Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gamma agonists for preventing recurrent stroke and other vascular events in people with stroke or transient ischaemic attack.

BACKGROUND: Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gamma (PPAR-γ) agonists are insulin-sensitising drugs used for the treatment of insulin resistance. In addition to lowering glucose in diabetes, these drugs may also protect against hyperlipidaemia and arteriosclerosis, which are risk factors for stroke. This is an update of a review first published in January 2014 and subsequently updated in December 2017 and October 2019. OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy and safety of PPAR-γ agonists in the secondary prevention of stroke and related vascular events for people with stroke or transient ischaemic attack (TIA). SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register (1 January 2022), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2021, Issue 12), MEDLINE (1949 to 1 January 2022), Embase (1980 to 1 January 2022), CINAHL (1982 to 1 January 2022), AMED (1985 to 1 January 2022), and 11 Chinese databases (1 January 2022). In an effort to identify further published, unpublished, and ongoing trials, we searched ongoing trials registers, reference lists, and relevant conference proceedings, and contacted authors and pharmaceutical companies. We did not impose any language restrictions. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating PPAR-γ agonists versus placebo for the secondary prevention of stroke and related vascular events in people with stroke or TIA, with the outcomes of recurrent stroke, vascular events, and adverse events. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently screened the titles and abstracts of identified records, selected studies for inclusion, extracted eligible data, cross-checked the data for accuracy, and assessed methodological quality and risk of bias. We evaluated the certainty of evidence for each outcome using the GRADE approach. MAIN RESULTS: We identified five RCTs with 5039 participants; two studies had a low risk of bias for all domains. Four studies evaluated the drug pioglitazone, and one study evaluated rosiglitazone. The participants in different studies were heterogeneous. Recurrent stroke Three studies evaluated the number of participants with recurrent stroke (4979 participants, a single study contributing 3876 of these). Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gamma agonists probably reduce the recurrence of stroke compared with placebo (risk ratio (RR) 0.66, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.44 to 0.99; moderate-certainty evidence). Adverse events Evidence that adverse events occurred more frequently in participants treated with PPAR-γ agonists when compared with placebo was uncertain due to wide confidence intervals and high levels of statistical heterogeneity: risk difference 10%, 95% CI -8% to 28%; low-certainty evidence). Data were available on additional composite outcomes reflecting serious vascular events (all-cause death and other major vascular events; all-cause mortality, non-fatal myocardial infarction or non-fatal stroke) from one study in 984 people. This study provided low-certainty evidence that PPAR-γ agonists led to fewer events (data not meta-analysed). Vascular events Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gamma agonists given over a mean duration of 34.5 months in a single trial of 984 participants may reduce serious vascular events expressed as a composite outcome of total events of cardiovascular death, non-fatal myocardial infarction or non-fatal stroke (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.99; low-certainty evidence). Other outcomes One study in 20 people measured insulin sensitivity, and one study in 40 people measured the ubiquitin-proteasome activity in carotid plaques. Our confidence in the improvements observed with PPAR-γ agonists were limited by small sample sizes and risk of bias. None of the studies reported the number of participants with disability due to vascular events or improvement in quality of life. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gamma agonists probably reduce recurrent stroke and total events of cardiovascular death, non-fatal myocardial infarction or non-fatal stroke, and may improve insulin sensitivity and the stabilisation of carotid plaques. Their effects on adverse events are uncertain. Our conclusions should be interpreted with caution considering the small number and the quality of the included studies. Further well-designed, double-blind RCTs with large samples are required to assess the efficacy and safety of PPAR-γ agonists in the secondary prevention of stroke and related vascular events in people with stroke or TIA.

Flexible Curcumin-Loaded Zn-MOF Hydrogel for Long-Term Drug Release and Antibacterial Activities.

Management of chronic inflammation and wounds has always been a key issue in the pharmaceutical and healthcare sectors. Curcumin (CCM) is an active ingredient extracted from turmeric rhizomes with antioxidant, anti-inflammatory, and antibacterial activities, thus showing significant effectiveness toward wound healing. However, its shortcomings, such as poor water solubility, poor chemical stability, and fast metabolic rate, limit its bioavailability and long-term use. In this context, hydrogels appear to be a versatile matrix for carrying and stabilizing drugs due to their biomimetic structure, soft porous microarchitecture, and favorable biomechanical properties. The drug loading/releasing efficiencies can also be controlled via using highly crystalline and porous metal-organic frameworks (MOFs). Herein, a flexible hydrogel composed of a sodium alginate (SA) matrix and CCM-loaded MOFs was constructed for long-term drug release and antibacterial activity. The morphology and physicochemical properties of composite hydrogels were analyzed by scanning electron microscopy (SEM), Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (FT-IR), X-ray diffraction (XRD), ultraviolet-visible spectroscopy (UV-Vis), Raman spectroscopy, and mechanical property tests. The results showed that the composite hydrogel was highly twistable and bendable to comply with human skin mechanically. The as-prepared hydrogel could capture efficient CCM for slow drug release and effectively kill bacteria. Therefore, such composite hydrogel is expected to provide a new management system for chronic wound dressings.

Treatment of epilepsy for people with Alzheimer's disease.

BACKGROUND: Any type of seizure can be observed in Alzheimer's disease. Antiepileptic drugs seem to prevent the recurrence of epileptic seizures in most people with Alzheimer's disease. There are pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatments for epilepsy in people with Alzheimer's disease, however there are no current systematic reviews to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of these treatments. This review aims to investigate these different modalities. This is an updated version of the Cochrane Review previously published in 2018. OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy and tolerability of pharmacological or non-pharmacological interventions for the treatment of epilepsy in people with Alzheimer's disease (including sporadic Alzheimer's disease and dominantly inherited Alzheimer's disease). SEARCH METHODS: For the latest update, on 3 August 2020 we searched the Cochrane Register of Studies (CRS Web) and MEDLINE (Ovid, 1946 to 31 July 2020). CRS Web includes randomized or quasi-randomized controlled trials from PubMed, EMBASE, ClinicalTrials.gov, the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and the Specialized Registers of Cochrane Review Groups, including Cochrane Epilepsy. In an effort to identify further published, unpublished and ongoing trials, we searched ongoing trials registers, reference lists and relevant conference proceedings; we also contacted trial authors and pharmaceutical companies. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized and quasi-randomized controlled trials investigating treatment for epilepsy in people with Alzheimer's disease, with the primary outcomes of proportion of participants with seizure freedom and proportion of participants experiencing adverse events. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently screened the titles and abstracts of identified records, selected studies for inclusion, extracted data, cross-checked the data for accuracy and assessed the methodological quality. We performed no meta-analyses due to there being limited available data. MAIN RESULTS: We included one randomized controlled trial (RCT) on pharmacological interventions; the trial included 95 participants. No studies were found for non-pharmacological interventions. Concerning the proportion of participants with seizure freedom, no significant differences were found for the comparisons of levetiracetam versus lamotrigine (RR) 1.20, 95% CI 0.53 to 2.71; 67 participants; very low-certainty evidence), levetiracetam versus phenobarbital (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.47 to 2.19; 66 participants; very low-certainty evidence), or lamotrigine versus phenobarbital (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.35 to 2.02; 57 participants; very low-certainty evidence). It seemed that levetiracetam could improve cognition and lamotrigine could relieve depression, while phenobarbital and lamotrigine could worsen cognition, and levetiracetam and phenobarbital could worsen mood. The risk of bias relating to allocation, blinding and selective reporting was unclear. We judged the certainty of the evidence for all outcomes to be very low. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This review does not provide sufficient evidence to support levetiracetam, phenobarbital or lamotrigine for the treatment of epilepsy in people with Alzheimer's disease. Regarding efficacy and tolerability, no significant differences were found between levetiracetam, phenobarbital and lamotrigine. Large RCTs with a double-blind, parallel-group design are required to determine the efficacy and tolerability of treatment for epilepsy in people with Alzheimer's disease.

Topiramate for juvenile myoclonic epilepsy.

BACKGROUND: Topiramate is a newer broad-spectrum antiepileptic drug (AED). Some studies have shown the benefits of topiramate in the treatment of juvenile myoclonic epilepsy (JME). However, there are no current systematic reviews to determine the efficacy and tolerability of topiramate in people with JME. This is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2015, and last updated in 2019. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of topiramate in the treatment of JME. SEARCH METHODS: For the latest update, we searched the Cochrane Register of Studies (CRS Web) on 26 August 2021, and MEDLINE (Ovid 1946 to 26 August 2021). CRS Web includes randomized or quasi-randomized controlled trials from PubMed, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov, the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and the Specialized Registers of Cochrane Review Groups, including Cochrane Epilepsy. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating topiramate versus placebo or other AED treatment for people with JME, with the outcomes of proportion of responders and proportion of participants experiencing adverse events (AEs). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently screened the titles and abstracts of identified records, selected studies for inclusion, extracted data, cross-checked the data for accuracy and assessed the methodological quality of the studies. MAIN RESULTS: We included three studies with a total of 83 participants. For efficacy, a greater proportion of participants in the topiramate group had a 50% or greater reduction in primarily generalized tonic-clonic seizures (PGTCS), compared with participants in the placebo group (RR 4.00, 95% CI 1.08 to 14.75; 1 study, 22 participants; very low-certainty evidence). There were no significant differences between topiramate and valproate for participants responding with a 50% or greater reduction in myoclonic seizures (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.15; one study, 23 participants; very-low certainty evidence) or in PGTCS (RR 1.22, 95% CI 0.68 to 2.21; one study, 16 participants, very-low certainty evidence), or participants becoming seizure-free (RR 1.13, 95% CI 0.61 to 2.11; one study, 27 participants; very-low certainty evidence). Concerning tolerability, we ranked AEs associated with topiramate as moderate to severe, while we ranked 59% of AEs linked to valproate as severe complaints (2 studies, 61 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Moreover, systemic toxicity scores were higher in the valproate group than the topiramate group. Overall we judged all three studies to be at high risk of attrition bias and at unclear risk of reporting bias. We judged the studies to be at low to unclear risk of bias for the remaining domains (selection bias, performance bias, detection bias and other bias). We judged the overall certainty of the evidence for the outcomes as very low using the GRADE approach. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We have found no new studies since the last version of this review was published in 2019. This review does not provide sufficient evidence to support topiramate for the treatment of people with JME. Based on the current limited available data, topiramate seems to be better tolerated than valproate, but has no clear benefits over valproate in terms of efficacy. Well-designed, double-blind RCTs with large samples are required to test the efficacy and tolerability of topiramate in people with JME.

Influence of bovine serum albumin on corrosion behaviour of pure Zn in phosphate buffered saline.

Zinc (Zn) and its alloys have received increasing attention as new alternative biodegradable metals. However, consensus has not been reached on the corrosion behaviour of Zn. As cardiovascular artery stent material, Zn is supposed to contact with plasma that contains inorganic salts and organic components. Protein is one of the most important constitute in the plasma and could adsorb on the material surface. In this paper, bovine serum albumin (BSA) was used as a typical protein. Influences of BSA on pure Zn corrosion in phosphate buffered saline is investigated as a function of BSA concentrations and immersion durations by electrochemical techniques and surface analysis. Results showed that pure Zn corrosion was progressively accelerated with BSA concentrations (ranging from 0.05 to 5 g L-1) at 0.5 h. With time evolves, formation of phosphates as corrosion product was delayed by BSA adsorption, especially at concentration of 2 g L-1. Within 48 h, the corrosion of pure Zn was alleviated by BSA at concentration of 0.1 g L-1, whereas the corrosion was enhanced after 168 h. Addition of 2 g L-1 BSA has opposite influence on the pure Zn corrosion. Furthermore, schematic corrosion behaviour at protein/Zn interfaces was proposed. This work encourages us to think more about the influence of protein on the material corrosion and helps us to better understand the corrosion behaviour of pure Zn.

Enhanced photoelectrochemical activity of α-Fe2O3/TiO2 nanoheterojunction by controlling hydrodynamic conditions.

Interfacial heterostructuring has appeared to be an efficient strategy to address the efficiency and applicability of the photocatalysts in solar energy conversion. Herein, we developed one-dimensional (1D) α-Fe2O3/TiO2 nanoheterojunction arrays for enhanced photoelectrochemical (PEC) activity. α-Fe2O3 nanotubes were firstly prepared via anodization under controlled hydrodynamic conditions to increase the efficiency. 1D α-Fe2O3/TiO2 nanoheterojunction arrays were then prepared through a hydrothermal treatment and a subsequent annealing process. A controlled anodization by modulating the hydrodynamic conditions, added a fine coating of TiO2 overlayer, to finally give an optimized composition and geometry for improved light absorption and spatial charge separation efficiency. Consequently, the optimized α-Fe2O3 generated a photocurrent of 0.07 mA cm-2 (3.5 times higher than that of pristine α-Fe2O3), and the as-obtained α-Fe2O3/TiO2 nanoheterojunction exhibited a photocurrent intensity of 0.12 mA cm-2 (about 6 times higher than that of pristine α-Fe2O3). A long-term stability can also be ensured. The well-controlled architectures provides a guideline for synthesis of advanced nanomaterials.

Baclofen for alcohol withdrawal.

BACKGROUND: Alcohol withdrawal syndrome (AWS) is a distressing and life-threatening condition that usually affects people who are alcohol dependent when they discontinue or decrease their alcohol consumption. Baclofen shows potential for rapidly reducing symptoms of severe AWS in people with alcoholism. Treatment with baclofen is easy to manage and rarely produces euphoria or other pleasant effects, or craving for the drug. This is an updated version of the original Cochrane Review first published in 2011 and last updated in 2017. OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy and safety of baclofen for people with AWS. SEARCH METHODS: We updated our searches of the following databases to June 2019: the Cochrane Drugs and Alcohol Group Specialised Register, CENTRAL, PubMed, Embase, and CINAHL. We also searched registers of ongoing trials. We handsearched the references quoted in the identified trials, and sought information from researchers, pharmaceutical companies, and relevant trial authors about unpublished or uncompleted trials. We placed no restrictions on language. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included all randomised controlled clinical trials (RCTs) evaluating baclofen versus placebo or any other treatment for people with AWS. We excluded uncontrolled, non-randomised, or quasi-randomised trials. We included both parallel group and cross-over studies. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. MAIN RESULTS: We included four RCTs with 189 randomised participants (one RCT new for this update). None of the included studies reported the primary outcomes of alcohol withdrawal seizures, alcohol withdrawal delirium, or craving. For the comparison of baclofen and placebo (1 study, 31 participants), there was no evidence of a difference in Clinical Institute Withdrawal Assessment of Alcohol Scale, Revised (CIWA-Ar) scores in eight-hour periods from days one to five (very low-quality evidence). For the comparison of baclofen and diazepam (2 studies, 85 participants), there was no evidence of a difference in change from baseline to days 10 to 15 on CIWA-Ar scores (very low-quality evidence, meta-analysis was not performed due to insufficient data). In one study (37 participants), there was no evidence of a difference in participants with at least one adverse event (risk difference (RD) 0.00, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.10 to 0.10; very low-quality evidence), dropouts (RD 0.00, 95% CI -0.10 to 0.10; very low-quality evidence), and dropouts due to adverse events (RD 0.00, 95% CI -0.10 to 0.10; very low-quality evidence). For the comparison of baclofen and chlordiazepoxide (1 study, 60 participants), there was no evidence of a difference in difference from baseline to nine-day decremental fixed-dose intervention: CIWA-Ar scores (mean difference (MD) 1.00, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.30; very low-quality evidence), global improvement (MD 0.10, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.23; very low-quality evidence), 14/60 participants with adverse events (RD 2.50, 95% CI 0.88 to 7.10; very low-quality of evidence), dropouts (RD 0.00, 95% CI -0.06 to 0.06; very low-quality evidence), and dropouts due to adverse events (RD 0.00, 95% CI -0.06 to 0.06; very low-quality evidence). None of the RCTs provided information on random sequence generation or allocation concealment, therefore, we assessed them at unclear risk of bias. Two RCTs were not of double-blind design and had a high risk of bias in blinding (Addolorato 2006; Girish 2016). One RCT had more than 5% dropouts with high risk of attrition bias (Lyon 2011). We could not assess reporting bias as none of the prepublished protocols were available. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: No conclusions can be drawn about the efficacy and safety of baclofen for the management of alcohol withdrawal because we found insufficient and very low-quality evidence.

Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gamma agonists for preventing recurrent stroke and other vascular events in people with stroke or transient ischaemic attack.

BACKGROUND: Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gamma (PPAR-γ) agonists are insulin-sensitising drugs used for the treatment of insulin resistance. In addition to lowering glucose in diabetes, these drugs may also protect against hyperlipidaemia and arteriosclerosis, which are risk factors for stroke. This is an update of a review first published in January 2014 and subsequently updated in December 2017. OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy and safety of PPAR-γ agonists in the secondary prevention of stroke and related vascular events for people with stroke or transient ischaemic attack (TIA). SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register (30 July 2019), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2019, Issue 7), MEDLINE (1949 to 30 July 2019), Embase (1980 to 30 July 2019), CINAHL (1982 to 30 July 2019), AMED (1985 to 30 July 2019), and 11 Chinese databases (30 July 2019). In an effort to identify further published, unpublished, and ongoing trials, we searched ongoing trials registers, reference lists, and relevant conference proceedings, and contacted authors and pharmaceutical companies. We did not impose any language restrictions. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating PPAR-γ agonists versus placebo for the secondary prevention of stroke and related vascular events in people with stroke or TIA, with the outcomes of recurrent stroke, vascular events, and adverse events. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently screened the titles and abstracts of identified records, selected studies for inclusion, extracted eligible data, cross-checked the data for accuracy, and assessed methodological quality and risk of bias. We evaluated the quality of evidence for each outcome using the GRADE approach. MAIN RESULTS: We identified five RCTs with 5039 participants; two studies had a low risk of bias for all domains. Four studies evaluated the drug pioglitazone, and one study evaluated rosiglitazone. The participants in different studies were heterogeneous.Recurrent strokeThree studies evaluated the number of participants with recurrent stroke (4979 participants, a single study contributing 3876 of these). Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gamma agonists probably reduce the recurrence of stroke compared with placebo (risk ratio (RR) 0.66, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.44 to 0.99; moderate-quality evidence).Adverse eventsEvidence that adverse events occurred more frequently in participants treated with PPAR-γ agonists when compared with placebo was uncertain due to wide confidence interval and high levels of statistical heterogeneity: risk difference 10%, 95% CI -8% to 28%; low-quality evidence).Data were available on additional composite outcomes reflecting serious vascular events (all-cause death and other major vascular events; all-cause mortality, non-fatal myocardial infarction or non-fatal stroke) from one study in 984 people. This study provided low-quality evidence that PPAR-γ agonists led to fewer events (data not meta-analysed).Vascular eventsPeroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gamma agonists given over a mean duration of 34.5 months in a single trial of 984 participants may reduce serious vascular events expressed as a composite outcome of total events of cardiovascular death, non-fatal myocardial infarction or non-fatal stroke (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.99; low-quality evidence).Other outcomesOne study in 20 people measured insulin sensitivity, and one study in 40 people measured the ubiquitin-proteasome activity in carotid plaques. Our confidence in the improvements observed with PPAR-γ agonists were limited by small sample sizes and risk of bias. None of the studies reported the number of participants with disability due to vascular events or improvement in quality of life. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gamma agonists probably reduce recurrent stroke and total events of cardiovascular death, non-fatal myocardial infarction or non-fatal stroke, and may improve insulin sensitivity and the stabilisation of carotid plaques. Their effects on adverse events are uncertain. Our conclusions should be interpreted with caution considering the small number and the quality of the included studies. Further well-designed, double-blind RCTs with large samples are required to assess the efficacy and safety of PPAR-γ agonists in the secondary prevention of stroke and related vascular events in people with stroke or TIA.

Topiramate for juvenile myoclonic epilepsy.

BACKGROUND: Topiramate is a newer broad-spectrum antiepileptic drug (AED). Some studies have shown the benefits of topiramate in the treatment of juvenile myoclonic epilepsy (JME). However, there are no current systematic reviews to determine the efficacy and tolerability of topiramate in people with JME. This is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2015, and last updated in 2017. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of topiramate in the treatment of JME. SEARCH METHODS: For the latest update, on 10 July 2018 we searched the Cochrane Register of Studies (CRS Web), which includes the Cochrane Epilepsy Group's Specialized Register and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE (Ovid 1946- ), and ClinicalTrials.gov. We also searched ongoing trials registers, reference lists and relevant conference proceedings, and contacted study authors and pharmaceutical companies. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating topiramate versus placebo or other AED treatment for people with JME, with the outcomes of proportion of responders and proportion of participants experiencing adverse events (AEs). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently screened the titles and abstracts of identified records, selected studies for inclusion, extracted data, cross-checked the data for accuracy and assessed the methodological quality. We performed no meta-analyses due to the limited available data. MAIN RESULTS: We included three studies with a total of 83 participants. For efficacy, a greater proportion of participants in the topiramate group had a 50% or more reduction in primarily generalized tonic-clonic seizures (PGTCS) compared with participants in the placebo group. There were no significant differences between topiramate and valproate in participants responding with a 50% or more reduction in myoclonic seizures or in PGTCS, or becoming seizure-free. Concerning tolerability, we ranked AEs associated with topiramate as moderate to severe, while we ranked 59% of AEs linked to valproate as severe complaints. Moreover, systemic toxicity scores were higher in the valproate group than the topiramate group.Overall we judged all three studies to be at high risk of attrition bias and at unclear risk of reporting bias. We judged all three studies to be at low to unclear bias for the remaining risk of bias domains (random sequence, allocation, blinding). We judged the quality of the evidence from the studies to be very low. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We have found no new studies since the last version of this review was published in 2017. This review does not provide sufficient evidence to support topiramate for the treatment of people with JME. Based on the current limited available data, topiramate seems to be better tolerated than valproate, but has no clear benefits over valproate in terms of efficacy. Well-designed, double-blind RCTs with large samples are required to test the efficacy and tolerability of topiramate in people with JME.

TfOH- and HBF4-Mediated Formal Cycloisomerizations and [4+3] Cycloadditions of Allene-alkynylbenzenes.

A metal-free, TfOH (1.1 equiv)-mediated formal cycloisomerization of easily prepared allene-alkynylbenzenes to give pyrrolidines and cyclopentanes derivatives was developed. This reaction is initiated by the generation of allylic cation from allene, followed by alkyne's reaction with the allylic cation, to give a vinyl cation, which is finally intercepted by the triflate (TfO) anion. This cycloisomerization can be further tuned to become an acid-mediated intramolecular formal [4+3] cycloaddition by using 10 equiv of TfOH (The excess acid was used to promote the Friedel-Crafts reaction of the acid-mediated cycloisomerization products). The present system can also be applied to synthesized F-incorporated products by using HBF4 or Me3OBF4 as the fluoro source.

Antibacterial activity and inflammation inhibition of ZnO nanoparticles embedded TiO2 nanotubes.

Titanium (Ti) with nanoscale structure on the surface exhibits excellent biocompatibility and bone integration. Once implanted, the surgical implantation may lead to bacterial infection and inflammatory reaction, which cause the implant failure. In this work, irregular and nanorod-shaped ZnO nanoparticles were doped into TiO2 nanotubes (TNTs) with inner diameter of about 50 nm by electro-deposition. The antibacterial properties of ZnO incorporated into TiO2 nanotubes (TNTs/ZnO) were evaluated using Staphylococcus aureus (S. aureus). Zn ions released from the nanoparticles and the morphology could work together, improving antibacterial effectiveness up to 99.3% compared with the TNTs. Macrophages were cultured on the samples to determine their respective anti-inflammatory properties. The proliferation and viability of macrophages were evaluated by the CCK-8 method and Live&Dead stain, and the morphology of the cells was observed by scanning electron microscopy. Results indicated that TNTs/ZnO has a significant inhibitory effect on the proliferation and adhesion of macrophages, which could be used to prevent chronic inflammation and control the inflammatory reaction. Besides, the release of Zn ions from the ZnO nanoparticles is a long-term process, which could be beneficial for bone integration. Results demonstrate that ZnO deposited into TNTs improved the antibacterial effectiveness and weakened the inflammatory reaction of titanium-based implants, which is a promising approach to enhance their bioactivity.

Gamma aminobutyric acid (GABA) receptor agonists for acute stroke.

BACKGROUND: Gamma aminobutyric acid (GABA) receptor agonists have been shown to have a neuroprotectant effect in reducing infarct size and improving functional outcome in animal models of cerebrovascular disease. However, the sedative effects of GABA receptor agonists have limited their wider application in people with acute stroke, due to the potential risk of stupor. This is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2013, and previously updated in 2014 and 2016. OBJECTIVES: To determine the efficacy and safety of GABA receptor agonists in the treatment of acute stroke. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register (accessed May 2018), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) 2018, Issue 4 (accessed May 2018), MEDLINE (from 1949 to May 2018), Embase (from 1980 to May 2018), CINAHL (from 1982 to May 2018), AMED (from 1985 to May 2018), and 11 Chinese databases (accessed May 2018). In an effort to identify further published, unpublished, and ongoing trials we searched ongoing trial registers, reference lists, and relevant conference proceedings, and contacted authors and pharmaceutical companies. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating GABA receptor agonists versus placebo for people with acute stroke (within 12 hours after stroke onset), with the primary outcomes of efficacy and safety. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently screened the titles and abstracts of identified records, selected studies for inclusion, extracted eligible data, cross-checked the data for accuracy, and assessed the risk of bias. We used the GRADE approach to assess the quality of the evidence. MAIN RESULTS: We included five trials with 3838 participants (acute ischemic or hemorrhagic stroke patients, 3758 analyzed). Most of the participants recruited had acute ischaemic stroke, with limited data available from participants with other stroke subtypes, including total anterior circulation syndrome (TACS). The methodological quality of the included trials was generally good, with an unclear risk for selection bias only. For death and dependency at three months, pooled results did not find a significant difference for chlormethiazole versus placebo (risk ratio (RR) 1.03, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.96 to 1.11; four trials; 2909 participants; moderate-quality evidence) and for diazepam versus placebo (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.07; one trial; 849 participants; moderate-quality evidence). The most frequent adverse events related to chlormethiazole were somnolence (RR 4.56, 95% CI 3.50 to 5.95; two trials; 2527 participants; moderate-quality evidence) and rhinitis (RR 4.75, 95% CI 2.67 to 8.46; two trials; 2527 participants; moderate-quality evidence). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This review provides moderate-quality evidence that fails to support the use of GABA receptor agonists (chlormethiazole or diazepam) for the treatment of people with acute stroke. More well-designed RCTs with large samples of participants with total anterior circulation syndrome are required to determine if there are benefits for this subgroup. Somnolence and rhinitis are frequent adverse events related to chlormethiazole.

Treatment of epilepsy for people with Alzheimer's disease.

BACKGROUND: Any type of seizure can be observed in Alzheimer's disease (AD). Antiepileptic drugs seem to prevent the recurrence of epileptic seizures in most people with AD. There are pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatments for epilepsy in people with AD. There are no current systematic reviews to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of these treatments; this review aims to review those different modalities. This is an updated version of the original Cochrane Review published in Issue 11, 2016. OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy and tolerability of pharmacological or non-pharmacological interventions for the treatment of epilepsy in people with AD (including sporadic AD and dominantly inherited AD). SEARCH METHODS: For the latest update, on 10 July 2018 we searched the Cochrane Register of Studies (CRS Web), which includes the Cochrane Epilepsy Group's Specialized Register and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE (Ovid 1946- ), ClinicalTrials.gov, and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP). In an effort to identify further published, unpublished and ongoing trials, we searched ongoing trials registers, reference lists and relevant conference proceedings, and contacted authors and pharmaceutical companies. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized and quasi-randomized controlled trials investigating treatment for epilepsy in people with AD, with the outcomes of proportion of participants with seizure freedom or proportion of participants experiencing adverse events. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently screened the titles and abstracts of identified records, selected studies for inclusion, extracted data, cross-checked the data for accuracy and assessed the methodological quality. We performed no meta-analyses due to the limited available data. MAIN RESULTS: We included one randomized controlled trial on pharmacological interventions with 95 participants. No studies were found for non-pharmacological interventions. Concerning the proportion of participants with seizure freedom, no significant differences were found for the comparisons of levetiracetam (LEV) versus lamotrigine (LTG) (risk ratio (RR) 1.20, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.53 to 2.71), LEV versus phenobarbital (PB) (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.47 to 2.19), or LTG versus PB (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.35 to 2.02). It seemed that LEV could improve cognition and LTG could relieve depression, while PB and LTG could worsen cognition, and LEV and PB could worsen mood. Unclear risk of bias was found in allocation, blinding and selective reporting. We judged the quality of the evidence to be very low. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This review does not provide sufficient evidence to support LEV, PB or LTG for the treatment of epilepsy in people with AD. Regarding efficacy and tolerability, no significant differences were found between LEV, PB and LTG. Large randomized controlled trials with a double-blind, parallel-group design are required to determine the efficacy and tolerability of treatment for epilepsy in people with AD.

Baclofen for alcohol withdrawal.

BACKGROUND: Baclofen shows potential for rapidly reducing symptoms of severe alcohol withdrawal syndrome (AWS) in people with alcoholism. Treatment with baclofen is easy to manage and rarely produces euphoria or other pleasant effects, or craving for the drug. This is an updated version of the original Cochrane Review published in 2015, Issue 4. OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy and safety of baclofen for people with AWS. SEARCH METHODS: We updated our searches of the following databases to March 2017: the Cochrane Drugs and Alcohol Group Specialised Register, CENTRAL, PubMed, Embase, and CINAHL. We also searched registers of ongoing trials. We handsearched the references quoted in the identified trials, and sought information from researchers, pharmaceutical companies, and relevant trial authors about unpublished or uncompleted trials. We placed no restrictions on language. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included all randomised controlled clinical trials (RCTs) evaluating baclofen versus placebo or any other treatment for people with AWS. We excluded uncontrolled, non-randomised, or quasi-randomised trials. We included both parallel group and cross-over studies. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. MAIN RESULTS: We included three RCTs with 141 randomised participants. We did not perform meta-analyses due to the different control interventions. For the comparison of baclofen and placebo (1 study, 31 participants), there was no significant difference in Clinical Institute Withdrawal Assessment of Alcohol Scale, Revised (CIWA-Ar) scores (very low quality evidence). For the comparison of baclofen and diazepam (1 study, 37 participants), there was no significant difference in CIWA-Ar scores (very low quality evidence), adverse events (risk difference (RD) 0.00, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.10 to 0.10; very low quality evidence), dropouts (RD 0.00, 95% CI -0.10 to 0.10; very low quality evidence), and dropouts due to adverse events (RD 0.00, 95% CI -0.10 to 0.10; very low quality evidence). For the comparison of baclofen and chlordiazepoxide (1 study, 60 participants), there was no significant difference in CIWA-Ar scores (mean difference (MD) 1.00, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.30; very low quality evidence), global improvement (MD 0.10, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.23; very low quality evidence), adverse events (RD 2.50, 95% CI 0.88 to 7.10; very low quality of evidence), dropouts (RD 0.00, 95% CI -0.06 to 0.06; very low quality evidence), and dropouts due to adverse events (RD 0.00, 95% CI -0.06 to 0.06; very low quality evidence). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: No conclusions can be drawn about the efficacy and safety of baclofen for the management of alcohol withdrawal because we found insufficient and very low quality evidence.

Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gamma agonists for preventing recurrent stroke and other vascular events in people with stroke or transient ischaemic attack.

BACKGROUND: Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gamma (PPAR-γ) agonists are insulin-sensitising drugs used for the treatment of insulin resistance. In addition to lowering glucose in diabetes, these drugs may also protect against hyperlipidaemia and arteriosclerosis, which are risk factors for stroke. This is an update of a review first published in January 2014 and subsequently updated in October 2015. OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy and safety of PPAR-γ agonists in the secondary prevention of stroke and related vascular events for people with stroke or transient ischaemic attack (TIA). SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register (16 May 2017), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2017, Issue 5), MEDLINE (1949 to 16 May 2017), Embase (1980 to 16 May 2017), CINAHL (1982 to 16 May 2017), AMED (1985 to 16 May 2017), and 11 Chinese databases (16 May 2017). In an effort to identify further published, unpublished, and ongoing trials, we searched ongoing trials registers, reference lists, and relevant conference proceedings, and contacted authors and pharmaceutical companies. We did not impose any language restrictions. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating PPAR-γ agonists versus placebo for the secondary prevention of stroke and related vascular events in people with stroke or TIA, with the outcomes of recurrent stroke, vascular events, and adverse events. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently screened the titles and abstracts of identified records, selected studies for inclusion, extracted eligible data, cross-checked the data for accuracy, and assessed methodological quality and risk of bias. We evaluated the quality of evidence for each outcome using the GRADE approach. MAIN RESULTS: We identified five RCTs with 5039 participants; two studies had a low risk of bias for all domains. Four studies evaluated the drug pioglitazone, and one study evaluated rosiglitazone. The participants in different studies were heterogeneous.Recurrent strokeThree studies evaluated the number of participants with recurrent stroke (4979 participants, a single study contributing 3876 of these). Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gamma agonists probably reduce the recurrence of stroke compared with placebo (risk ratio (RR) 0.66, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.44 to 0.99; moderate-quality evidence).Adverse eventsEvidence that adverse events occurred more frequently in participants treated with PPAR-γ agonists when compared with placebo was uncertain due to wide confidence interval and high levels of statistical heterogeneity: risk difference 10%, 95% CI -8% to 28%; low-quality evidence).Data were available on additional composite outcomes reflecting serious vascular events (all-cause death and other major vascular events; all-cause mortality, non-fatal myocardial infarction or non-fatal stroke) from one study in 984 people. This study provided low-quality evidence that PPAR-γ agonists led to fewer events (data not meta-analysed).Vascular eventsPeroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gamma agonists given over a mean duration of 34.5 months in a single trial of 984 participants may reduce serious vascular events expressed as a composite outcome of total events of cardiovascular death, non-fatal myocardial infarction or non-fatal stroke (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.99; low-quality evidence).Other outcomesOne study in 20 people measured insulin sensitivity, and one study in 40 people measured the ubiquitin-proteasome activity in carotid plaques. Our confidence in the improvements observed with PPAR-γ agonists were limited by small sample sizes and risk of bias. None of the studies reported the number of participants with disability due to vascular events or improvement in quality of life. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gamma agonists probably reduce recurrent stroke and total events of cardiovascular death, non-fatal myocardial infarction or non-fatal stroke, and may improve insulin sensitivity and the stabilisation of carotid plaques. Their effects on adverse events are uncertain. Our conclusions should be interpreted with caution considering the small number and the quality of the included studies. Further well-designed, double-blind RCTs with large samples are required to assess the efficacy and safety of PPAR-γ agonists in the secondary prevention of stroke and related vascular events in people with stroke or TIA.

Topiramate monotherapy for juvenile myoclonic epilepsy.

BACKGROUND: Topiramate is a newer broad-spectrum antiepileptic drug (AED). Some studies have shown the benefits of topiramate monotherapy in the treatment of juvenile myoclonic epilepsy (JME). However, there are no current systematic reviews to determine the efficacy and tolerability of topiramate monotherapy in people with JME. This is an updated version of the original Cochrane Review published in Issue 12, 2015. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of topiramate monotherapy in the treatment of JME. SEARCH METHODS: For the latest update, on 21 February 2017 we searched Cochrane Epilepsy's Specialized Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and ClinicalTrials.gov. We also searched ongoing trials registers, reference lists and relevant conference proceedings, and contacted study authors and pharmaceutical companies. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating topiramate monotherapy versus placebo or other AED treatment for people with JME, with the outcomes of proportion of responders or experiencing adverse events (AEs). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently screened the titles and abstracts of identified records, selected studies for inclusion, extracted data, cross-checked the data for accuracy and assessed the methodological quality. We performed no meta-analyses due to the limited available data. MAIN RESULTS: We included three studies with 83 participants. For efficacy, a greater proportion of participants in the topiramate group had a 50% or more reduction in primarily generalized tonic-clonic seizures (PGTCS) compared with participants in the placebo group. There were no significant differences between topiramate versus valproate in participants responding with a 50% or more reduction in myoclonic seizures or in PGTCS or seizure-free. Concerning tolerability, we ranked AEDs associated with topiramate as moderate-to-severe, while we ranked 59% of AEDs linked to valproate as severe complaints. Moreover, systemic toxicity scores were higher in the valproate group than the topiramate group. We judged the quality of the evidence from the studies to be very low. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Since the last version of this review we found no new studies. This review does not provide sufficient evidence to support topiramate for the treatment of people with JME. Based on the current limited available data, topiramate seems to be better tolerated than valproate, but there were no more benefits of efficacy in topiramate compared with valproate. In the future, well-designed, double-blind RCTs with large samples are required to test the efficacy and tolerability of topiramate in people with JME.

A Concise Total Synthesis of (-)-Mesembrine.

A concise total synthesis of mesembrine (four steps from known compound) was achieved both racemically and asymmetrically. Two key reactions were used here. One is the Rh(I)-catalyzed [5 + 1] cycloaddition of vinylcyclopropane 3c and CO. The other one is Buchwald's Pd-catalyzed coupling reaction that coupled ß,γ-cyclohexenone 2c with aryl bromide 5 (using dppe ligand for racemic or (S)-Antphos ligand for asymmetric synthesis) to give γ,γ-disubstituted α,ß-cyclohexenone 1c. Finally, aza-Michael addition converted 1c to mesembrine.

Gamma aminobutyric acid (GABA) receptor agonists for acute stroke.

BACKGROUND: Gamma aminobutyric acid (GABA) receptor agonists have been shown to have a neuroprotectant effect in reducing infarct size and improving functional outcome in animal models of cerebrovascular disease. However, the sedative effects of GABA receptor agonists have limited their wider application in people with acute stroke, due to the potential risk of stupor. This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2013, and previously updated in 2014. OBJECTIVES: To determine the efficacy and safety of GABA receptor agonists in the treatment of acute stroke. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register (accessed March 2016), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) 2016, Issue 3, part of the Cochrane Library (accessed March 2016), MEDLINE (from 1949 to March 2016), Embase (from 1980 to March 2016), CINAHL (from 1982 to March 2016), AMED (from 1985 to March 2016), and 11 Chinese databases (accessed March 2016). In an effort to identify further published, unpublished, and ongoing trials we searched ongoing trials registers, reference lists, and relevant conference proceedings, and contacted authors and pharmaceutical companies. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating GABA receptor agonists versus placebo for people with acute stroke (within 12 hours after stroke onset), with the primary outcomes of efficacy and safety. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently screened the titles and abstracts of identified records, selected studies for inclusion, extracted eligible data, cross-checked the data for accuracy, and assessed the risk of bias. MAIN RESULTS: We included five trials with 3838 participants (3758 analyzed). The methodological quality of the included trials was generally good, with an unclear risk for selection bias only. Four trials (N = 2909) measured death and dependency at three months for chlormethiazole versus placebo; pooled results did not find a significant difference (risk ratio (RR) 1.03, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.96 to 1.11). One trial (N = 849) measured this outcome for diazepam versus placebo (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.07). The most frequent adverse events related to chlormethiazole were somnolence (RR 4.56, 95% CI 3.50 to 5.95; two trials; N = 2527) and rhinitis (RR 4.75, 95% CI 2.67 to 8.46; two trials; N = 2527). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This review provides moderate-quality evidence that fails to support the use of GABA receptor agonists (chlormethiazole or diazepam) for the treatment of people with acute stroke. More well-designed RCTs with large samples of participants with total anterior circulation syndrome are required to determine if there are benefits for this subgroup. Somnolence and rhinitis are frequent adverse events related to chlormethiazole.

Treatment of epilepsy for people with Alzheimer's disease.

BACKGROUND: Any type of seizure can be observed in Alzheimer's disease (AD). Antiepileptic drugs seem to prevent the recurrence of epileptic seizures in most people with AD. There are pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatments for epilepsy in people with AD. There are no current systematic reviews to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of the treatment. This review aims to review those different modalities. OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy and tolerability of the treatment of epilepsy for people with Alzheimer's disease (AD) (including sporadic AD and dominantly inherited AD). SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Epilepsy Group Specialized Register (1 February 2016), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (1 February 2016), MEDLINE (Ovid, 1 February 2016) and ClinicalTrials.gov (1 February 2016). In an effort to identify further published, unpublished and ongoing trials, we searched ongoing trials' registers, reference lists and relevant conference proceedings, and contacted authors and pharmaceutical companies. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials investigating treatment for epilepsy in people with AD, with the outcomes of proportion of seizure freedom or experiencing adverse events. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently screened the titles and abstracts of identified records, selected studies for inclusion, extracted data, cross-checked the data for accuracy and assessed the methodological quality. We performed no meta-analyses due to the limited available data. MAIN RESULTS: We included one randomised controlled trial with 95 participants. Concerning the proportion of participants with seizure freedom, no significant differences were found in levetiracetam (LEV) versus lamotrigine (LTG) (risk ratio (RR) 1.20, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.53 to 2.71), in levetiracetam versus phenobarbital (PB) (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.47 to 2.19), or in LTG versus PB (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.35 to 2.02). It seemed that LEV could improve cognition and LTG could relieve depression; while PB and LTG could worsen cognition, and LEV and PB could worsen mood. We judged the quality of the evidence to be very low. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This review does not provide sufficient evidence to support LEV, PB and LTG for the treatment of epilepsy in people with AD. Regarding the efficacy and tolerability, no significant differences were found between LEV, PB and LTG. In the future, large randomised, double-blind, controlled, parallel-group clinical trials are required to determine the efficacy and tolerability of treatment for epilepsy in people with AD.

Pathological Changes of von Economo Neuron and Fork Neuron in Neuropsychiatric Diseases.

von Economo neuron (VEN) is a bipolar neuron characterized by a large spindle-shaped soma. VEN is generally distributed in the layer V of anterior insular lobe and anterior cingulate cortex. Fork neuron is another featured bipolar neuron. In recent years,many studies have illustrated that VEN and fork neurons are correlated with complicated cognition such as self-consciousness and social emotion. Studies in the development and morpholigies of these two neurons as well as their pathological changes in various neurological and psychiatric disorders have found that the abnormal number and functions of VEN can cause corresponding dysfunctions in social recognition and emotions both during the neuro-developmental stages of childhood and during the nerve degeneration in old age stage. Therefore, more attentions should be paid on the research of VEN and fork neurons in neuropsychiatric diseases.