SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Human Challenge Trials 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.

2,779 records · Page 9Linked to original sources

PubMed2026

Sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors and gastrointestinal neoplasm risk in type 2 diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

The potential carcinogenic effects of sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) remain controversial, particularly regarding site-specific gastrointestinal (GI) neoplasms. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to determine the relationship between SGLT2 inhibitors and the risk of GI neoplasms in patients with T2DM. We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane CENTRAL, Scopus, and Web of Science through March 17, 2025, for RCTs in T2DM comparing SGLT2 inhibitors with placebo or active comparators. Two reviewers independently screened studies, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias. The primary outcome was GI neoplasms reported in publications, supplementary materials, or trial registries, usually as adverse events rather than centrally adjudicated cancer endpoints. Pooled odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated in Stata 17.0. In 48 RCTs (n = 48,765), SGLT2 inhibitor therapy was not associated with overall GI neoplasm risk (OR = 1.10, 95% CI: 0.84-1.44; p = 0.46; I² = 0%). Site-specific analyses showed no statistically significant association for esophageal (OR = 1.12, 95% CI 0.37-3.45), gastric (1.20, 0.65-2.23), hepatic (0.62, 0.31-1.22), pancreatic (0.91, 0.51-1.64), colonic (1.28, 0.78-2.08), colorectal (0.76, 0.27-2.17), and rectal neoplasms (0.98, 0.49-1.97), with all p-values > 0.05. Subgroup analyses by agents (e.g., canagliflozin, dapagliflozin, empagliflozin), baseline age, body mass index (BMI), HbA1c, treatment duration, and dose were also non-significant (all p > 0.05). Approximately half of the trials had follow-up of one year or less, limiting our ability to evaluate long-term risk. Available RCT evidence does not show a clear increase in GI neoplasm risk with SGLT2 inhibitors in T2DM. However, limited follow-up, low event counts, and non-cancer-specific outcome ascertainment, the findings should be interpreted as reassuring but not definitive evidence of long-term oncologic safety.Systematic review registration: PROSPERO No. CRD42024619019.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Efficacy and Safety of Anti-Obesity Medications for Weight Loss Maintenance in Adults With Overweight or Obesity: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomised Controlled Trials.

AIMS: This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of anti-obesity medications (AOMs) for long-term weight maintenance following initial weight loss in adults with overweight or obesity. METHODS: We searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library from inception to 31 October 2025. Eligible studies were randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing AOMs with placebo during the weight-maintenance phase in adults with overweight or obesity after initial weight loss achieved through lifestyle, dietary, surgical or pharmacological interventions. Outcomes included anthropometric indices, cardiometabolic measures, safety endpoints, quality of life and neuropsychiatric adverse events. Weighted mean differences (WMDs) and odds ratios (ORs), each with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), were pooled for continuous and categorical outcomes, respectively, using fixed-effect or random-effects models as appropriate. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane RoB 2 tool, and certainty of evidence was evaluated using the GRADE framework. The protocol was registered with PROSPERO (CRD420261293040). RESULTS: A total of 12 RCTs comprising 4915 participants met the inclusion criteria. Compared with placebo, AOM therapy during the weight-maintenance phase was associated with prevention of weight regain and additional improvements in anthropometric and cardiometabolic outcomes. AOMs led to further reductions in body weight (BW, WMD: -8.68 kg, 95% CI: -13.25 to -4.11), waist circumference (WC, WMD: -7.16 cm, 95% CI: -10.34 to -3.98) and body mass index (BMI, WMD: -3.58 kg/m2, 95% CI: -5.69 to -1.46). Additional benefits were observed for triglycerides, total cholesterol, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, systolic blood pressure and diastolic blood pressure. Gastrointestinal adverse events were more common with AOMs, whereas serious adverse events were not significantly increased. Neuropsychiatric adverse events were generally comparable between groups, and available quality-of-life measures favoured AOM treatment. CONCLUSIONS: AOM therapy during the weight-maintenance phase can help prevent weight regain, provide further reductions in body weight and improve cardiometabolic risk factors in adults with overweight or obesity. Gastrointestinal adverse events were more common with AOMs, whereas serious adverse events were not significantly increased. Further long-term trials are needed to clarify optimal treatment strategies and safety.

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

The impact of prehabilitation on postoperative outcomes in patients undergoing radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: Preoperative rehabilitation training can optimize functional reserve before radical prostatectomy (RP), thereby improving postoperative outcomes. However, its effects on urinary incontinence, erectile function, and quality of life (QoL) remain controversial. This study systematically evaluated these outcome measures. METHODS: Data from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were retrieved from the PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, and CINAHL databases. The risk of bias was assessed using the RoB-2 tool, and meta-analysis was performed using Stata 18.0 software. Two reviewers independently performed study selection, data extraction, and risk-of-bias assessment. Meta-analyses were conducted using fixed- or random-effects models according to heterogeneity. Outcomes included urinary incontinence incidence, urinary incontinence severity, erectile function, and QoL at different postoperative follow-up time points. RESULTS: 16 randomized controlled trials involving 1,542 participants were included. Prehabilitation significantly reduced the incidence of urinary incontinence at 1 month (OR = 0.58, 95% CI 0.39-0.84) and 6 months (OR = 0.52, 95% CI 0.28-0.96) after RP, with a non-significant borderline reduction at 3 months, and no significant benefit at 12 months. No significant improvement was observed in urinary incontinence severity or erectile function at any follow-up time point. Prehabilitation significantly improved QoL within 3 months (SMD = -0.70, 95% CI -1.08 to -0.32) and 6 months (SMD = -0.45, 95% CI -0.74 to -0.16) postoperatively. However, within 12 months, the effect size attenuated, showing only a marginal trend that did not reach statistical significance (SMD = -0.33, 95% CI -0.66 to 0.00). Risk of bias was generally moderate. CONCLUSION: Prehabilitation reduces early incontinence and improves QoL post-RP, but its effects on severity and erectile function remain unclear. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO [CRD420251183407].

Humans↗

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

Effectiveness of hyperbaric oxygen in traumatic brain injury patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is the most common neurological disorder and a leading cause of global mortality and disability. Although growing evidence suggests potential benefits of Hyperbaric Oxygen Therapy (HBOT) for TBI, its efficacy remains controversial. METHODS: We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science from inception to March 2026. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating HBOT versus any comparator including sham, standard care and no treatment in adults with TBI were included. Two independent reviewers screened records, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. Heterogeneity was assessed using the I² statistic. Effect sizes were pooled using random/fixed-effects models per heterogeneity results. RESULTS: 8 studies involving 570 participants were included. HBOT significantly improved computerized cognitive performance (SMD = 0.23, 95% CI: 0.07-0.40, p = 0.004, I² = 0%), executive function and processing speed (SMD = -0.59, 95% CI: -0.93 to -0.26, p = 0.0005, I² = 30%), memory function (SMD = 0.33, 95% CI: 0.03-0.63, p = 0.03, I² = 0%), and sleep quality (MD = 1.98, 95% CI: 0.07-3.88, p = 0.04, I² = 65%). No significant benefits were observed for Glasgow Outcome Scale (RR = 1.57, 95% CI: 0.55-4.44, I² = 87%), PTSD symptoms (MD = -3.05, 95% CI: -7.05-0.95, I² = 67%), neurobehavioral symptoms (MD = -9.06, 95% CI: -32.13-14.00, I² = 97%), and emotional distress (SMD = 0.25, 95% CI: -0.32-0.81, I² = 85%). Most adverse events were mild and transient. CONCLUSION: HBOT demonstrates domain‑specific benefits for cognitive function and sleep quality in TBI patients, predominantly those with mild TBI. However, evidence for PTSD, neurobehavioral symptoms, and emotional distress remains uncertain. Furthermore, the applicability of current evidence to moderate-to-severe TBI populations is restricted.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Major cardiovascular event risk of advanced therapies in inflammatory bowel diseases: systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Patients with chronic immune-mediated disorders (IMIDs), including inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), are at increased risk of cardiovascular disease. While advanced therapies show cardioprotective effects in other IMIDs, their impact on major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) in IBD remains unclear. We conducted a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies evaluating MACE risk with advanced therapies in IBD. METHODS: Systematic search of PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials identified 43 studies (36 RCTs, including 9 long-term follow-up (LTF) studies, and 7 observational studies) published between 2002 and 2024. Primary analyses estimated odds ratios (OR) for MACE comparing advanced therapy to placebo, with secondary analyses stratifying studies by drug class and length of follow-up. Sensitivity analyses were conducted using alternative methods to account for zero-event data. RESULTS: Placebo-controlled RCTs showed a nonsignificant trend toward reduced MACE risk (OR 0.60; 95% CI 0.24-1.51), with similar findings across sensitivity analyses accounting for sparse and zero-event data. Class-specific trends suggested lower MACE risk with IL-12/IL-23 inhibitors (OR 0.35; 95% CI 0.05-2.21), JAK inhibitors (OR 0.57; 95% CI 0.16-2.06), and a potential increase with Anti-TNF agents (OR: 3.04; 95% CI 0.31-29.47), though none reached statistical significance. LTF studies showed consistent findings. Observational studies suggested lower MACE risk with Anti-TNF therapies (OR 0.29; 95% CI 0.21-0.40), but not with IL-12/IL-23 (OR 4.41; 95% CI 0.49-39.28) or JAK inhibitors (OR 1.57; 95% CI 0.86-2.84). CONCLUSION: Advanced therapies did not demonstrate a clear increase or decrease in cardiovascular risk in IBD. The discrepancies between RCTs and observational studies underscore the urgent need for rigorous-designed observational research with long-term follow-up to evaluate the real-world impact of advanced therapies on MACE risk.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

The effect of dexmedetomidine in mechanically ventilated patients with sepsis and septic shock: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

PURPOSE: Dexmedetomidine (DEX) is a central sympatholytic with sedative properties widely used in critically ill patients. However, its effects in patients with sepsis and septic shock remain controversial. This meta-analysis evaluated the efficacy and safety of DEX compared to other sedatives in mechanically ventilated patients with sepsis and septic shock. METHODS: A systematic search was conducted across PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Cochrane Library from inception through May 1, 2025 for randomized controlled trials comparing DEX with other sedatives or placebo in mechanically ventilated patients with sepsis and septic shock. Primary outcomes included overall mortality and Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) scores. Secondary outcomes encompassed duration of mechanical ventilation (MV), length of stay in Intensive Care Unit (ICU), incidence of hypotension and bradycardia. RESULTS: Fifteen studies involving 3,882 patients (1,945 in the DEX group, 1,937 in the control group) were included. DEX was demonstrated no significant differences compared to other sedatives or placebo in overall mortality (Risk Ratio [RR] 0.98, 95% Confidence Interval [CI] 0.90 to 1.07, p = 0.71, I2 = 0%), SOFA scores (Mean Difference [MD] - 0.14, 95% CI -0.81 to 0.52, p = 0.67, I2 = 0%), length of stay in ICU (MD -0.32, 95% CI -1.69 to 1.06, p = 0.65, I2 = 77%), or incidence of hypotension (RR 1.15, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.62, p = 0.44, I2 = 14%). However, DEX significantly reduced the duration of MV (MD -0.54, 95% CI -0.98 to -0.10, p = 0.02, I2 = 25%) but was associated with an increased incidence of bradycardia (RR 1.67, 95% CI 1.22 to 2.28, p = 0.001, I2 = 0%). CONCLUSIONS: In mechanically ventilated patients with sepsis and septic shock, DEX shortened duration of MV but was associated increased bradycardia risk. No mortality or organ dysfunction benefits were observed. These findings suggest DEX is a reasonable therapeutic option to facilitate earlier ventilator weaning in selected patients (particularly those without shock), but careful monitoring for cardiovascular adverse effects is warranted.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Comparative Effectiveness of Pharmacogenomics for Treatment of Depression.

PURPOSE/BACKGROUND: Pharmacogenomics (PGx), or the use of genetic information to assess drug-gene interactions, is an important step toward precision medicine. It is unclear if clinician use of PGx yields better outcomes for their patients. This study compared the effectiveness of combinatorial PGx-guided plus guideline-informed treatment (PGx+GIT) with guideline-informed treatment (GIT) alone to improve well-being in individuals with major depressive disorder. METHODS/PROCEDURES: Eligible participants (N=201) were randomized to PGx+GIT or GIT alone. PGx was measured with the proprietary GeneSight combinatorial test. PGx+GIT participant clinicians received test results within 2 business days to inform decisions about medication changes. Participants completed the World Health Organization Well-Being Index (WHO-5), Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9), and PROMIS Profile physical functioning and social roles and activity domains every 2 weeks for 2 months and then every 2 months for the remaining 10 months. Monthly medication changes operationalized as necessary clinical adjustments were tracked with the medication recommendation tracking form. FINDINGS/RESULTS: Both groups improved average well-being over the 12-month study period (model-based change in WHO-5 per log (week) [95% CI]: 4.1 [3.3, 5.0] PGx+GIT and 4.8 [4.0, 5.5] GIT). PGx+GIT did not result in superior improvement in well-being (model-based difference [95% CI]: -0.6 [-1.8, 0.5], P =0.270), or any secondary outcomes. The effect of randomized treatment on well-being was not moderated by depression severity, number of previous failed medications for major depressive disorder, or presence of a comorbid condition. IMPLICATIONS/CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest PGx+GIT was not superior to GIT alone, possibly due to a ceiling effect of GIT, or PGx did not yield better results.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Safety and Effectiveness of Direct Oral Anticoagulants Versus Low-Molecular-Weight Heparin for Cancer-Associated Thrombosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Cancer-associated thrombosis is a condition associated with high mortality rates, yet limited evidence exists regarding the safety and effectiveness of low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) and direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs), focusing on a fixed follow-up period based on clinical practice guideline recommendations. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare the safety and effectiveness of DOACs versus LMWH in patients with cancer-associated thrombosis over a 6-month follow-up period. METHODS: PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were systematically searched up to 30 June, 2025. Recurrent venous thromboembolism, major bleeding, and all-cause mortality were pooled using a random-effects meta-analysis. RESULTS: Seven randomized controlled trials and 28 cohort studies were included in our systematic review. After applying the criteria for a 6-month follow-up period, five randomized controlled trials and 16 cohort studies with 49,824 patients were analyzed in the meta-analysis. In randomized controlled trials, DOACs showed a lower incidence of venous thromboembolism recurrence (relative risk [RR] 0.66, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.49-0.87) compared with LMWH, with a non-significant increase in major bleeding (RR 1.28, 95% CI 0.87-1.88) and no significant difference in all-cause mortality (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.86-1.18). Cohort studies demonstrated a lower incidence of venous thromboembolism recurrence (RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.62-0.76) with DOACs, a non-significant reduction in major bleeding (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.68-1.07), and a lower risk of all-cause mortality (RR 0.47, 95% CI 0.31-0.72). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with cancer-associated thrombosis, DOACs demonstrated a decrease in recurrent venous thromboembolism without increasing the risk of all-cause mortality. A non-significant increase in the risk of major bleeding was recorded in randomized controlled trials, but not in cohort studies. DOACs may provide greater effectiveness for cancer-associated thrombosis compared with LMWH.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Closed-loop vasopressor systems for hemodynamic control in perioperative and critical care settings: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Maintaining mean arterial pressure (MAP) within a predefined target is central to haemodynamic management in surgical and critically ill adults receiving vasopressors. Closed-loop vasopressor (CLV) systems automate titration to optimise blood pressure control, but their clinical effectiveness remains uncertain. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing CLV with manual titration. This PRISMA 2020-compliant review was prospectively registered in PROSPERO (CRD420250655697). MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, CENTRAL, and the Cochrane Library were searched (January 2000-June 2025). Randomised controlled trials enrolling adults receiving vasopressors in perioperative or intensive care settings were included. Primary outcomes were time within the MAP target range and time spent in hypotension or hypertension. Risk of bias was assessed using RoB 2.0 and certainty of evidence using GRADE. Random- or fixed-effects models were selected according to heterogeneity. Six randomized controlled trials (215 patients) were included in the systematic review, whereas five perioperative trials contributed to the meta-analysis of haemodynamic control outcomes, and one ICU-based study was summarized narratively because it did not report comparable MAP control endpoints. CLV increased time within the MAP target range (mean difference [MD] 33.94%, 95% CI 20.41-47.46; I2 = 77%) and reduced time in hypotension (MD - 18.24%, 95% CI - 28.95 to - 7.53; I2 = 73%). There was no significant difference in time in hypertension, cumulative norepinephrine dose, or major/minor adverse events. ICU length of stay was not pooled because of clinical and methodological heterogeneity. Certainty of evidence ranged from low to high (moderate for haemodynamic control outcomes). CLV systems improved haemodynamic control, primarily in perioperative settings, but heterogeneity and small samples limit confidence in effect size and generalisability. Evidence in critically ill populations remains limited, and larger trials are needed to determine whether improvements in these physiological surrogate endpoints translate into meaningful patient-centred outcomes.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

The effect of nutrition education interventions on dialysis patients' outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Non-adherence to dietary and fluid restrictions among dialysis patients is associated with adverse clinical outcomes. Quantifying the effectiveness of nutrition education interventions can inform practice and policy. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, CENTRAL, PsycINFO, Web of Science, and Scopus up to 15 July 2025, supplemented by trial registries and Google Scholar, with an updated search through 8 April 2026. Eligible studies included randomized and non-randomized trials evaluating nutritional education interventions in adult dialysis populations. Risk of bias was assessed using RoB-2 and ROBINS-I, certainty graded using GRADE, and random-effects meta-analyses conducted alongside subgroup, sensitivity, and meta-regression analyses. Publication bias was assessed with Egger and Begg tests and trim-and-fill where applicable. RESULTS: Forty-four studies comprising 4,106 participants were included. Nutrition education significantly improved knowledge (SMD = 1.09; 95% CI: 0.67-1.51) and health-related quality of life (SMD = 1.43; 95% CI: 0.86-2.00; I² = 0%), and reduced serum potassium (SMD = -0.52; 95% CI: -0.91 to -0.14; I² = 92%) and serum phosphate (SMD = -0.35; 95% CI: -0.56 to -0.15; I² = 81%). Results for albumin, creatinine, sodium, calcium, and BUN were inconsistent and non-significant. Most outcomes were rated low or very low certainty by GRADE, reflecting inconsistency, indirectness, and imprecision. Potential publication bias was identified for certain outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Nutrition education consistently improves knowledge and quality of life and may modestly reduce serum phosphate and potassium in dialysis patients. High-quality registered trials with standardized outcomes and longer follow-up are needed to establish effectiveness and sustainability. PROSPERO REGISTRATION: CRD420251119567.

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

Exploring the dose-response relationship between prenatal exercise and postpartum depression: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

IMPORTANCE: Postpartum depression (PPD) is a hidden and widespread global public health crisis affecting millions of mothers and infants annually. Prenatal exercise is a potentially accessible nonpharmacological strategy for PPD prevention, but its optimal dose remains uncertain. OBJECTIVE: To explore the dose-response relationship between prenatal exercise and the incidence of PPD through meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). DATA SOURCES: Systematic searches were conducted in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library using MeSH terms and keywords related to "pregnant women," "prenatal exercise," and "postpartum depression," up to June 23, 2025. STUDY SELECTION: RCTs included examined prenatal exercise interventions in pregnant women without a history of depression, with PPD incidence reported using validated depression scales (such as EPDS, CES-D). Non-RCT studies, duplicate publications, and studies with insufficient data were excluded. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Two researchers independently extracted data according to the PRISMA guidelines. A random-effects model was used to pool odds ratios (OR) and their 95% confidence intervals (CI). Linear and nonlinear dose-response models were employed to analyze and evaluate the relationship between exercise dose (measured in METs-min/week) and the incidence of PPD. MAIN OUTCOME(S) AND MEASURE(S): The primary outcome is the incidence of PPD, analyzing its relationship with prenatal exercise dose. RESULTS: Eight RCTs involving 2231 pregnant women were included. The pooled analysis showed that prenatal exercise was associated with a potential reduction in PPD incidence, although the overall effect did not reach statistical significance (OR=0.58, 95% CI [0.33, 1.02]). In dose-stratified analysis, exercise doses ≥500 METs-min/week were associated with significantly lower PPD incidence (OR=0.44, 95% CI [0.24, 0.78]). Subgroup analyses suggested trends toward greater benefits among women aged ≥30 years and those initiating exercise between 14 and 28 weeks of gestation; however, subgroup differences did not reach statistical significance. The linear dose-response trend did not reach statistical significance (p = 0.0533), and neither the overall spline association (p = 0.1704) nor the test for nonlinearity (p = 0.6361) was statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Prenatal exercise may be associated with a lower risk of PPD, but the overall pooled effect did not reach statistical significance. Findings concerning ≥500 METs-min/week and the apparent flattening of the dose-response curve should be considered exploratory and require confirmation in larger trials.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Effectiveness of the DASH diet versus alternative dietary interventions for hypertension management: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The Dietary Approaches to Stop Hypertension (DASH) diet is widely recommended for blood pressure control; however, its comparative effectiveness relative to other structured dietary interventions remains uncertain. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the comparative effectiveness of the DASH diet versus alternative dietary interventions on blood pressure and cardiometabolic outcomes in adults. METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials was conducted in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. Multiple databases were searched from inception to February 2026. Eligible studies included adults with elevated blood pressure or hypertension comparing the DASH diet with other dietary interventions or usual care. Continuous outcomes were pooled using random-effects models and expressed as mean differences (MD) or standardized mean differences (SMD). Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane RoB 2 tool, and certainty of evidence was evaluated using the GRADE approach. RESULTS: A total of 22 randomized controlled trials were included in the qualitative synthesis, of which 10 were included in the meta-analysis. The DASH diet did not demonstrate a statistically significant advantage over comparator diets in reducing systolic blood pressure (MD = 1.30; 95% CI: -1.54 to 4.14) or diastolic blood pressure (MD = 0.21; 95% CI: -3.72 to 4.14), with substantial heterogeneity observed across studies. Significant effects were identified for selected cardiometabolic outcomes, including reductions in urinary sodium excretion (MD = -32.89; 95% CI: -62.76 to -3.01), LDL cholesterol (MD = -8.59; 95% CI: -14.64 to -2.54), and glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) (MD = -0.49; 95% CI: -0.52 to -0.46), as well as an increase in urinary potassium excretion (MD = 11.76; 95% CI: 4.08 to 19.44). The certainty of evidence ranged from moderate to very low across outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: The DASH diet was not superior to other dietary interventions in reducing blood pressure; however, it demonstrated consistent benefits in selected cardiometabolic parameters. Given the overall low certainty of evidence and substantial heterogeneity, these findings should be interpreted cautiously. Future research should focus on well-designed trials with standardized outcomes and longer follow-up to clarify comparative effectiveness.

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

Effectiveness of exercise-based prehabilitation on pre and postoperative outcomes of patients undergoing cardiac surgery-An umbrella review of systematic reviews.

AIMS: Individuals undergoing cardiac surgery are becoming older, frailer, and less mobile. Prehabilitation has shown to improve postoperative outcomes by optimizing preoperative physical function. This umbrella review aims to pool the systematic reviews assessing the effectiveness of exercise-based prehabilitation in cardiac surgery. METHODS AND RESULTS: The review followed the PRIOR checklist. PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, Cochrane library, Scopus, Web of science, ProQuest NAHD, ProQuest HMC, Open Grey and MedNar were searched using relevant keywords from inception to 16th December, 2024. Two reviewers screened and extracted data from the included reviews and assessed primary study overlap with the corrected covered area. Methodological quality of the reviews was evaluated with the A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews-2 scale. Certainty of evidence was assessed using a previously developed criteria for overview of reviews. Six systematic reviews with 30 unique trials and 6705 participants were included. The interventions assessed included breathing exercises, inspiratory muscle training, and exercise training. Prehabilitation reduced length of hospital stay, postoperative pulmonary complications, and clinically improved functional capacity with a very low to moderate certainty of evidence. However, there was uncertainty regarding the effects pertaining to adverse events and quality of life. The methodological quality of all reviews was critically low. The primary trials scored poorly in the domains of selection and detection bias. CONCLUSION: Exercise-based prehabilitation might reduce length of hospital stay and postoperative complications, and improve functional capacity. However, the quality of evidence is poor, and individual discretion is required before implementing them into practice. REGISTRATION: PROSPERO: CRD42023480100.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Surgical outcomes and complications of fixation strategies for distal tibial fractures: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Multiple fixation options exist for distal tibial fractures, but the optimal approach remains controversial. Common techniques includeopen reduction and internal fixation(ORIF), minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis (MIPO), external fixation combined with limited open reduction and internal fixation (EF + LORIF), intramedullary nailing (IMN), and retrograde tibial nailing (RTN). METHODS: PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library were searched through March 19, 2026. Network meta-analysis (R v4.5.1) assessed operation time, fracture healing time, malunion, delayed union/nonunion, and infection, reporting MDs or RRs with 95% CIs. RESULTS: Eleven randomized controlled trials and 18 cohort studies (2145 patients) were included. MIPO was associated with a longer operative time and a longer time to union than IMN-IP (MD = 8.23, 95% CI 0.44-16.01; and MD = 1.02, 95% CI 0.10-1.93, respectively). For malunion, ORIF had a lower risk than MIPO (RR = 0.30, 95% CI 0.11-0.82), whereas MIPO had a higher risk than EF + LORIF (RR = 3.26, 95% CI 1.08-9.80) and IMN-SP (RR = 4.03, 95% CI 1.30-12.48). ORIF, EF + LORIF, and IMN-SP also showed lower malunion risk than IMN-IP. No significant differences were observed for delayed union and nonunion. Infection risk was generally higher with ORIF and MIPO than with several comparators, particularly EF + LORIF and intramedullary nailing-based strategies. CONCLUSIONS: No single strategy was consistently superior. Operation time and impaired union ( delayed union and nonunion) did not differ significantly among techniques. MIPO may be associated with longer time to union than IMN-IP and higher malunion risk than EF + LORIF and IMN-SP. Infection risk appeared higher with ORIF and MIPO in network estimates, although several comparisons remained uncertain. Findings should be interpreted in light of imprecision and study-level heterogeneity. PROTOCOL REGISTRATION: INPLASY2025120055.

Humans↗