Treatment of post-treatment Lyme disease symptoms-a systematic review.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Residual symptoms after treatment of Lyme disease, sometimes called post-treatment Lyme disease symptoms (PTLDs), are a matter of ongoing controversy. To guide treatment recommendations, a systematic review was performed of the available literature on specific treatment for PTLDs. METHODS: A systematic literature search of MEDLINE and CENTRAL was performed. No restrictions on case definitions, study types or specific interventions were applied to enable a comprehensive overview of the available literature. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tools for randomized controlled trials. Certainty of the evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. Outcomes of interest were quality of life, fatigue, depression and cognition as well as adverse events. RESULTS: After screening 1274 records, eight eligible randomized controlled trials were included. Heterogeneity was observed regarding inclusion criteria, intervention, length of treatment and outcome measures. For efficacy outcomes, results are presented narratively due to heterogeneity. Eligible studies show no statistically significant difference between antibiotics and placebo regarding quality of life, cognition and depression. Results for fatigue were inconsistent whilst studies with low risk of bias showed no statistically significant difference between antibiotics and placebo. Meta-analysis of safety outcomes showed statistically significantly more adverse events for antibiotics compared to placebo. CONCLUSIONS: Available literature on treatment of PTLDs is heterogeneous, but overall shows evidence of no effect of antibiotics regarding quality of life, depression, cognition and fatigue whilst showing more adverse events. Patients with suspected PTLDs should not be treated with antibiotics.

BMI Z-Score (SDS) versus Calculated Body Fat Percentage: Association with Cardiometabolic Risk Factors in Obese Children and Adolescents.

INTRODUCTION: BMI or BMI-standardized deviation score (SDS) in children and adolescents is still the standard for weight classification. [BMJ. 2019;366:4293] developed a formula to calculate body fat percentage (%BF) based on age, sex, height, weight, and ethnicity. Using data from the German/Austrian APV registry, we investigated whether the calculated %BF is superior to BMI-SDS in predicting arterial hypertension, dyslipidaemia, and impaired glucose metabolism. METHODS: 94,586 children and adolescents were included (12.5 years, 48.3% male). Parental birth country (BC) was used to depict ethnicity (15.8% migration background); 95.67% were assigned to the ethnicity "white." %BF was calculated based on the Hudda formula. The relationship between BMI-SDS or %BF quartiles and outcome variables was investigated by logistic regression models, adjusted for age, sex, and migration background. Vuong test was applied to analyse predictive power. RESULTS: 58.4% had arterial hypertension, 33.5% had dyslipidaemia, and 11.6% had impaired glucose metabolism. Boys were significantly more often affected, although girls had higher calculated %BF (each p < 0.05). After adjustment, both models revealed significant differences between the quartiles (all p < 0.001). The predictive power of BMI-SDS was superior to %BF for all three comorbidities (all p < 0.05). DISCUSSION: The prediction of cardiometabolic comorbidities by calculated %BF was not superior to BMI-SDS. This formula developed in a British population may not be suitable for a central European population, which is applicable to this possibly less heterogeneous collective. Additional parameters, especially puberty status, should be taken into account. However, objective determinations such as bioimpedance analysis may possibly be superior to assess fat mass and cardiometabolic risk than calculated %BF.

Critical outcomes to be included in the Core Outcome Set for nutritional intervention studies in older adults with malnutrition or at risk of malnutrition: a modified Delphi Study.

INTRODUCTION: As part of the development of an agreed minimum set of outcomes or Core Outcome Set (COS) for future nutritional intervention trials in older adults with malnutrition or at risk of malnutrition, this work reports on the Delphi surveys and final consensus. METHODS: Outcomes from a scoping review were incorporated into a two-round Delphi survey. Researchers and healthcare professionals experienced in malnutrition in older adults were invited to take part in an online survey to rate 38 selected outcomes on a nine-point Likert scale ranging from 'not important' to 'critical' for their setting (community, hospital, or long-term care). Consensus for inclusion was reached when ≥75% (or ≥60% if a patient-reported outcome) of the participants scored the outcome as 'critical' and <15% as 'not important'. Resulting outcomes were voted for inclusion or exclusion in the COS in a final online consensus meeting. RESULTS: Ninety-three and 72 participants from diverse professional backgrounds and countries participated in the 1st and 2nd Delphi round, respectively. After both rounds eleven outcomes met the inclusion criteria, largely irrespective of setting. Fifteen participants, representing academia, health care, health policy, industry, and PPI, voted in a final online consensus meeting resulting in ten outcomes: malnutrition status, dietary intake, appetite, body weight or BMI, muscle strength, muscle mass, functional performance, functional limitations, quality of life, and acceptability of the intervention. CONCLUSIONS: Ten outcomes will form the COS which is intended to be used by the scientific community in all future nutritional intervention studies for older adults with malnutrition or at risk of malnutrition. The subsequent phase will establish the appropriate methods to measure these outcomes.

Pharmacological interventions for the management of children and adolescents living with obesity-An update of a Cochrane systematic review with meta-analyses.

IMPORTANCE: The effectiveness of anti-obesity medications for children and adolescents is unclear. OBJECTIVE: To update the evidence on the benefits and harms of anti-obesity medication. DATA SOURCES: Cochrane CENTRAL, MEDLINE, ClinicalTrials.gov and WHO ICTRP (1/1/16-17/3/23). STUDY SELECTION: Randomized controlled trials ≥6 months in people <19 years living with obesity. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Screening, data extraction and quality assessment conducted in duplicate, independently. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Body mass index (BMI): 95th percentile BMI, adverse events and quality of life. RESULTS: Thirty-five trials (N = 4331), follow-up: 6-24 months; age: 8.8-16.3 years; BMI: 26.2-41.7 kg/m2. Moderate certainty evidence demonstrated a -1.71 (95% confidence interval [CI]: -2.27 to -1.14)-unit BMI reduction, ranging from -0.8 to -5.9 units between individual drugs with semaglutide producing the largest reduction of -5.88 kg/m2 (95% CI: -6.99 to -4.77, N = 201). Drug type explained ~44% of heterogeneity. Low certainty evidence demonstrated reduction in 95th percentile BMI: -11.88 percentage points (95% CI: -18.43 to -5.30, N = 668). Serious adverse events and study discontinuation due to adverse events did not differ between medications and comparators, but medication dose adjustments were higher compared to comparator (10.6% vs 1.7%; RR = 3.74 [95% CI: 1.51 to 9.26], I2 = 15%), regardless of approval status. There was a trend towards improved quality of life. Evidence gaps exist for children, psychosocial outcomes, comorbidities and weight loss maintenance. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Anti-obesity medications in addition to behaviour change improve BMI but may require dose adjustment, with 1 in 100 adolescents experiencing a serious adverse event.

Impact of different surgical and non-surgical interventions on health-related quality of life after thoracolumbar burst fractures without neurological deficit: protocol for a comprehensive systematic review with network meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: There is no international consensus on how to treat thoracolumbar burst fractures (TLBFs) without neurological deficits. The planned systematic review with network meta-analyses (NMA) aims to compare the effects on treatment outcomes, focusing on midterm health-related quality of life (HRQoL). METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will conduct a comprehensive and systematic literature search, identifying studies comparing two or more treatment modalities. We will search MEDLINE, EMBASE, Google Scholar, Scopus and Web of Science from January 2000 until July 2023 for publications. We will include (randomised and non-randomised) controlled clinical trials assessing surgical and non-surgical treatment methods for adults with TLBF. Screening of references, data extraction and risk of bias (RoB) assessment will be done independently by two reviewers. We will extract relevant studies, participants and intervention characteristics. The RoB will be assessed using the revised Cochrane RoB V.2.0 tool for randomised trials and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for controlled trials. The OR for dichotomous data and standardised mean differences for continuous data will be presented with their respective 95% CIs. We will conduct a random-effects NMA to assess the treatments and determine the superiority of the therapeutic approaches. Our primary outcomes will be midterm (6 months to 2 years after injury) overall HRQoL and pain. Secondary outcomes will include radiological or clinical findings. We will present network graphs, forest plots and relative rankings on plotted rankograms corresponding to the treatment rank probabilities. The ranking results will be represented by the area under the cumulative ranking curve. Analyses will be performed in Stata V.16.1 and R. The quality of the evidence will be evaluated according to the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations framework. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval is not required. The research will be published in a peer-reviewed journal.