Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Más filtros




Base de datos
Asunto de la revista
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
Physiother Res Int ; 29(2)2024 Apr.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-39055778

RESUMEN

Background and purpose: Fibromyalgia (FM) is associated with altered descending pain modulatory pathways, which can be assessed through Conditioned Pain Modulation (CPM). In this study, we aimed to explore the relationship between CPM and self-reported baseline characteristics in patients with fibromyalgia. We also performed a longitudinal analysis exploring CPM as a potential predictor of clinical improvement over time in individuals with FM. Methods: We performed cross-sectional univariable and multivariable analyses of the relationship between CPM and other variables in 41 FM patients. We then performed longitudinal analyses, building linear mixed effects models with pain in the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) as the dependent variable, and testing for the interaction between time and CPM. We also tested the interaction between CPM and time in models using other outcomes, such as the revised Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire (FIQR) and Quality of Life Scale (QOLs). Results: We found no association between CPM and other demographic and clinical variables in the univariable analysis. We found a statistically significant association in the multivariable linear regression model between CPM and the QOLs at baseline, after controlling for age, sex, and duration of symptoms. In the longitudinal analyses, we found that CPM is an effect modifier for clinical improvement over time for the pain VAS, QOLs and FIQR: individuals with low-efficient CPM at baseline have a different (improved) pattern of response over time when compared to those with high-efficient CPM. Conclusions: Our findings suggest that CPM is not a reliable biomarker of clinical manifestations in chronic pain patients during cross-sectional assessments. However, our results are consistent with previous findings that CPM can be used to predict the evolution of clinical pain over time. We expect that our findings will help in the selection of patients with the best profile to respond to specific interventions and assist clinicians in tailoring pain treatments.


Asunto(s)
Fibromialgia , Dimensión del Dolor , Calidad de Vida , Humanos , Estudios Transversales , Femenino , Estudios Longitudinales , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Adulto , Factores de Tiempo , Encuestas y Cuestionarios , Manejo del Dolor
2.
Neuromodulation ; 2024 May 25.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38795094

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis assessing the antiinflammatory effects of various VNS methods while exploring multiple antiinflammatory pathways. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We included clinical trials that used electrical stimulation of the vagus nerve and assessed inflammatory markers up to October 2022. We excluded studies lacking control groups, those with combined interventions, or abstracts without full text. We adhered to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines and the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews. For each inflammatory marker, a random-effects meta-analysis using the inverse variance method was performed. Methods used include transcutaneous auricular VNS (taVNS), transcutaneous cervical VNS (tcVNS), invasive cervical VNS (iVNS), and electroacupuncture VNS (eaVNS). Main reported outcomes included tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α, interleukin (IL)-6, IL-1ß, C-reactive protein (CRP), and IL-10. Risk of bias was evaluated using the Cochrane Collaboration Tool (RoB 2.0). RESULTS: This review included 15 studies, involving 597 patients. No statistically significant general VNS effect was observed on TNF-α, IL-6, and IL-1ß. However, CRP, IL-10, and interferon (IFN)-γ were significantly modulated by VNS across all methods. Subgroup analysis revealed specific stimulation techniques producing significant results, such as taVNS effects in IL-1ß and IL-10, and iVNS in IL-6, whereas tcVNS and eaVNS did not convey significant pooled results individually. Cumulative exposure to VNS, higher risk of bias, study design, and pulse width were identified as effect size predictors in our meta-regression models. CONCLUSIONS: Pooling all VNS techniques indicated the ability of VNS to modulate inflammatory markers such as CRP, IL-10, and IFN-γ. Individually, methods such as taVNS were effective in modulating IL-1ß and IL-10, whereas iVNS modulated IL-6. However, different VNS techniques should be separately analyzed in larger, homogeneous, and powerful studies to achieve a clearer and more consistent understanding of the effect of each VNS method on the inflammatory system.

SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA