Search

Background: The management of knee osteoarthritis involves various treatment strategies. It is important to explore alternative therapies that are both safe and effective. Collagen peptides have emerged as a potential intervention for knee osteoarthritis. This study aims to evaluate the analgesic effects and safety of collagen peptide in patients diagnosed with knee osteoarthritis. Methods: We conducted a systematic literature search following the guidelines of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement. Multiple databases including PubMed, Scopus, EMBASE, Web of Science, Cochrane, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published up to 27 May 2023 that focused on the analgesic outcomes and adverse events associated with collagen peptides or hydrolyzed collagen in patients with osteoarthritis. We assessed the quality of the included studies and the strength of evidence using the Cochrane ROB 2.0 tool and Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations. Results: Four trials involving 507 patients with knee osteoarthritis were included and analyzed using the random-effects model. All these trials were considered to have a high risk of bias. Our results revealed a significant difference in pain relief between the collagen peptide group and the placebo group in patients with knee osteoarthritis (standardized mean difference: − 0.58; 95% CI − 0.98, − 0.18, p = 0.004; I2: 68%; quality of evidence: moderate). However, there was no significant difference in the risk of adverse events between collagen peptide and placebo (odds ratio: 1.66; 95% CI 0.99, 2.78, p = 0.05; I2: 0%; quality of evidence: very low). Conclusions: Our findings demonstrate significant pain relief in patients with knee osteoarthritis who received collagen peptides compared to those who received placebo. In addition, the risk of adverse events did not differ significantly between the collagen peptide group and the placebo group. However, due to potential biases and limitations, well-designed randomized controlled trials are needed to validate and confirm these findings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Ankylosing spondylitis (AS) and spinal fusion (SF) classified as stiff spines have been associated with the increased rate of complications following total hip arthroplasty (THA). However, the differences between the two cohorts have inconsistent evidence. Methods: We searched for studies comparing complications among stiff spine patients, including SF and AS, who underwent THA in PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane CENTRAL, Web of Science, and Scopus until March 2021. Studies detailing rates of mechanical complications, aseptic loosening, dislocation, infection, and revisions were included. We performed network meta-analyses using frequentist random-effects models to compare differences between cohorts. We used P-score to rank the better exposure with the lowest complications. Results: Fourteen studies were included in the final analysis. A total of 740,042 patients were included in the systematic review and network meta-analysis. Mechanical complications were highest among SF patients (OR 2.33, 95% CI 1.86, 2.92, p < 0.05), followed by AS patients (OR 1.18, 95% CI 0.87, 1.61, p = 0.82) compared to controls. Long Spinal Fusions had the highest aseptic loosening (OR 2.33, 95% CI 1.83, 2.95, p < 0.05), dislocations (OR 3.25, 95% CI 2.58, 4.10, p < 0.05), infections (OR 2.14, 95% CI 1.73, 2.65, p < 0.05), and revisions (OR 5.25, 95% CI 2.23, 12.32, p < 0.05) compared to AS and controls. Our results suggested that SF with longer constructs may be associated with higher complications in THA patients. Conclusions: THAs following SFs have higher mechanical complications, aseptic loosening, dislocations, and infections, especially with longer constructs. AS patients may have fewer complications compared to this cohort. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis evaluating the efficacy of adjuvant human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination in preventing recurrent cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) 2 or greater after surgical excision.Data Sources: Electronic databases (Cochrane, PubMed, EMBASE, MEDLINE, Scopus, and ClinicalTrials.gov) were searched for studies comparing surgical excision alone to surgical excision with adjuvant HPV vaccination for CIN 2 or greater. Studies published from January 1990 to January 2019 were included.Methods: A total of 5,901 studies were reviewed. The primary outcomes evaluated included: recurrence of CIN 2 or greater, CIN 1 or greater, and HPV 16,18 associated CIN within 6-48 months. We used Covidence software to assist with screening, and meta-analysis was performed using Review Manager.Tabulation, Integration, and Results: Six studies met inclusion criteria and were included in the final analysis. In total 2,984 women were included; 1,360 (45.6%) received adjuvant HPV vaccination after surgical excision, and 1,624 (54.4%) received either placebo or surgical management alone for CIN 2 or greater. Recurrence of CIN 2 or greater occurred within 6-48 months in 115 women (3.9%) overall; however, recurrence was significantly lower for vaccinated women: 26 of 1,360 women (1.9%) vs 89 of 1,624 unvaccinated women (5.9%) (relative risk [RR] 0.36 95% CI 0.23-0.55). The risk of CIN 1 or greater was also significantly lower with adjuvant HPV vaccination, occurring in 86 of 1,360 vaccinated women (6.3%) vs 157 of 1,624 unvaccinated women (9.7%) (RR 0.67 95% CI 0.52-0.85). Thirty-five women developed recurrent CIN 2 or greater lesions specific to HPV 16,18; nine received adjuvant vaccination (0.9%) vs 26 who were unvaccinated (2.0%) (RR 0.41 95% CI 0.20-0.85).Conclusion: Adjuvant HPV vaccination in the setting of surgical excision for CIN 2 or greater is associated with a reduced risk of recurrent cervical dysplasia overall and a reduction in the risk of recurrent lesions caused by the most oncogenic strains (HPV 16,18). Human papillomavirus vaccination should therefore be considered for adjuvant treatment in patients undergoing surgical excision for CIN 2 or greater.Systematic Review Registration: PROSPERO, CRD42019123786. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]