Minimally invasive sacroiliac joint fusion using triangular titanium implants versus nonsurgical management for sacroiliac joint dysfunction: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive sacroiliac joint (MISIJ) fusion is a surgical option to relieve SIJ pain. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare MISIJ fusion with triangular titanium implants (TTI) to nonoperative management of SIJ dysfunction. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. We included prospective clinical trials that compared MISIJ fusion to nonoperative management in individuals with chronic low back pain attributed to SIJ dysfunction. We evaluated pain on visual analogue scale, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) score, health-related quality of life (HRQoL) using the 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) physical component (PCS) and mental component summary (MCS) scores, patient satisfaction, and adverse events. RESULTS: A total of 8 articles representing 3 trials that enrolled 423 participants were deemed eligible. There was a significant reduction in pain score with MISIJ fusion compared with nonoperative management (standardized mean difference [SMD] -1.71, 95% confidence interval [CI] -2.03 to -1.39). Similarly, ODI scores (SMD -1.03, 95% CI -1.24 to -0.81), SF-36 PCS scores (SMD 1.01, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.19), SF-36 MCS scores (SMD 0.72, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.9), and patient satisfaction (odds ratio 6.87, 95% CI 3.73 to 12.64) were significantly improved with MISIJ fusion. No significant difference was found between the 2 groups with respect to adverse events (SMD -0.03, 95% CI -0.28 to 0.23). CONCLUSION: Our analysis showed that MISIJ fusion with TTI shows a clinically important and statistically significant improvement in pain, disability score, HRQoL, and patient satisfaction with a similar adverse event profile to nonoperative management in patients with chronic low back pain attributed to SIJ dysfunction.

Botulinum toxin type A for lower limb lengthening and deformity correction: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Botulinum toxin type A (BTX-A) is the most popular therapeutic agent for muscle relaxation and pain control. Lately, BTX-A injection received great interest as a part of multimodal pain management for lower limb lengthening and deformity correction. This systematic review aimed to determine the role of BTX-A injection in pain management for during lower limb lengthening and/or deformity correction. METHODS: We searched Medline, Embase, and CENTRAL. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared the BTX-A injection to placebo for individuals undergoing lower limb lengthening and/or deformity correction. We sought to evaluate the following outcomes: pain on visual analogue scale (VAS), range of motion parameters, average opioid consumption, and adverse events. The standardized mean difference (SMD) was used to represent continuous outcomes while risk ratio (RR) was used to represent dichotomous outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 4 RCTs that enrolled 257 participants (337 limbs) deemed eligible. Adjuvant BTX-A injection showed a significant reduction in post-operative pain compared to placebo (SMD = -0.28, 95% CI -0.53 to -0.04). No difference was found between BTX-A injection and placebo in terms of range of motion parameters, average opioid consumption, or adverse events after surgical limb lengthening and/or deformity correction (RR = 0.77, 95% CI -0.58 to 1.03). CONCLUSIONS: Adjuvant BTX-A injection conferred a discernible reduction in post-operative pain during surgical limb lengthening and/or deformity without increasing the risk of adverse events. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42021271580.

External fixation versus intramedullary nailing for the management of open tibial fracture: meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

AIM: Tibial shaft fractures are the most common type of long-bone fractures. External fixation (EF) and intramedullary nailing (IMN) are widely used surgical techniques for the definitive fixation of open tibial shaft fractures. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare EF to IMN for the definitive fixation of open tibial fractures. METHODS: Medline, Embase, and CENTRAL databases were searched for eligible studies. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared EF to IMN for skeletally mature adults with open tibial fracture (Gustilo I, II, and III). We evaluated the following outcomes: superficial infection, pin-track infection, deep infection, malunion, nonunion, delayed union, and implant/hardware failure. The risk ratio (RR) was used to represent the desired outcomes. The statistical analysis was performed using the random-effects model. RESULTS: A total of 12 RCTs that enrolled 1090 participants were deemed eligible for the analysis. EF showed a significantly higher rate of superficial infection, pin track infection, and malunion compared to IMN (RR = 2.30, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.34 to 3.95; RR = 13.52, 95% CI: 6.16 to 29.66; RR = 2.29, 95% CI 1.41 to 3.73, respectively). No substantial difference was found between EF and IMN in terms of deep infection, nonunion, delayed union, or implant/hardware failure (RR = 1.15, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.98; RR = 0.92, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.10; RR = 1.50, 95% CI 0.98 to 3.33; RR = 0.96, 95% CI 0.36 to 2.60, respectively). DISCUSSION: The findings of our meta-analysis are consistent with the previous systematic reviews excepts for the implant/hardware failure which was found to be significant in favour of IMN by one of the previous reviews. CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis confirms that IMN is better than EF with respect to clinical outcomes and complication rate for the definitive fixation of open tibial fracture.

Public awareness about arthritic diseases in Saudi Arabia: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: Raising public knowledge and perception would have a discernible impact on providing optimal care and reducing the burden of arthritis in the community. This systematic review aimed to identify the public knowledge about the common arthritic conditions in Saudi Arabia. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, and CENTRAL for relevant literature. We included questionnaire-based cross-sectional studies performed in Saudi Arabia assessing the public perception of general knowledge, causes/risk factors, signs/symptoms, and relieving/management measures of the common arthritic conditions including osteoarthritis (OA), rheumatoid arthritis (RA), and gout. The meta-analysis was performed on outcomes reported in ≥ two studies utilizing a random-effects model RESULTS: Ten studies representing 6703 participants were deemed eligible for inclusion in this review. A total of 35 questions were feasible to be included in the meta-analysis. The meta-analysis estimated that 83.51%, 54.51%, and 80.42% have ever hearsd or read about OA, RA, and gout. Joint pain and swelling were perceived to be the main signs/symptoms of OA, RA, and gout. 7.5% think OA is predisposed by genetics while only 33.6% think the same of RA. RA knowledge in general is suboptimum. Only 27.04% think medications can help in the management of gout. CONCLUSION: The Saudi public perception of the general knowledge and causes/risk factors of the most common arthritic conditions was acceptable. The level of knowledge about other aspects of the common arthritic conditions is still limited and needs to be addressed by future educational interventions. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO registration number: CRD42022345274.

Effect of ultrasound-guided versus landmark-guided local corticosteroid injection for carpal tunnel syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS), the commonest neuropathy of the upper limb, can be managed with different therapeutic approaches. Local corticosteroid injection has been adopted widely in clinical practice, as it showed great efficacy in treating CTS. However, the best injection technique continues to be a subject of controversy. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the efficacy of ultrasound-guided (US-guided) versus landmark-guided (LM-guided) corticosteroid injection on the clinical and electrophysiological outcomes in patients with CTS. METHODS: We performed a systematic literature search in Medline, Embase, and CENTRAL, from which we included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared US-guided and LM-based corticosteroid injection in treating individuals with CTS. We evaluated the following outcomes: Boston carpal tunnel questionnaire functional status scale (BCTQ-FSS) and symptom severity scale (BCTQ-SSS), and adverse event rate. The standardized mean difference (SMD) was used to represent continuous outcomes, while the risk ratio (RR) was used to represent dichotomous outcome. RESULTS: A total of 8 RCTs that enrolled 500 wrists were deemed eligible. US-guided injection showed a significantly better BCTQ-FSS (SMD = -0.22, 95% CI -0.39 to -0.04), BCTQ-SSS (SMD = -0.77, 95% CI -1.22 to -0.31), and adverse event rate (RR = 0.32, 95% CI 0.21 to 0.49) compared to LM-based injection. CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis showed the superiority of US-guided corticosteroid injection over LM-guided corticosteroid injection in enhancing functional status, improving symptom severity, and reducing the adverse event rate in individuals with CTS.

Public awareness and attitudes toward epilepsy in Saudi Arabia: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Public awareness of epilepsy and attitudes toward people with epilepsy (PWE) largely affect patients' perceived stigma and their quality of life. Educational interventions to increase public awareness of the disease need to target areas of lowest awareness levels to achieve best results. The aim of this review was to identify these areas in Saudi Arabia. METHODS: This review was based on PRISMA guidelines. Medline, PsychInfo, Embase, Ovid Evidence-Based Medicine Reviews, and Web of Science databases were searched for relevant literature. Inclusion criteria was cross-sectional studies that are done in Saudi Arabia, assess any aspect of epilepsy awareness or attitudes toward PWE, and report outcomes in proportions. Meta-analysis was done on outcomes reported in ≥5 studies utilizing random-effects model. Quality assessment was done using AXIS tool. RESULTS: Twenty-seven studies were included in this review. A total of 48 questions' outcomes were reported in ≥3 studies, and 26 of them were included in the meta-analysis. The meta-analysis estimated that 6.4% (CI 4.2-9.7%) of the population think epilepsy is a contagious disease; 90.7% (CI 85.5-94.1%) have heard/read about epilepsy; 53.1% (CI 47.7-58.3%) have witnessed a seizure; 38.6% (CI 24.7-54.7%) think epilepsy is a psychological disorder; 25.2% (CI 16.5-36.7%) think it is caused by spirit possession; 35.1% (CI 22.0-50.8%) were estimated to think it is caused by evil eye (envy); 37.9% (CI 21.9-57.0%) would try to put something inside a seizing patient's mouth to prevent tongue biting; 34.6% (CI 26.9-43.1%) would approve their offspring marrying someone with epilepsy. CONCLUSION: Areas of unsatisfactory awareness levels included etiology of epilepsy and appropriate seizure responses. Attitudes were more negative regarding marriage, children, and employment. These areas need to be properly addressed in future educational interventions.

Monoclonal antibodies for the treatment of Graves' ophthalmopathy: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: The traditional standard of care for Graves' ophthalmopathy (GO) is glucocorticoid therapy, which is associated with many long-term side effects. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare the traditional therapy to novel monoclonal antibodies (e.g. rituximab [RTX], teprotumumab, and tocilizumab [TCZ]). METHODS: We searched the Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared different monoclonal antibodies (e.g. RTX, teprotumumab, and TCZ) with glucocorticoids or placebo in patients with GO. We evaluated the clinical activity score (CAS), proptosis, subjective diplopia using the Gorman score, quality of life (QoT), adverse events, change in lid fissure, NOSPECS score, and TSH receptor antibody (TRAb) levels. The odds ratio (OR) was used to represent dichotomous outcomes. The continuous outcomes were represented as standardized mean difference (SMD). Data were pooled using the inverse variance weighting method. Risk of bias was assessed using the revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials. RESULTS: Six (n = 571) RCTs were deemed eligible. The different monoclonal antibodies were significantly more efficacious than glucocorticoid/placebo in terms of reduction in CAS (SMD = -1.44, 95% confidence interval (CI): -1.91--0.97, P < 0.00001, I2 = 74%), change in proptosis (SMD = -4.96, 95% CI: -8.02--1.89, P = 0.002, I2 = 99%), QoL (SMD = 2.64, 95% CI: 0.50-4.79, P = 0.02, I2 = 97%), and Gorman score for diplopia (OR = 3.42, 95% CI: 1.62-7.22, P = 0.001, I2 = 8%). However, monoclonal antibodies have shown higher rates of adverse events (OR = 2.91, 95% CI: 1.12-7.56, P = 0.03, I2 = 62%). No significant difference was found with respect to lid fissure, NOSPECS, and TRAb levels. CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis demonstrated that monoclonal antibodies were associated with more favorable clinical outcomes than standard steroid therapy or placebo, especially with regard to CAS, change in proptosis, diplopia, and QoL, with teprotumumab being superior. In addition, only minor safety concerns were identified with monoclonal antibodies though less worrisome than using traditional steroids.

Early versus late weightbearing in conservative management of acute achilles tendon rupture: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: Achilles tendon rupture (ATR) is one of the most frequently encountered injuries in Sports Medicine. ATR can be managed surgically or conservatively followed by early functional rehabilitation or cast immobilization. The aim of the present systematic review and meta-analysis was to provide an update about the role of early weightbearing (WB) versus late WB on the clinical outcomes of adults with acute ATR. METHODS: We performed a systematic literature search in Web of Science, Ovid, Medline/PubMed, and CENTRAL. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared early WB, defined as weight-bearing within 4 weeks of treatment, to late WB for individuals with acute (<14 days) ATR. We sought to evaluate the following outcomes: re-rupture rate, Achilles Tendon Rupture Score (ATRS), return to pre-injury sport activity, time to return to work, and adverse event rate. The standardized mean difference (SMD) was used to represent continuous outcomes while the risk ratio (RR) was used to represent dichotomous outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 9 RCTs that enrolled 1046 participants were deemed eligible. There was no significant difference between early WB and late WB in terms of re-rupture rate (RR=0.75, 95% CI 0.49 to 1.16), ATRS (SMD=0.06, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.16), return to pre-injury sport activity (RR=1.05, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.28), time to return to work (SMD=0.03, 95% CI -0.20 to 0.26), or adverse event rate (RR=1.87, 95% CI 0.53 to 6.63). CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis shows no difference in the functional outcomes and patient-reported outcomes between early functional rehabilitation and cast immobilization for conservatively treat individuals with acute ATR.

Influence of perioperative opioid-related patient education: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the role of perioperative protocolized opioid-specific patient education on opioid consumption for individuals undergoing surgical procedures. METHODS: We searched Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared protocolized perioperative opioid-specific patient education to the usual care for adult individuals undergoing surgical interventions. The standardized mean difference (SMD) was used to represent continuous outcomes while the risk ratio (RR) was used to represent dichotomous outcomes. RESULTS: In total, 15 RCTs that enrolled 2546 participants were deemed eligible. Protocolized opioid-specific patient education showed a significant reduction in postoperative opioid consumption and postoperative pain score compared to usual care (SMD= -0.15, 95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.28 to -0.03 and SMD= -0.17, 95% CI: -0.28 to -0.06, respectively). No significant difference was found between the protocolized opioid-specific patient education and the usual care in terms of the number of refill requests (RR=0.82, 95% CI: 0.50-1.34), patients with opioid leftovers (RR=0.92, 95% CI: 0.78-1.08), and patients taking opioids after hospital discharge. CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis demonstrated that protocolized opioid-specific patient education significantly reduces postoperative opioid consumption and pain score but has no influence on the number of opioid refill requests, opioid leftovers, and opioid use after hospital discharge. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Healthcare professionals may offer opioid-related educational sessions for the surgical patients during the perioperative period through a video-based material that emphasizes the role of alternative analgesics to opioids, patients' expectations about the post-operative pain, and the potential side effects of opioid consumptions.