted PR was 2&#xb7;4 (0&#xb7;5-11&#xb7;2). For connective-tissue disorder, the UIA prevalence was 10&#xb7;3% (6&#xb7;5-16&#xb7;0; 94 of 879 participants) and the adjusted PR was 3&#xb7;9 (2&#xb7;0-7&#xb7;6). For autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease (ADPKD), the UIA prevalence was 12&#xb7;8% (9&#xb7;2-17&#xb7;6; 293 of 1990 participants) and the adjusted PR was 4&#xb7;4 (1&#xb7;5-12&#xb7;6). RRs were for current smoking 1&#xb7;4 (1&#xb7;2-1&#xb7;6; 798 of 27911 participants), for having hypertension 1&#xb7;6 (1&#xb7;5-1&#xb7;7, 4043 of 83053 participants), and for female sex 1&#xb7;9 (1&#xb7;8-2&#xb7;0; 3415 of 65020 women and 2122 of 76130 men). In studies on healthy individuals with MR angiography or CT angiography as imaging modality, the prevalence in 2016-2022 was 6&#xb7;6% (6&#xb7;3-6&#xb7;8; 2904 of 41191 participants). The adjusted PR was 1&#xb7;8 (1&#xb7;1-2&#xb7;8) for 2016-2022 versus 2002-2015. Prevalence of UIAs of 5 mm or larger was 0&#xb7;7% (0&#xb7;6-0&#xb7;8) in 2002-2015 and 1&#xb7;4% (1&#xb7;0-1&#xb7;9) in 2016-2022. The UIA prevalence did not differ between countries. &#x3c4;2 showed significant heterogeneity between studies. The certainty of the evidence ranged from very low to moderate. INTERPRETATION: Prevalence of UIA is increasing, particularly over the past two decades. This increase is only in part explained by improved detection of small UIAs and an ageing population, and other factors-such as environmental-are likely involved. Alongside patients with ADPKD and a positive family history of aSAH, patients with connective-tissue disorders had a higher prevalence of UIA than the reference population. Our findings warrant further investigation into the potential benefit of personalised screening and management strategies in groups at high risk for having UIAs. FUNDING: None.

Humans

Long-term hormone therapy for perimenopausal and postmenopausal women.

BACKGROUND: Hormone therapy is widely provided to control menopausal symptoms and has been used for the management and prevention of cardiovascular disease, osteoporosis and dementia in older women. This is an updated version of a Cochrane review first published in 2005. OBJECTIVES: To assess the long-term effects of prolonged use (at least one year) of hormone therapy on mortality, cardiovascular outcomes, cancer, gallbladder disease, fractures and cognition in perimenopausal and postmenopausal women. SEARCH METHODS: We used the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, three other databases and two trial registers, together with reference checking, citation searching and contact with study authors to identify the studies included in the review. The latest search date was 26 September 2024. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised, double-blind trials in which peri- or postmenopausal women took hormone therapy or placebo for at least one year. We included various oestrogen formulations, with or without progestogens. We focused on studies assessing hormone therapy's effects on long-term clinical outcomes, including death, coronary events and cancer. Hormone therapy's efficacy in managing menopausal symptoms was beyond the scope of this review, and is assessed in other Cochrane reviews. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently selected studies, assessed risk of bias and extracted data. We calculated risk ratios (RRs) for dichotomous data and mean differences (MDs) for continuous data, along with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We assessed the certainty of the evidence using GRADE. MAIN RESULTS: We included 24 studies - with two newly added in this update - involving 45,660 participants. We derived nearly 70% of the data from two well-conducted studies: the Heart and Estrogen/progestin Replacement Study (HERS 1998) and the large, multi-component Women's Health Initiative research programme, which included two hormone therapy arms (WHI 1998). Across all the studies, most participants were postmenopausal American women with one or more comorbidities. The mean participant age in most studies was over 60 years. Only one included study focused on perimenopausal women. We present full results for all included studies with available data in the main review. The results presented below are drawn from WHI 1998, in which the combined hormone therapy arm and the oestrogen-only arm were run concurrently, with women assigned to the appropriate trial based on their uterus status. One study with 16,608 postmenopausal women with an intact uterus compared combined continuous hormone therapy (conjugated equine oestrogen and medroxyprogesterone acetate) to placebo, and measured outcomes at an average of 5.6 years of follow-up. Based on this study, combined continuous hormone therapy probably makes little to no difference to the risk of a coronary event (RR 1.17, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.44; moderate-certainty evidence). It may increase the risk of stroke (RR 1.39, 95% CI 1.09 to 2.09; low-certainty evidence) and venous thromboembolism (RR 2.03, 95% CI 1.55 to 6.64; low-certainty evidence). Compared to placebo, combined continuous hormone therapy probably increases the risk of breast cancer (RR 1.27, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.56; moderate-certainty evidence) and probably makes little to no difference to the risk of lung cancer (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.46; moderate-certainty evidence). It may increase gallbladder disease requiring surgery (RR 1.64, 95% CI 1.30 to 2.06; 14,203 participants; low-certainty evidence), and probably reduces the risk of all clinical fractures (RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.71 to 0.86; moderate-certainty evidence). One study including 10,739 postmenopausal women who had undergone a hysterectomy compared oestrogen-only (conjugated equine oestrogen) hormone therapy to placebo, and measured outcomes at an average of seven years' follow-up. Based on this study, oestrogen-only hormone therapy probably makes little to no difference to the risk of coronary events (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.13), venous thromboembolism (RR 1.32, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.74) and breast cancer (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.61 to 1.01), all with moderate-certainty evidence. It may make little to no difference to the risk of lung cancer (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.48; low-certainty evidence). Oestrogen-only hormone therapy probably increases the risk of stroke (RR 1.33, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.67) and gallbladder disease requiring surgery (RR 1.78, 95% CI 1.42 to 2.24), and probably reduces the risk of all clinical fractures (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.65 to 0.80), all with moderate-certainty evidence. We judged most included studies to have a low risk of bias for most domains. The overall certainty of evidence for the main comparisons was moderate. The main limitation was that only about 30% of women were 50 to 59 years old at baseline, the age group most likely to consider hormone therapy for vasomotor symptoms. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Long-term follow-up of women using hormone therapy suggests that the risk profiles vary between combined hormone therapy and oestrogen-only therapy. Oestrogen-only hormone therapy probably makes little to no difference to coronary events, and probably increases the risk of stroke and gallbladder disease. It probably makes little to no difference in the risk of breast cancer, and probably reduces the risk of all fractures. Combined hormone therapy may increase the risk of thromboembolism and probably increases the risk of breast cancer. These results should be interpreted with caution as they are based on one study using oral hormone therapy, which may not represent the risks of the hormone therapy currently used in clinical practice.

Humans