An Alzheimer's dementia cumulative risk model in a sample of general population over 65: Public health implications

Background and objectives: With the population ageing, the identification of modifiable risk factors for dementia represents a public health priority. Co-occurrence of risk factors in the same individual is more frequent than an isolated appearance and may create synergistic effects, with an increased risk of negative outcomes such as dementia and mortality. We aim to study the cumulative risk of incident Alzheimer's Dementia (AD) in a community sample aged >65 (n= 3044).MethodsTo this end, we will examine the impact on the risk of AD of the co-occurrence of variables that have previously been shown to increase risk: age, gender, education, marital status, depression, anxiety, body mass index (BMI) and hearing loss.ResultsThe most frequent number of co-occurring risk factors was 3. We found a cumulative increased risk of both death and AD by the confluence of 2 or more risk factors. Using a competing risk regression model, each increase in a co-occurring risk factor was associated with a significant increase in the risk of incident AD of more than two-fold. By the analysis of the Population Attributable Fractions (PAF) of AD due to several risk factors, we found that if 4 or more co-occurring risk factors could be eliminated from the population, the prevalence of AD would be reduced by approximately 38%.ConclusionOur study offers an estimate of the impact that preventive interventions could have if the number of modifiable risk factors of AD at a population level. (AU)

Clinically significant anxiety as a risk factor for Alzheimer's disease: Results from a 10-year follow-up community study.

OBJECTIVE: There is growing evidence for an association between anxiety and an increased risk of dementia, but it is not clear whether anxiety is a risk factor or a prodromic symptom. In this study, we investigated if clinically significant anxiety increases the risk of developing Alzheimer's disease (AD) up to 10 years later. METHODS: We used data from the longitudinal Zaragoza Dementia and Depression (ZARADEMP) Project. Excluding subjects with dementia at baseline left us with 3044 individuals aged >65 years. The Geriatric Mental State-Automated Geriatric Examination for Computer Assisted Taxonomy (GMS-AGECAT) package was used to identify cases and subcases of anxiety. AD was diagnosed by a panel of research psychiatrists according to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, fourth edition (DSM-IV) criteria. Multivariate survival analysis with a competing risk regression model was performed. RESULTS: We observed a significant association between clinically significant anxiety at baseline and AD risk within a 10-year follow-up (SHR 2.82 [95% CI 1.21-6.58]), after controlling for confounders including depression. In contrast, isolated symptoms of anxiety were not significantly associated with an increased incidence of AD. CONCLUSION: Our results support the hypothesis that clinically significant anxiety is an independent risk factor for AD and not just a prodromic symptom. Future studies should clarify if treating anxiety reduces the incidence of AD.

Prevalence of depression among medical students during the COVID-19 pandemic. A systematic review and meta-analysis

ABSTRACT Background: Medical students frequently have depressive symptoms. Thus, the psychological impact of COVID-19 on them should be high. Aim: To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis on the prevalence of depression in medical students during the COVID-19 pandemic. Material and Methods: MEDLINE via PubMed, Embase and Web of Science were searched for studies reporting the prevalence of depression in medical students, published from December 1, 2019 to December 27, 2020. Results: Eleven studies were included, most of them from Asia. The estimated overall prevalence of depression in medical students was 31% (95% CI: 23%-40%), with lower prevalence rates reported in studies from Asia in general, and China in particular. Conclusions: Our findings indicate that the proportion of medical students with depression during the pandemic was high, and comparable with that reported in other university students.

Antecedentes: Los estudiantes de medicina muestran altos niveles de síntomas depresivos. Por lo tanto, se espera que el impacto psicológico de COVID-19 en ellos sea alto. Objetivo: Realizar una revisión sistemática y metanálisis de la prevalencia de depresión en estudiantes de medicina durante la pandemia de COVID-19. Material y Métodos: Se realizaron búsquedas en MEDLINE a través de PubMed, Embase y Web of Science para obtener estudios que informaran sobre la prevalencia de la depresión en estudiantes de medicina, publicados del 1 de diciembre de 2019 al 27 de diciembre de 2020. Resultados: Se incluyeron 11 estudios, la mayoría de Asia. La prevalencia general estimada de depresión en estudiantes de medicina fue del 31% (IC del 95%: 23% - 40%), con tasas de prevalencia más bajas informadas en estudios de Asia en general y China en particular. Conclusiones: Nuestros hallazgos indican que la proporción de estudiantes de medicina con depresión durante la pandemia es considerablemente alta y comparable con la informada en otros estudiantes universitarios.

Prevalence of Anxiety in Dental Students during the COVID-19 Outbreak: A Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, the psychological state of university students has been a cause for concern. In particular, odontology students have experienced symptoms of anxiety due to the closure of universities and the suspension of clinical training. METHODS: Medline via PubMed was searched for studies on the prevalence of anxiety in dental undergraduates, published from 1 December 2019 to 1 August 2021. RESULTS: A total of fifteen studies were included in this review. Our results show a prevalence of anxiety of 35% reported by dental students, which was independent of gender, response rate or methodological quality. The only significant finding was a lower prevalence of anxiety in studies located in Europe compared to those located in other continents. CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest dental students are experiencing significant levels of anxiety during this COVID-19 pandemic and that there seem to be differences between students from different regions of the world. Therefore, it is important to help dental students psychologically as the pandemic situation continues.

Prevalence of Anxiety, Depression, and Stress among Teachers during the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Rapid Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, teachers have been accumulating adverse psychological symptoms due to the closure of educational centers and the need to adapt to different teaching modalities. METHODS: Medline and PubMed were searched for studies on the prevalence of depression, anxiety, stress, and burn-out in teachers, published from 1 December 2019 to 15 June 2021. RESULTS: In total, eight studies were included in this study. The results show that teachers report levels of anxiety (17%), depression (19%), and stress (30%). In Asia, there has been more anxiety compared to other continents. Overall, anxiety has been higher among teachers in schools compared to universities. However, stress levels have been higher among teachers in universities compared to schools. Statistically, there were no significant differences regarding gender and age in any of the symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest that teachers at different educational levels are experiencing adverse psychological symptomatology during the COVID-19 pandemic, and that anxiety levels vary between different countries. However, more international studies are needed to fully understand the impact of the pandemic on teachers' mental health.

Prevalence of Depression among Healthcare Workers during the COVID-19 Outbreak: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: There is evidence of a high psychological toll from the COVID-19 pandemic in healthcare workers. This paper was aimed at conducting a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies reporting levels of depression among healthcare workers during the COVID-19 and estimating the pooled prevalence of depression. METHODS: We searched for cross-sectional studies listed on PubMed from 1 December 2019 to 15 September 2020 that reported prevalence of depression in healthcare workers, nurses, medical doctors, and COVID-19 frontline professionals. The pooled proportions of depression were calculated with random effects models. RESULTS: We identified 57 studies from seventeen countries. The pooled prevalence of depression in healthcare workers was 24% (95% CI: 20-28%), 25% for nurses (95% CI: 18-33%), 24% for medical doctors (95% CI: 16-31%), and 43% for frontline professionals (95% CI: 28-59%). CONCLUSIONS: The proportion of depression in nurses and medical doctors during the COVID-19 pandemic was similar to that found in the general population as previously reported in other meta-analyses conducted with smaller numbers of studies. Importantly, almost half of the frontline healthcare workers showed increased levels of depression. There is need for a comprehensive, international response to prevent and treat common mental health problems in healthcare workers.

A Novel Score for Predicting Alzheimer's Disease Risk from Late Life Psychopathological and Health Risk Factors.

With the increasing size of the aging population, dementia risk reduction has become a main public health concern. Dementia risk models or indices may help to identify individuals in the community at high risk to develop dementia. We have aimed to develop a novel dementia risk index focused on the late-life (65 years or more) population, that addresses risk factors for Alzheimer's disease (AD) easily identifiable at primary care settings. These risk factors include some shown to be associated with the risk of AD but not featured in existing indices, such as hearing loss and anxiety. Our index is also the first to account for the competing risk of death. The Zaragoza Dementia and Depression Project (ZARADEMP) Alzheimer Dementia Risk Score predicts an individual´s risk of developing AD within 5 years. The probability of late onset AD significantly increases in those with risk scores between 21 and 28 and, furthermore, is almost 4-fold higher for those with risk scores of 29 or higher. Our index may provide a practical instrument to identify subjects at high risk of AD and to design preventive strategies targeting the contributing risk factors.

Prevalence of anxiety in health care professionals during the COVID-19 pandemic: A rapid systematic review (on published articles in Medline) with meta-analysis.

During the COVID-19, healthcare workers are exposed to a higher risk of mental health problems, especially anxiety symptoms. The current work aims at contributing to an update of anxiety prevalence in this population by conducting a rapid systematic review and meta-analysis. Medline and Pubmed were searched for studies on the prevalence of anxiety in health care workers published from December 1, 2019 to September 15, 2020. In total, 71 studies were included in this study. The pooled prevalence of anxiety in healthcare workers was 25% (95% CI: 21%-29%), 27% in nurses (95% CI: 20%-34%), 17% in medical doctors (95% CI: 12%-22%) and 43% in frontline healthcare workers (95% CI: 25%-62%). Our results suggest that healthcare workers are experiencing significant levels of anxiety during the COVID-19 pandemic, especially those on the frontline and nurses. However, international longitudinal studies are needed to fully understand the impact of the pandemic on healthcare workers' mental health, especially those working at the frontline.

Prevalence of depression during the COVID-19 outbreak: A meta-analysis of community-based studies

Introduction: COVID-19 pandemic, declared on March 11, 2020, constitute an extraordinary health, social and economic global challenge. The impact on people's mental health is expected to be high. This paper sought to systematically review community-based studies on depression conducted during the COVID-19 and estimate the pooled prevalence of depression. Method: We searched for cross-sectional, community-based studies listed on PubMed or Web of Science from January 1, 2020 to May 8, 2020 that reported prevalence of depression. A random effect model was used to estimate the pooled proportion of depression. Results: A total of 12 studies were included in the meta-analysis, with prevalence rates of depression ranging from 7.45% to 48.30%. The pooled prevalence of depression was 25% (95% CI: 18%−33%), with significant heterogeneity between studies (I2=99.60%, p<.001). Conclusions: Compared with a global estimated prevalence of depression of 3.44% in 2017, our pooled prevalence of 25% appears to be 7 times higher, thus suggesting an important impact of the COVID-19 outbreak on people's mental health. Addressing mental health during and after this global health crisis should be placed into the international and national public health agenda to improve citizens’ wellbeing. (AU)

Introducción: La pandemia de COVID-19, declarada el 11 de marzo de 2020, representa un reto global extraordinario a nivel sanitario, social y económico. Se espera un impacto alto en la salud mental de las personas. Este artículo tiene como objetivo realizar una revisión sistemática de estudios transversales basados en muestras comunitarias que proporcionaban la prevalencia de depresión durante la crisis del COVID-19. Método: Se realizó una búsqueda de estudios comunitarios publicados en Pubmed y Web of Science desde el 1 de enero del 2020 al 8 de mayo del 2020 y que informaron sobre la prevalencia de depresión. Se usó un modelo de efectos aleatorios para estimar la proporción agrupada de depresión. Resultados: Un total de 12 estudios fueron incluidos en el meta-análisis, con prevalencias de depresión que oscilaban entre 7,45% y 48,30%. La prevalencia agrupada de depresión fue de 25% (95% CI: 18%-33%), con heterogeneidad significativa entre estudios (I2=99,60%, p<0,001). Conclusiones: En comparación con una estimación global de depresión en 2017 del 3,44%, nuestra prevalencia agrupada del 25% es 7 veces mayor, sugiriendo un impacto importante del brote de COVID-19 en la salud mental de las personas. El abordaje de la salud mental durante y después de esta crisis global sanitaria debe ser parte de las agendas de salud pública nacionales e internacionales para mejorar el bienestar de los ciudadanos. (AU)

Prevalence of depression among medical students during the COVID-19 pandemic. A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Medical students frequently have depressive symptoms. Thus, the psychological impact of COVID-19 on them should be high. AIM: To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis on the prevalence of depression in medical students during the COVID-19 pandemic. MATERIAL AND METHODS: MEDLINE via PubMed, Embase and Web of Science were searched for studies reporting the prevalence of depression in medical students, published from December 1, 2019 to December 27, 2020. RESULTS: Eleven studies were included, most of them from Asia. The estimated overall prevalence of depression in medical students was 31% (95% CI: 23%-40%), with lower prevalence rates reported in studies from Asia in general, and China in particular. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings indicate that the proportion of medical students with depression during the pandemic was high, and comparable with that reported in other university students.

Prevalence of depression during the COVID-19 outbreak: A meta-analysis of community-based studies.

Introduction: COVID-19 pandemic, declared on March 11, 2020, constitute an extraordinary health, social and economic global challenge. The impact on people's mental health is expected to be high. This paper sought to systematically review community-based studies on depression conducted during the COVID-19 and estimate the pooled prevalence of depression. Method: We searched for cross-sectional, community-based studies listed on PubMed or Web of Science from January 1, 2020 to May 8, 2020 that reported prevalence of depression. A random effect model was used to estimate the pooled proportion of depression. Results: A total of 12 studies were included in the meta-analysis, with prevalence rates of depression ranging from 7.45% to 48.30%. The pooled prevalence of depression was 25% (95% CI: 18% - 33%), with significant heterogeneity between studies (I 2  = 99.60%, p < .001). Conclusions: Compared with a global estimated prevalence of depression of 3.44% in 2017, our pooled prevalence of 25% appears to be 7 times higher, thus suggesting an important impact of the COVID-19 outbreak on people's mental health. Addressing mental health during and after this global health crisis should be placed into the international and national public health agenda to improve citizens' wellbeing.

Introducción: La pandemia de COVID-19, declarada el 11 de marzo de 2020, representa un reto global extraordinario a nivel sanitario, social y económico. Se espera un impacto alto en la salud mental de las personas. Este artículo tiene como objetivo realizar una revisión sistemática de estudios transversales basados en muestras comunitarias que proporcionaban la prevalencia de depresión durante la crisis del COVID-19. Método: Se realizó una búsqueda de estudios comunitarios publicados en Pubmed y Web of Science desde el 1 de enero del 2020 al 8 de mayo del 2020 y que informaron sobre la prevalencia de depresión. Se usó un modelo de efectos aleatorios para estimar la proporción agrupada de depresión. Resultados: Un total de 12 estudios fueron incluidos en el meta-análisis, con prevalencias de depresión que oscilaban entre 7,45% y 48,30%. La prevalencia agrupada de depresión fue de 25% (95% CI: 18%-33%), con heterogeneidad significativa entre estudios (I 2  = 99,60%, p < 0,001). Conclusiones: En comparación con una estimación global de depresión en 2017 del 3,44%, nuestra prevalencia agrupada del 25% es 7 veces mayor, sugiriendo un impacto importante del brote de COVID-19 en la salud mental de las personas. El abordaje de la salud mental durante y después de esta crisis global sanitaria debe ser parte de las agendas de salud pública nacionales e internacionales para mejorar el bienestar de los ciudadanos.

Prevalence of anxiety in the COVID-19 pandemic: An updated meta-analysis of community-based studies.

BACKGROUND: The unprecedented worldwide crisis caused by the rapid spread of COVID-19 and the restrictive public health measures enforced by some countries to slow down its transmission have severely threatened the physical and mental wellbeing of communities globally. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the prevalence of anxiety in the general population during the COVID-19 pandemic. Two researchers independently searched for cross-sectional community-based studies published between December 1, 2019 and August 23, 2020, using PubMed, WoS, Embase, and other sources (e.g., grey literature, manual search). RESULTS: Of 3049 records retrieved, 43 studies were included. These studies yielded an estimated overall prevalence of anxiety of 25%, which varied significantly across the different tools used to measure anxiety. Consistently reported risk factors for the development of anxiety included initial or peak phase of the outbreak, female sex, younger age, marriage, social isolation, unemployment and student status, financial hardship, low educational level, insufficient knowledge of COVID-19, epidemiological or clinical risk of disease and some lifestyle and personality variables. CONCLUSIONS: As the overall global prevalence of anxiety disorders is estimated to be 7.3% normally, our results suggest that rates of anxiety in the general population could be more than 3 times higher during the COVID-19 pandemic. These findings suggest a substantial impact on mental health that should be targeted by individual and population-level strategies.

Erratum: Lasheras, I.; et al. Prevalence of Anxiety in Medical Students during the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Rapid Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 6603.

The source of funding was not included in our original article [...].

Prevalence of Anxiety in Medical Students during the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Rapid Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis.

The novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic has brought a great deal of pressure for medical students, who typically show elevated anxiety rates. Our aim is to investigate the prevalence of anxiety in medical students during this pandemic. This systematic review and mini meta-analysis has been conducted following the PRISMA guidelines. Two researchers independently searched PubMed on 26 August 2020 for cross-sectional studies on medical students during the COVID-19 outbreak, with no language restrictions applied. We then performed a manual search to detect other potentially eligible investigations. To the 1361 records retrieved in the initial search, 4 more were added by manual search on medRxiv. Finally, eight studies were finally included for qualitative and quantitative analysis, which yielded an estimated prevalence of anxiety of 28% (95% CI: 22-34%), with significant heterogeneity between studies. The prevalence of anxiety in medical students is similar to that prior to the pandemic but correlates with several specific COVID-related stressors. While some preventive and risk factors have been previously identified in a non-pandemic context, knowledge and cognitions on COVID-19 transmission, treatment, prognosis and prevention negatively correlate with anxiety, emerging as a key preventive factor that may provide a rationale for why the levels of anxiety have remained stable in medical students during the pandemic while increasing in their non-medical peers and the general population. Other reasons for the invariability of anxiety rates in this population are discussed. A major limitation of our review is that Chinese students comprised 89% the total sample, which could compromise the external validity of our work.

Does Anxiety Increase the Risk of All-Cause Dementia? An Updated Meta-Analysis of Prospective Cohort Studies.

Background: Anxiety has been suggested as a potentially modifiable risk factor for dementia, but results are still controversial. Our main objectives are to develop an updated meta-analysis of prospective population-based studies on the relationship between anxiety and risk of dementia, and to estimate the population fraction of dementia attributable to anxiety (PAF). Methods: We searched for cohort studies listed on PubMed or Web of Science from January 2018 to January 2020 that reported risk estimates for the association between anxiety and incident dementia. These were added to cohort studies published before January 2018 that were used in a previously published meta-analysis. Fully adjusted RRs were pooled using random effects models. We estimated the proportion of incident dementia attributable to anxiety by using PAF. Results: The meta-analysis included nine prospective cohorts from eight studies, representing 29,608 participants. The overall relative risk (RR) of dementia was 1.24 (95% CI: 1.06-1.46) and the PAF of dementia due to anxiety was 3.9%. Conclusions: Anxiety is significantly associated with an increased risk of all-cause dementia. The treatment or prevention of anxiety might help to reduce dementia incidence rates, but more research is needed to clarify whether anxiety is a cause of dementia rather than a prodrome.

Association between Anxiety and Vascular Dementia Risk: New Evidence and an Updated Meta-Analysis.

The association between anxiety and vascular dementia (VaD) is unclear. We aimed to reliably estimate the association between anxiety and VaD risk using meta-analysis to pool new results from a large community-based cohort (Zaragoza Dementia and Depression (ZARADEMP) study) and results from previous studies. ZARADEMP participants (n = 4057) free of dementia were followed up on for up to 12 years. Cases and subcases of anxiety were determined at baseline. A panel of four psychiatrists diagnosed incident cases of VaD by consensus. We searched for similar studies published up to October 2019 using PubMed and Web of Science. Observational studies reporting associations between anxiety and VaD risk, and adjusting at least for age, were selected. Odds ratios (ORs) from each study were combined using fixed-effects models. In the ZARADEMP study, the risk of VaD was 1.41 times higher among individuals with anxiety (95% CI: 0.75-2.68) compared with non-cases (p = 0.288). Pooling this result with results from two previous studies yielded an OR of 1.65 (95% CI: 1.07-2.53; p = 0.022). These findings indicate that anxiety is associated with an increased risk of VaD. Taking into account that anxiety is commonly observed in the elderly, treating and preventing it might reduce the prevalence and incidence of VaD. However, whether anxiety is a cause of a prodrome of VaD is still unknown, and future research is needed to clarify this.

Misoprostol combined with cervical single or double balloon catheters versus misoprostol alone for labor induction of singleton pregnancies: a meta-analysis of randomized trials.

Objective: To compare the effect of misoprostol combined with a cervical single or double-balloon catheter versus misoprostol alone for labor induction of singleton pregnancies with an unfavorable cervix.Methods: Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) regarding the comparison of two schemes for labor induction of singleton cephalic pregnancies with a Bishop score ≤7 and no contraindication for vaginal delivery. Six research databases were searched for articles published in all languages up to 10 May 2018 comparing misoprostol (oral or vaginal) in combination with a cervical placed single or double balloon catheter versus misoprostol treatment alone. Random effects models and inverse variance were used for meta-analyses. Summary measures were mean differences (MDs) and risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence interval (CI). Risk of bias was evaluated with the Cochrane tool and publication bias was assessed with Begg's and Egger's tests.Results: Fifteen RCTs reported predefined outcomes. Pooled analyses showed that the combined treatment (misoprostol + catheter) was associated with a shorter induction to delivery time interval (MD = -1.99 hours; 95% CI: -3.42, -0.56); in addition to fewer uterine hyperstimulations (RR = 0.39; 95% CI: 0.23, 0.67) and Neonatal Intensive Care Unit (NICU) admissions (RR = 0.75; 95% CI: 0.58, 0.97) as compared to misoprostol alone. There were no significant differences in RRs for tachysystole, chorioamnionitis, cesarean delivery rate, birthweight, and Apgar score at 5 minutes.Conclusion: The combined use of misoprostol and a cervical balloon catheter reduces the intervention to delivery time interval and number of NICU admissions in women induced with an unfavorable cervix.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of the effects of treatment modalities for vestibulodynia in women.

Objective: To quantify the effects of available treatments of vestibulodynia. Methods: Systematic review of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in six search engines until December 2018, comparing any intervention vs. placebo or sham in women with vestibulodynia. Primary outcome was dyspareunia assessed with visual analogue (VAS) or numeric rating (NRS) scales. Secondary outcomes were daily vestibular symptoms (DVS), McGill Pain Questionnaire (MPQ) and Index of Sexual Satisfaction (ISS). Effects were described as mean differences (MDs) with their 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Traditional and frequentist network meta-analyses (NMA) were performed using random effect models. Results: Four RCTs (n = 275) were included evaluating vaginal cream of conjugated oestrogens, oral desipramine with or without topical lidocaine, topical lidocaine, laser therapy and transcranial direct current. In traditional MA, interventions did not reduce dyspareunia (MD = 0.08; 95%CI = -0.49 to 0.64), DVS (MD = -0.04; 95%CI = -0.31 to 0.24; 4 interventions), or MPQ (MD = -0.17; 95%CI = -2.16 to 1.81; 4 interventions). ISS was significantly improved (MD = -5.14; 95%CI = -9.52 to -0.75). In NMA, oral desipramine with or without lidocaine significantly improved ISS vs. other treatments. Conclusions: Several existing interventions were not associated with improvements in vestibulodynia. There only was improvement of sexual function with oral desipramine with or without lidocaine.

Effect of exercise alone or combined with dietary supplements on anthropometric and physical performance measures in community-dwelling elderly people with sarcopenic obesity: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of exercise (EXE) alone or exercise combined with dietary supplements (EXE-SUPPL) on body composition and physical performance in subjects 60 years and older with sarcopenic obesity. METHODS: A systematic review was carried out of studies identified through five search engines up to April 15, 2018. We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating EXE or EXE-SUPPL in elderly individuals with sarcopenic obesity for at least six weeks. Primary outcomes were percentage of body fat mass, appendicular skeletal muscle mass, and hand grip strength. Random effects meta-analyses with the inverse variance method were used to evaluate the effects of interventions on outcomes. Effects were expressed as mean differences (MD) and their 95% confidence intervals (CI). Risk of bias was assessed with the Cochrane tool. RESULTS: Nine papers reporting seven RCTs (with a total of 558 participants) were included in the review. EXE alone and EXE-SUPPL increased grip strength (MD 1.30 kg; 95% CI 0.58-2.01), gait speed (MD 0.05 m/s; 95% CI 0.03-0.07) and appendicular skeletal muscle mass (MD 0.40 kg; 95% CI 0.18-0.63). EXE alone and EXE-SUPPL reduced waist circumference (MD -1,40 cm; 95% CI -1.99 to -0.81), total fat mass (MD -1,77 kg; 95% CI -2.49 to -1.04), and trunk fat mass (MD -0.82 kg; 95% CI -1.22 to -0.42). CONCLUSION: EXE alone and EXE-SUPPL improved muscle-related outcomes and reduced fat-related outcomes in subjects with sarcopenic obesity. There is a need for better-designed RCTs with systematic assessment of both different exercise regimes and dietary supplements in sarcopenic obese subjects.

Systematic review and meta-analysis regarding the association of endometriosis and preeclampsia in women conceiving spontaneously or through assisted reproductive technology.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the association between endometriosis and preeclampsia and/or its severe forms (eclampsia and/or the hemolysis, elevated liver enzymes and low platelet count [HELLP] syndrome) in pregnancies conceived either spontaneously or by assisted reproductive technology (ART). DESIGN AND METHODS: Systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies. Search in PubMed-Medline, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Clinicaltrials.gov, the UK Clinical Trials Gateway, and the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry was conducted from inception through 21 June 2017, without language restrictions. Primary outcome was preeclampsia and/or its severe forms (eclampsia and/or HELLP syndrome) in pregnant women. Random-effects models were used for meta-analyses. Endometriosis effect was estimated as odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI). RESULTS: A total of 9 cohort and 4 case-control studies were eligible for data analysis, including 39,816 pregnancies with endometriosis and 2,831,065 without. Women with endometriosis diagnosed through biopsy did not have a higher preeclampsia, eclampsia and HELLP syndrome risk as compared to those without (OR 1.01, 95% CI 0.56-1.82); this was found the same even if endometriosis was diagnosed using other procedures (OR 1.15, 95% CI 0.94-1.40). Preeclampsia, eclampsia and HELLP syndrome risk was also not increased in women with endometriosis conceiving spontaneously (OR 1.21; 95% CI 0.94-1.56) or through ART (OR 0.74; 95% CI 0.41-1.35). CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis evidences that endometriosis was not associated to a higher risk of preeclampsia and/or its severe forms in pregnancies either conceived spontaneously or through ART.