SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Meta-analysis as topic”

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.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

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

1,766 records · Page 4Linked to original sources

PubMed2026

Effects of Moderate-Frequency Resistance Training on Cardiometabolic Risk Factors in Adults With Overweight or Obesity: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Resistance training (RT) effectively manages cardiometabolic risk factors in adults, but the specific effects of moderate-frequency RT (2-3 sessions/week) in adults with overweight or obesity are understudied. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate moderate-frequency RT's effects on cardiometabolic risk factors in this population and quantify effect sizes. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library searched up to July 2025. ELIGIBILITY: English randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing RT (≥ 7 weeks) to nonexercise control; nonathletic adults ≥ 18 years with BMI ≥ 25 kg/m2. PARTICIPANTS: 454 participants across 12 RCTs (mean age 58.93 ± 12.87 years; mean BMI 31.2 ± 3.5 kg/m2; ~50% female). RESULTS: RT significantly reduced diastolic blood pressure (MD = -1.53 mmHg; 95% CI: -2.16 to -0.91; p < 0.01), LDL-C (MD = -0.25 mmol/L; 95% CI: -0.41 to -0.08; p < 0.01), and triglycerides (MD = -0.17 mmol/L; 95% CI: -0.30 to -0.04; p = 0.01). No significant effects on systolic blood pressure, mean arterial pressure, waist circumference, glycemic markers, total cholesterol, or HDL-C. Subgroup analyses showed larger LDL-C/triglyceride improvements with concurrent dietary control. CONCLUSION: Moderate-frequency RT inconsistently improves cardiometabolic risk factors, benefiting diastolic blood pressure, LDL-C, and triglycerides but not glycemic or other parameters. Combining with dietary control may enhance benefits, supporting RT as a complementary strategy in multimodal lifestyle interventions. TRIAL REGISTRATION PROSPERO: CRD42022343167.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Do adherence-focused interventions in low back pain have an impact on rehabilitation outcomes? A systematic review with meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Low back pain (LBP) is the leading cause of disability worldwide. Exercise-based interventions are effective, but adherence remains suboptimal. This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated the effectiveness of strategies designed to enhance adherence to exercise-based interventions in individuals with LBP in terms of adherence as well as pain and functionality. METHODS: Randomized controlled trials including adults with non-specific LBP were eligible if they compared exercise-based interventions incorporating adherence-enhancing strategies versus exercise alone or usual care. Primary outcome was adherence; secondary outcomes were pain and functionality. Searches were conducted in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, Scopus, and PEDro up to May 2026. Two reviewers independently screened studies, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane RoB 2 tool. Random-effects meta-analyses were performed using standardized mean differences. Certainty of evidence was evaluated using the GRADE approach. RESULTS: Fourteen randomized controlled trials including 1233 participants were included. Risk of bias was low in six studies, with the remainder showing some concerns or high risk. For adherence outcomes, evidence showed no clear effect of adherence-enhancing strategies on either device-measured physical activity (SMD = 0.21, 95% CI -0.01 to 0.43; 3 trials, 320 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) or questionnaire-based adherence (SMD = 0.33, 95% CI -0.23 to 0.89; 4 trials, 377 participants; very low-certainty evidence). For pain and functionality, moderate certainty of evidence indicated small improvements favoring intervention groups in the medium term. CONCLUSIONS: Strategies to enhance adherence to exercise in LBP show uncertain effects on adherence but may provide small improvements in clinical outcomes in the medium term. Higher-quality trials are needed to strengthen the evidence base.

Adult↗

PubMed2026

Efficacy of NAs in combination with Peg-IFN for functional cure in patients with CHB: a meta-analysis of RCTs.

BACKGROUND: The goal of treating chronic hepatitis B (CHB) is to achieve functional cure. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy of the combination of nucleoside (acid) analogues (NAs) and pegylated interferon (Peg-IFN) on the functional cure of CHB patients at the EOT and at the EOF. METHOD: PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science were searched systematically up to March 15, 2025. Sixteen RCTs on CHB patients receiving combination or monotherapy were included. RESULT: Compared with NAs treatment, the NAs combined with Peg-IFN treatment group significantly improved HBsAg clearance rate (RR: 14.05, 95% CI 6.13-32.20) and HBsAg seroconversion rate (RR: 12.82, 95% CI 5.08-32.33) at the EOT. Moreover, compared with NAs treatment, the NAs combined with Peg-IFN treatment group significantly improved HBsAg clearance rate (RR: 7.70, 95% CI 4.24-13.98), HBsAg seroconversion rate (RR: 11.93, 95% CI 5.14-27.67) at the EOF. However, compared with Peg-IFN monotherapy, the combination therapy group did not show any improvement in HBsAg clearance rate, HBsAg seroconversion rate, and the rate of qHBsAg decrease > 1 log10 IU/mL at the EOT and the EOF. Moreover, in terms of safety, the Peg-IFN monotherapy group showed more ALT flares (ALT > 5 × ULN) during the treatment process. CONCLUSION: Compared with NAs therapy, Peg-IFN combined with NAs therapy significantly improves functional cure rate. However, combination therapy shows no additional advantage over Peg-IFN monotherapy in achieving functional cure. The Peg-IFN monotherapy group has a higher incidence of ALT flares than the combination therapy group.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Incidence of Cirrhosis in Fibrotic Metabolic Dysfunction-Associated Steatohepatitis: A Meta-Analysis of Placebo Arms from Randomized Clinical Trials.

BACKGROUNDS AND AIMS: Metabolic dysfunction-associated steatohepatitis (MASH) with stage F2-F3 fibrosis represents the main target population for emerging pharmacotherapies. However, data on short-term progression to cirrhosis (F4) in this group remain limited. We aimed to evaluate the incidence of cirrhosis in placebo-treated patients with fibrotic MASH in randomized controlled trials (RCTs). METHODS: In this single-arm meta-analysis, we systematically searched PubMed and Cochrane Library from inception to December 13, 2024, for pharmacological Phase ≥ 2 RCTs reporting cirrhosis events (detected in liver biopsy or clinical signs) among patients with fibrotic MASH receiving placebo. Incidence rates were pooled using generalized linear mixed models with Clopper-Pearson confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: We identified a total of 11 RCTs, including 586 patients with fibrotic MASH. Total follow-up was 657.23 person-years (PYs), with 83 cirrhosis events reported. The pooled incidence rate was 13.09 per 100 PYs (95% CI 7.81 to 21.12, I2 = 75.6%, τ2 = 0.682). In subgroup analysis, the incidence of cirrhosis was 3.40 per 100 PYs in MASH F2 (95% CI 1.10 to 10.02, I2 = 0%, τ2 = 0) and 17.90 per 100 PYs (95% CI 10.63 to 28.55, I2 = 70.2%, τ2 = 0.561) in MASH F3, with significant differences between stages (p = 0.006). Sensitivity analyses showed consistent estimates. Most RCTs were judged to have a low risk of bias. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides stage-specific data on cirrhosis incidence in fibrotic MASH, highlighting the high short-term risk associated with MASH F3 in trial settings. These data may inform benchmarks to guide event expectations, enrichment strategies, sample size assumptions, and the interpretation of future MASH clinical trials.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Meta-analysis and pharmacoeconomic study of rasagiline versus selegiline in the treatment of Parkinson's disease.

OBJECTIVE: Given the persistent absence of direct head-to-head trials, this study aimed to evaluate the comparative efficacy, safety, and cost-effectiveness of rasagiline versus selegiline as early-stage monotherapy for Parkinson's disease (PD), informing clinical selection and healthcare policies in China. METHODS: A systematic search of PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library identified randomized controlled trials (RCTs) up to April 2026. Focusing on short-term outcomes (10-16 weeks), an adjusted indirect treatment comparison (ITC) using placebo as a common anchor evaluated symptom improvement (UPDRS total scores) and adverse event (AE) incidence. For economic evaluation, a 2-year Markov model was constructed from a Chinese healthcare-system perspective. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was calculated alongside robust sensitivity analyses. RESULTS: Ten RCTs (rasagiline: 6; selegiline: 4) were included. The ITC revealed no statistically significant differences between rasagiline and selegiline in short-term symptomatic relief (Mean Difference = -0.82, 95% CI [-2.08, 0.44], p = 0.203) or AE risk (Odds Ratio = 0.83, 95% CI [0.50, 1.38], p = 0.475). The overall evidence certainty was rated as moderate. Economically, the base-case simulation indicated rasagiline yielded a marginal benefit of 0.0088 QALYs over selegiline but incurred an additional 17,111.10 Yuan. This resulted in an ICER of 1,951,505.55 Yuan/QALY, substantially exceeding the conventional willingness-to-pay threshold. CONCLUSION: Supported by moderate-certainty evidence, rasagiline and selegiline provide comparable short-term efficacy and safety for early-stage PD monotherapy. However, at its current pricing, rasagiline is not cost-effective. Significant price reductions or definitive proof of long-term superiority are required to justify its economic value.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Impact of education protocols and physiotherapeutic management in improving pain, symptoms, activities of daily living, and quality of life in patients with knee osteoarthritis: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Knee osteoarthritis is a debilitating condition of the knee joint and the major cause of disability globally, with an increased economic burden on healthcare. Patient education (PE) has emerged as a primary care treatment approach in chronic conditions. This review aims to evaluate the effectiveness of PE along with exercise in reducing pain, alleviating symptoms, improving activities of daily living, and promoting quality of life among individuals with knee osteoarthritis. METHOD: A systematic search was conducted across three electronic databases, PubMed, Cochrane Library, and PEDro. The search was limited to between 2020 and 2025, and included only randomized controlled trials. The Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool and the PEDro Scale were used to evaluate the methodological evidence. Statistical synthesis was analysed using mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) under a random-effects model. RESULTS: Eight trials were included, of which four studies evaluated the four Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) domains, and three studies evaluated the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) and KOOS activities of daily living domain in patients with knee osteoarthritis. For the meta-analysis, we assessed all five domains of the KOOS scale and VAS. Statistical analysis of the studies showed a significant reduction in pain (VAS) for the PE along with exercise group (MD = -3.28, 95% CI (-4.85; -1.70), and I2 = 69.6%), but there was no significant improvement in the domains of the KOOS scale. CONCLUSION: The study highlights the importance of PE along with exercise in reducing pain. It might not be more effective when compared with exercise therapy as a standalone intervention in improving ADLs, QoL, and symptoms, but it has demonstrated some degree of effectiveness. It additionally promotes self-management and self-efficacy as a physiotherapeutic rehabilitation treatment intervention.

Humans↗

PubMed2025

Treatment preference for once-weekly versus once-daily DPP-4 inhibitors in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE: Although once-weekly and once-daily DPP-4 inhibitors have gained widespread market recognition, patient preference differences remain a key focus. This meta-analysis compares treatment preferences for once-weekly versus once-daily DPP-4 inhibitors in T2DM, offering evidence to guide clinical decisions and healthcare policies. METHODS: PubMed, OVID, EBSCO, Web of Science, CNKI, Wanfang, and clinical trial registries were searched up to June 30, 2025. After screening literature against predefined criteria, a systematic review was conducted to compare the effects of once-weekly and once-daily DPP-4 inhibitors on the treatment preferences of patients with T2DM. RESULTS: 8 RCTs with 1,575 participants were analyzed. No significant difference in medication adherence and DTSQ total score between the once-weekly and once-daily groups (p > 0.05). HbA1c percentage (MD = -0.21, 95% CI [-0.42, -0.01], p < 0.05) decreased significantly with once-weekly dosing, while GA and FPG showed no change (p > 0.05), this suggests greater improvement in HbA1c percentage levels following a switch to once-weekly DPP-4 inhibitors. Once-weekly DPP-4 inhibitors showed higher musculoskeletal/connective tissue disorder risk (RR = 2.63; 95% CI [1.18, 5.83]), but no significant differences in other adverse events (p > 0.05). No significant differences in treatment burden between both groups (p > 0.05). CONCLUSION: No statistically significant association between treatment preferences for once-weekly versus once-daily DPP-4 inhibitors among T2DM patients and medication adherence, treatment satisfaction, glycemic level changes, safety, or treatment burden for these two dosing regimens. Further research is needed to elucidate the influence of physician prescribing behavior on these preferences.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Maternal vaccination with RSVpreF and risk of hypertensive disorders of pregnancy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: A bivalent respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) prefusion F protein-based vaccine (RSVpreF) was approved in the United States in August 2023 for use during pregnancy to prevent infant RSV-associated lower respiratory tract disease. The pivotal phase 3 trial identified a numerical imbalance in hypertensive disorders of pregnancy (HDP) that did not reach statistical significance; postmarketing observational studies have since reported inconsistent findings. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess this association. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL, Scopus, ClinicalTrials.gov, and WHO ICTRP from inception to Jan 26, 2026, for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies comparing HDP outcomes in RSVpreF-vaccinated versus unvaccinated or placebo-receiving pregnant individuals. Unadjusted risk ratios (RRs) were pooled using a random-effects model; adjusted estimates from observational studies were pooled separately by inverse variance methods. This study is registered with PROSPERO (CRD420251026835). RESULTS: Nine studies were included (3 RCTs, 6 retrospective cohort studies; n = 148,267). RSVpreF vaccination was associated with a small but statistically significant increase in overall HDP risk (RR 1·08, 95% CI 1·02-1·13; p = 0·004; I2 = 44%), driven by the observational studies group (1·08, 1·02-1·14; I2 = 61%); RCTs showed a directionally consistent but non-significant RR (1·12, 0·87-1·43; I2 = 0%). The association was attributable to gestational hypertension, with no significant association for preeclampsia/eclampsia. CONCLUSION: Maternal RSVpreF vaccination was associated with a small increase in HDP attributable to gestational hypertension and driven primarily by observational studies, in which residual confounding remains possible. The benefits of infant RSV prevention remain substantial, and these findings support continued postmarketing surveillance and informed shared decision-making.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

The clinical value of adding immune checkpoint inhibitors to radiotherapy for cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: While several randomized clinical trials (RCTs) have explored the addition of immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) treatment for patients undergoing radiotherapy, studies systematically assessing the clinical value of such interventions are lacking. METHODS: PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were searched for relevant RCTs of cancers that received ICIs plus radiotherapy or radiotherapy. Eligible studies were those published in English as of 14 April 2024. Two independent reviewers screened the included studies and extracted relevant data, then selected the random or fixed-effects model based on the I2 statistic. The main outcomes were hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS); Odds ratios (ORs) with 95% CIs for objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), and adverse events (AEs). Stratified analysis was performed based on cancer type, ICI type, and the timing of ICI addition. The study was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42024551008). RESULTS: 15 RCTs with 7947 patients were included. Pooled HRs were 0.865 (95% CI, 0.730-1.000; I2 = 72.1%) for OS and 0.799 (0.677-0.922; I2 = 82.0%) for PFS in cancer patients. In cancer types, adding immunotherapy to radiotherapy significantly improved patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (OS: 0.544 [0.371-0.717]; PFS: 0.527 [0.438-0.617]) and cervical cancer (OS: 0.722 [0.578-0.867] and PFS: 0.754 [95%CI, 0.621-0.887]). Regarding the ICIs schedule, adjuvant ICI therapy with pooled HRs was 0.742 (0.649-0.834) for OS and 0.638 (0.579-0.697) for PFS. In addition, the pooled ORs for the incidence of grade 3 or higher treatment-related and immune-related adverse events were 1.227 (1.059-1.421; I2 = 71.9%) and 2.217 (1.743-2.821; I2 = 74.0%), respectively. CONCLUSION: Adding immunotherapy to radiotherapy can provide significant clinical benefits for patients with NSCLC and cervical cancer, and the addition of these ICIs in the adjuvant stage is supported.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

The efficacy of non-invasive brain stimulation interventions in obsessive-compulsive disorder management: A network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Non-invasive brain stimulation (NIBS) has been widely used as an alternative treatment for obsessive compulsive disorder (OCD). However, the most effective NIBS parameters are unclear. To compare the efficacy of NIBS in OCD. We conducted a systematic review and network meta-analyses (NMA) to combine direct and indirect comparisons of NIBS.Systematic searches were conducted in Cochrane CENTRAL, EMBASE, PubMed, and Web of Science from inception to June 20, 2025. Forty-two randomized sham-controlled trials (n = 1456) were included. All statistical analyses were conducted with R statistical software. Bayesian NMAs mainly using the BUGSnet package and gemtc package. Five NIBS protocols produced statistically significant reductions in Yale-Brown Obsessive Compulsive Scale (Y-BOCS) scores compared with sham stimulation: high-frequency rTMS over the FzFCz (Hf-rTMS-FzFCz; MD -11.77, 95% CrI -20.62 to -3.09), low-frequency rTMS over F3F4 (Lf-rTMS-F3F4; MD -9.93, 95% CrI -18.07 to -1.65), low-frequency rTMS over FCz (Lf-rTMS-FCz; MD -3.25, 95% CrI -6.06 to -0.40), high-frequency deep TMS over FzFC (Hf-dTMS-FzFC; MD -6.48, 95% CrI -12.32 to -0.50), and 2 mA anodal tDCS over F3 with cathodal over Fp2 (MD -9.34, 95% CrI -16.01 to -3.03).For secondary outcomes, high-frequency deep rTMS over FzFCz produced the largest reduction both in depressive symptoms (SMD -1.24, 95% CrI -1.92 to -0.55) and anxiety scores (SMD -1.88, 95% CrI -2.62 to -1.11), but had no effect on Clinical Global Impression-Severity (CGI-S) scores.Specific NIBS protocols are safe and effective adjunctive treatments for OCD, with promising yet inconclusive improvements in comorbid depressive symptoms. Further high-quality, head-to-head trials are needed.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Efficacy and Safety of the Dual Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 and Glucagon Receptor Agonist Mazdutide in Predominantly Chinese Adults With Obesity and/or Type 2 Diabetes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

AIM: To assess the effects of mazdutide on body weight, HbA1c, metabolic outcomes, and adverse events in adults with overweight/obesity and/or type 2 diabetes (T2D). METHODS: This systematic review and meta-analysis included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing mazdutide with placebo or active comparators in adults with overweight/obesity and/or T2D, identified through PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov to 20 February 2026. Co-primary outcomes were percent change in body weight and change in HbA1c. Secondary outcomes included other weight-related and metabolic outcomes, as well as safety. Random-effects models were used to generate pooled mean differences (MDs) or risk ratios with 95% confidence intervals, and the certainty of the evidence (COE) was assessed using GRADE. RESULTS: Nine RCTs (N = 2292; most with low risk of bias) were included. In overweight/obesity without diabetes, mazdutide 3, 4, and 6 mg reduced body weight more than placebo (MDs -6.56%, -9.92%, and -11.1%, respectively; very low COE due to substantial heterogeneity and few trials). In T2D, mazdutide 4 and 6 mg reduced body weight and HbA1c versus placebo (moderate COE) and also outperformed dulaglutide for both outcomes. Mazdutide also improved waist circumference, lipids, liver enzymes, and uric acid levels. Gastrointestinal adverse events were more frequent, but serious adverse events and treatment discontinuation rates were comparable with those of the comparators. CONCLUSIONS: Mazdutide was associated with dose-dependent reductions in body weight and HbA1c, with broader metabolic benefits in predominantly Chinese adults with obesity and/or T2D. Longer-term, multi-ethnic studies are needed to confirm durability, generalizability, and cardiovascular safety.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Effects of digital health-based exercise interventions on older adults with sarcopenia: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

BACKGROUND: Sarcopenia, the progressive loss of muscle mass and function, impairs independence in older adults. Digital health exercise interventions are scalable solutions for older adults with sarcopenia. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to synthesize the evidence on their efficacy in populations with clinically diagnosed sarcopenia and identify influential intervention characteristics associated with treatment outcomes. METHODS: We systematically searched PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, CNKI, and Wanfang on May 20, 2026, with no date restrictions. We included randomized controlled trials involving adults aged ≥60 with sarcopenia receiving digital exercise interventions. Two reviewers independently screened studies, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias; analyses were performed using R and Review Manager. RESULTS: Fourteen trials (n = 927) were included. Digital interventions showed potential improvements in muscle mass (MD = 0.25, 95%CI:0.03-0.46, 95% PI:-0.36 to 0.85), muscle strength (MD = 2.14, 95% CI:1.18-3.11, P < 0.001), balance ability (SMD = 0.31, 95% CI:0.12-0.51, P = 0.001), walking performance (SMD = 0.55, 95% CI:0.21-0.89, 95% PI:-0.70 to 1.79), and physical function (SMD = 0.89, 95% CI:0.08-1.71, 95% PI:-2.33 to 4.12), but not quality of life (SMD = 0.08, 95% CI:-0.19 to 0.35, P = 0.53). Exploratory subgroup analyses suggested that factors such as supervision, program duration, and measurement tools may influence outcomes; however, formal tests for subgroup differences were generally non-significant, and consistent patterns across all metrics were not observed. CONCLUSION: Digital exercise interventions show potential for managing sarcopenia in older adults, though the very low to moderate certainty of evidence indicates that true effects may differ substantially from observed estimates. This review explores potential roles of intervention design, supervision, and multimodal delivery. Future research should adopt rigorous designs and longer follow-up to validate results and enhance clinical application. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD420251135174.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Anti-inflammatory agents after hip and shoulder arthroplasty: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative inflammation after arthroplasty contributes to pain, delayed mobilization and prolonged hospitalization. Recent randomized trials have evaluated pharmacological anti-inflammatory strategies within contemporary enhanced recovery pathways, but evidence after hip and shoulder arthroplasty remains scattered across different drug classes and perioperative regimens. OBJECTIVES: To synthesize recent randomized controlled trial (RCT) evidence on perioperative anti-inflammatory agents after hip and shoulder arthroplasty. METHODS: PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library and Web of Science were searched for English-language RCTs published from January 2020 to March 2026. The 2020-2026 window was selected to update evidence generated under modern arthroplasty, anesthesia, multimodal analgesia and enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) pathways. Eligible trials included adults undergoing hip or shoulder arthroplasty and compared corticosteroids, cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) inhibitors, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID)-based/local anti-inflammatory regimens, or related anti-inflammatory interventions with placebo, saline, no treatment, or the same regimen without the target component. Weighted mean differences (WMDs) were pooled using random-effects models. RESULTS: Nine RCTs involving 800 patients were included. Anti-inflammatory interventions significantly reduced postoperative C-reactive protein (CRP) [WMD=-32.18, 95% confidence interval (CI) (-41.16, -23.21), P<0.001], interleukin-6 (IL-6) [WMD=-31.25, 95% CI (-41.79, -20.77), P<0.001], rest pain [WMD=-0.41, 95% CI (-0.58, -0.23), P<0.001], activity pain [WMD=-0.56, 95% CI (-0.83, -0.29), P<0.001] and hospital stay [WMD=-0.54, 95% CI (-0.92, -0.15), P=0.006]. CONCLUSION: Recent RCT evidence suggests that perioperative anti-inflammatory interventions can attenuate early inflammatory responses and improve short-term pain and recovery after hip and shoulder arthroplasty. Because data were limited and clinically heterogeneous, the findings should not be interpreted as evidence favoring a specific drug class, dose, route, or timing.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Effect of photobiomodulation on pain relief and functional improvement in fractures: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Fractures, the most common type of trauma, can cause considerable distress to patients. Pain can not only affect the comfort of fracture patients but also delay their participation in rehabilitation training. Photobiomodulation (PBM) has been associated with pain reduction and the promotion of tissue healing. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the efficacy of PBM in reducing pain and promoting rehabilitation in patients with fractures. METHODS: This study was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42024591373). We systematically searched PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library and Web of Science for RCTs that investigated PBM in fractures as of August 2025. The primary outcome was the pain score. The secondary outcomes included functional and healing. RESULT: Finally, 12 and 9 studies were ultimately included in the systematic review and meta-analysis, respectively. The pooled analysis showed that the one-week pain score was lower in the PBM group than in the placebo group (MD -0.74, 95% CI -1.00, -0.47, p < 0.0001, I2 = 0%). Subgroup analysis showed that the difference between the two groups was statistically significant regardless of fracture site or acupoint irradiation. Changes in pain scores were statistically significant in both groups at different wavelength combinations. The improvement in grip strength at 4 weeks was significantly greater in PBM than in placebo (MD 5.03, 95% CI 4.29, 5.78; p < 0.0001; I2 = 0%). There were no significant differences in pain and functional scores at 4-26 weeks. Bone healing did not show differences between the two groups. No side effects reported. CONCLUSION: PBM appears to relieve short-term pain in fractures and improve grip strength in patients with upper limb fractures, but does not show significant long-term benefits. Evidence for mandibular functional recovery and bone healing remains inconsistent. Future studies should determine therapeutic parameters and their impact on bone healing and long-term functional outcomes across fracture types.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Comparison of Ketamine and Pregabalin on Postoperative Opioid Usage and Pain Management in Spinal Fusion: Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Spinal fusion is associated with substantial early postoperative pain and opioid exposure. Both ketamine and pregabalin are widely incorporated into Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocols as opioid-sparing adjuncts. However, their comparative efficacy and safety in this specific setting remain uncertain. Our objective was to compare ketamine and pregabalin indirectly for early postoperative opioid consumption, pain, and adverse events in adults undergoing spinal fusion. METHODS: Pubmed, Embase, and Cochrane Trials were searched from inception through October 2025. Eligible studies were randomized trials enrolling adults undergoing instrumented spinal fusion, randomized to perioperative ketamine, pregabalin, or control, and reported extractable 24-hour opioid consumption or pain outcomes. Continuous outcomes were pooled as mean differences in MME or VAS units, and adverse events were reported descriptively. A connected treatment network was analyzed using random-effects models. Risk of bias (RoB) was assessed with the Cochrane RoB 2 tool. RESULTS: Thirteen trials (n=879) were included: ketamine (n=210), pregabalin (n=271), and control (n=398). Six trials contributed opioid data (3 ketamine, 3 pregabalin). Using pregabalin 150 mg as reference, ketamine was associated with lower 0-24-hour opioid use (MD -56.99 mg MME; 95% CI -99.56 to -14.43). Control (MD +21.31; 95% CI -1.05 to +43.66) and pregabalin 300 mg (MD -13.22; 95% CI -40.41 to +13.96) did not significantly differ from pregabalin 150 mg. Seven trials contributed 24-hour VAS data, with control being associated with higher pain versus pregabalin 150 mg (MD +0.84; 95% CI +0.01 to +1.66), while ketamine and pregabalin 300 mg were not k significantly different. Adverse events were generally infrequent and similar to control. CONCLUSIONS: Both ketamine and pregabalin provide early opioid sparing with comparable 24-hour analgesia. Ketamine showed a larger opioid-sparing point estimate, but indirect comparisons are imprecise. Adequately powered head-to-head trials with standardized protocols and adverse event reporting are needed.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Comparing the efficacy and safety of unilateral versus bilateral spinal anesthesia: a meta-analysis and systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Unilateral spinal anesthesia has gained increasing attention in recent years. Emerging evidence suggests that it provides comparable analgesia to conventional bilateral spinal anesthesia while reducing adverse effects, and its efficacy and safety compared to bilateral spinal anesthesia remains controversial. OBJECTIVE: This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to evaluate and compare the efficacy and safety of unilateral versus bilateral spinal anesthesia. DESIGN: Systematic reviews and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). DATA SOURCES: A systematic search was conducted across PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library from inception to December 10, 2024. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Included studies were randomized controlled trials involving adult patients (≥18 years) undergoing surgery under spinal anesthesia, comparing unilateral versus bilateral spinal anesthesia for efficacy and adverse effects. Studies that focused exclusively on either unilateral or bilateral spinal anesthesia were excluded. The comparator group used the same local anesthetic as the experimental group, with no restrictions on adjuncts (e.g. fentanyl, morphine). RESULTS: Nineteen randomized controlled trials including 1191 patients met the inclusion criteria. Compared with bilateral spinal anesthesia, unilateral spinal anesthesia has a longer onset of sensory blockade (MD = 2.58, 95% CI: 0.93 to 4.22, p = 0.002), a shorter duration of sensory blockade (MD = -27.83, 95% CI: -39.25 to -16.42, p < 0.00001). In addition, unilateral spinal anesthesia significantly reduced the incidence of hypotension (RR = 0.40, 95% CI: 0.31 to 0.52, p < 0.0001), nausea and vomiting (RR = 0.20, 95% CI: 0.07 to 0.56, p = 0.002), and post-dural puncture headache (RR = 0.44, 95% CI: 0.23 to 0.81, p = 0.009). No statistically significant differences were observed in bradycardia and urinary retention. Collectively, these findings support unilateral spinal anesthesia as a strategy that may enhance perioperative safety while maintaining adequate anesthetic efficacy in appropriately selected patients. CONCLUSIONS: Unilateral spinal anesthesia may offer a favorable balance between anesthetic efficacy and safety compared with bilateral spinal anesthesia, although its clinical utility may depend on surgical duration and patient characteristics.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Effects of antidepressant administration on physical performance and perceived exertion in athletes: systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Antidepressants are commonly prescribed in athletes with depressive disorders, yet their potential effects on physical performance and perceived exertion remain unclear, and existing evidence is limited and inconsistent. AIM: This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the effects of antidepressant use on objective physical performance and perceived exertion in athletes. METHOD: A systematic literature search was conducted in PubMed, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and SPORTDiscus through March 2025. Eligible studies were randomised controlled trials (RCTs) published in English that enrolled elite, competitive, or recreational athletes; compared antidepressant administration with placebo or no treatment; and reported at least one objective or subjective performance-related outcome. Meta-analyses were performed using random-effects models, and pooled mean differences with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated. This systematic review and meta-analysis was registered in PROSPERO (CRD420251123740). RESULTS: Ten crossover RCTs involving 99 male athletes were included. Interventions included a norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor (reboxetine), a norepinephrine-dopamine reuptake inhibitor (bupropion), and selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (fluoxetine or paroxetine). Acute antidepressant administration was associated with a small increase in rating of perceived exertion (RPE; mean difference 0.52 points on the Borg 6-20 scale, 95% CI 0.01-1.04; p < 0.05). No significant overall effects were observed for time-trial performance, mean power output, heart rate or blood lactate. However, subgroup analyses showed that reboxetine significantly impaired time-trial performance (mean difference 3.62 min, 95% CI 0.18-7.06; p < 0.05) and reduced mean power output (mean difference - 19.97 W, 95% CI - 36.87 to - 3.06; p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Short-term antidepressant administration in athletes was associated with a small increase in perceived exertion, without consistent impairment in objective physical performance. As the current evidence derives exclusively from male athletes and acute exposure, further research should clarify its relevance to female athletes and to longer-term antidepressant treatment in athletes with depressive disorders.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Disparities in guideline-adherent cardiovascular preventive care for people with diabetes: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Clinical practice guidelines offer guidance on delaying the progression of cardiovascular disease in people living with diabetes. We sought to determine whether guideline-recommended cardiovascular preventive care for people living with diabetes differs according to sociodemographic indicators, globally. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of studies that compared the sociodemographic characteristics of people diagnosed with type 1 or 2 diabetes who received cardiovascular preventive care as recommended by guidelines to those who did not. Sociodemographic predictors were defined by PROGRESS+ (an equity framework). We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and APA PsychInfo from 2010 to January 21, 2026. Studies were screened independently by two people. One person assessed the risk of bias and extracted data, and another verified. We pooled results using a random-effects model and assessed the certainty of evidence using GRADE. RESULTS: Twenty-five studies were included. Meta-analyses showed female, Black, and Hispanic individuals had slightly lower odds of receiving guideline-recommended prescriptions for lipid-lowering medication compared to Male, and White individuals, respectively (OR:0.89, 95%CI:0.79,1.00, moderate certainty; OR:0.78, 95%CI:0.74,0.81, high certainty; OR:0.86, 95%CI:0.59,1.26, low certainty). Individuals aged 18-45 years had moderately lower odds (OR:0.33, 95%CI:0.19,0.57, moderate certainty), no observed association for Asian individuals. Asian individuals had moderately lower odds of antihypertensive medication prescription (OR:0.42, 95%CI:0.38,0.46, high certainty). Evidence suggests likely no association between HbA1c testing and sex/gender or between sex/gender and lipid panel testing. CONCLUSIONS: Some disparities in guideline-recommended cardiovascular preventive care among people living with diabetes were found. These results are consistent with previous reviews and highlight the need to ensure guidelines consider equity and with improved dissemination.

Humans↗