-
Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) Aug 2022: The effect of the blood flow restriction technique (BFR) on delayed onset muscular soreness (DOMS) symptoms remains unclear. Since there is no consensus in the... (Review)
Review
: The effect of the blood flow restriction technique (BFR) on delayed onset muscular soreness (DOMS) symptoms remains unclear. Since there is no consensus in the literature, the aim of the present study is to systematically identify and appraise the available evidence on the effects of the BFR technique on DOMS, in healthy subjects. : Computerized literature search in the databases Pubmed, Google Scholar, EBSCO, Cochrane and PEDro to identify randomized controlled trials that assessed the effects of blood flow restriction on delayed onset muscular soreness symptoms. : Eight trials met the eligibility criteria and were included in this review, presenting the results of 118 participants, with a mean methodological rating of 6/10 on the PEDro scale. : So far, there is not enough evidence to confirm or refute the influence of BFR on DOMS, and more studies with a good methodological basis are needed, in larger samples, to establish protocols and parameters of exercise and intervention. Data analysis suggests a tendency toward the proinflammatory effect of BFR during high restrictive pressures combined with eccentric exercises, while postconditioning BFR seems to have a protective effect on DOMS. Prospero ID record: 345457, title registration: "Effect of Blood Flow Restriction Technique on the Prevention of Delayed Onset Muscle Soreness: A Systematic Review".
Topics: Exercise; Exercise Therapy; Hemodynamics; Humans; Muscle, Skeletal; Myalgia; Pressure
PubMed: 36143831
DOI: 10.3390/medicina58091154 -
Cureus Aug 2022Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), was first identified in Wuhan, China in December 2019. Since... (Review)
Review
Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), was first identified in Wuhan, China in December 2019. Since then, the disease has spread globally, leading to the ongoing pandemic. It can cause severe respiratory illness; however, many cases of pericarditis have also been reported. This systematic review aims to recognize the clinical features of pericarditis and myopericarditis in COVID-19 patients. Google Scholar, Medline/PubMed, CINAHL, Cochrane Central, and Web of Science databases were searched for studies reporting "Coronavirus" or "COVID" and "Peri-myocarditis," "heart," or "retrospective." Case reports and retrospective studies published from May 2020 to February 2021 were reviewed. In total, 33 studies on pericarditis, myopericarditis, and pericardial infusion were included in this review. COVID-19 pericarditis affected adult patients at any age. The incidence is more common in males, with a male-to-female ratio of 2:1. Chest pain (60%), fever (51%), and shortness of breath (51%) were the most reported symptoms, followed by cough (39%), fatigue (15%), myalgia (12%), and diarrhea (12%). Laboratory tests revealed leukocytosis with neutrophil predominance, elevated D-dimer, erythrocyte rate, and C-reactive protein. Cardiac markers including troponin-1, troponin-T, and brain natriuretic peptide were elevated in most cases. Radiographic imaging of the chest were mostly normal, and only 31% of chest X-rays showed cardiomegaly and or bilateral infiltration. Electrocardiography (ECG) demonstrated normal sinus rhythm with around 59% ST elevation and rarely PR depression or T wave inversion, while the predominant echocardiographic feature was pericardial effusion. Management with colchicine was favored in most cases, followed by non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), and interventional therapy was only needed when patient developed cardiac tamponade. The majority of the reviewed studies reported either recovery or no continued clinical deterioration. The prevalence of COVID-19-related cardiac diseases is high, and pericarditis is a known extrapulmonary manifestation. However, pericardial effusion and cardiac tamponade are less prevalent and may require urgent intervention to prevent mortality. Pericarditis should be considered in patients with chest pain, ST elevation on ECG, a normal coronary angiogram, and COVID-19. We emphasize the importance of clinical examination, ECG, and echocardiogram for decision-making, and NSAIDs, colchicine, and corticosteroids are considered to be safe in the treatment of pericarditis/myopericarditis associated with COVID-19.
PubMed: 36120210
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.27948 -
European Journal of Pediatrics Dec 2022A systematic literature review was conducted up to 15th February 2022 to summarize long COVID evidence and to assess prevalence and clinical presentation in children and... (Review)
Review
UNLABELLED
A systematic literature review was conducted up to 15th February 2022 to summarize long COVID evidence and to assess prevalence and clinical presentation in children and adolescents. Articles reporting long COVID prevalence and symptoms based on original data in the paediatric population were included. Case series quality was assessed through the JBI Critical Appraisal Checklist. For observational studies, adherence to STROBE checklist was evaluated. Twenty-two articles were included: 19 observational studies (12 cohort/7 cross-sectional) and 3 case series. Nine studies provided a control group. We found a high variability in terms of prevalence (1.6-70%). The most frequently reported symptoms were fatigue (2-87%), headache (3.5-80%), arthro-myalgias (5.4-66%), chest tightness or pain (1.4-51%), and dyspnoea (2-57.1%). Five studies reported limitations in daily function due to long COVID. Alterations at brain imaging were described in one study, transient electrocardiographic abnormalities were described in a minority of children, while most authors did not evidence long-term pulmonary sequelae. Older age, female sex, and previous long-term pathological conditions were more frequently associated with persistent symptoms.
CONCLUSION
Long COVID evidence in children is limited, heterogeneous, and based on low-quality studies. The lockdown consequences are difficult to distinguish from long COVID symptoms. High-quality studies are required: WHO definition of long COVID should be used, controlled clinical studies should be encouraged, and the impact of new variants on long COVID prevalence should be investigated to ensure an objective analysis of long COVID characteristics in children and a proper allocation of healthcare system resources.
WHAT IS KNOWN
• Children rarely develop a severe respiratory disease in the acute phase of COVID-19. • A limited number of patients develop a multisystem inflammatory condition that can lead to multiorgan failure and shock.
WHAT IS NEW
• Persistent symptoms after SARS-CoV-2 infection are reported in children and limitations in daily function due to long COVID symptoms affect school attendance. • Functional complaints of post-acute COVID are difficult to be distinguished from those due to social restrictions.
Topics: Child; Adolescent; Humans; Female; COVID-19; SARS-CoV-2; Prevalence; Cross-Sectional Studies; Communicable Disease Control; Post-Acute COVID-19 Syndrome
PubMed: 36107254
DOI: 10.1007/s00431-022-04600-x -
International Journal of Environmental... Aug 2022As vaccine resources were distributed unevenly worldwide, sometimes there might have been shortages or delays in vaccine supply; therefore, considering the use of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
As vaccine resources were distributed unevenly worldwide, sometimes there might have been shortages or delays in vaccine supply; therefore, considering the use of heterogeneous booster doses for Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) might be an alternative strategy. Therefore, we aimed to review the data available to evaluate and compare the effectiveness and safety of heterologous booster doses with homologous booster doses for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccines. We searched relevant studies up to 27 April 2022. Random-effects inverse variance models were used to evaluate the vaccine effectiveness (VE) and its 95% confidence interval (CI) of COVID-19 outcomes and odds ratio (OR) and its CI of safety events. The Newcastle-Ottawa quality assessment scale and Cochrane Collaboration's tool were used to assess the quality of the included cohort studies. A total of 23 studies involving 1,726,506 inoculation cases of homologous booster dose and 5,343,580 inoculation cases of heterologous booster dose was included. The VE of heterologous booster for the prevention of SARS-CoV-2 infection (VE = 96.10%, VE = 84.00%), symptomatic COVID-19 (VE = 56.80%, VE = 17.30%), and COVID-19-related hospital admissions (VE = 97.40%, VE = 93.20%) was higher than homologous booster. Compared with homologous booster group, there was a higher risk of fever (OR = 1.930, 95% CI, 1.199-3.107), myalgia (OR = 1.825, 95% CI, 1.079-3.089), and malaise or fatigue (OR = 1.745, 95% CI, 1.047-2.906) within 7 days after boosting, and a higher risk of malaise or fatigue (OR = 4.140, 95% CI, 1.729-9.916) within 28 days after boosting in heterologous booster group. Compared with homologous booster group, geometric mean neutralizing titers (GMTs) of neutralizing antibody for different SARS-CoV-2 variants and response rate of antibody and gama interferon were higher in heterologous booster group. Our findings suggested that both homologous and heterologous COVID-19 booster doses had great effectiveness, immunogenicity, and acceptable safety, and a heterologous booster dose was more effective, which would help make appropriate public health decisions and reduce public hesitancy in vaccination.
Topics: Antibodies, Viral; COVID-19; COVID-19 Vaccines; Fatigue; Humans; Immunization, Secondary; SARS-CoV-2
PubMed: 36078466
DOI: 10.3390/ijerph191710752 -
Best Practice & Research. Clinical... Sep 2022Anabolic-androgenic steroid (AAS) have widespread and growing illicit use as image and performance enhancing drugs (IPED), predominantly in young men. Users trying to... (Review)
Review
Anabolic-androgenic steroid (AAS) have widespread and growing illicit use as image and performance enhancing drugs (IPED), predominantly in young men. Users trying to stop AAS are prone to distressing withdrawal symptoms which may trigger relapse in use. It is important to develop therapies to support AAS withdrawal. The illicit nature of AAS use has impeded the robust characterisation of its clinical withdrawal syndrome within any single study. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review summarising the available clinical studies describing symptoms associated with non-medically indicated AAS use, and AAS withdrawal. Reported clinical features of AAS withdrawal include headache, fatigue, myalgia, restlessness, insomnia, low mood and libido, anorexia, suicidal ideation, body image dissatisfaction, and steroid cravings; novel therapies for AAS withdrawal would need evaluation against these symptoms.
Topics: Anabolic Agents; Androgens; Humans; Male; Performance-Enhancing Substances; Steroids; Testosterone Congeners
PubMed: 35999138
DOI: 10.1016/j.beem.2022.101691 -
Reviews in Medical Virology Jan 2023Several phase-1 clinical trials have been performed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of candidate anti-Zika vaccines. In this systematic review, we systematically... (Review)
Review
Several phase-1 clinical trials have been performed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of candidate anti-Zika vaccines. In this systematic review, we systematically evaluated the safety and immunogenicity of candidate vaccines, which would aid researchers in formulating an effective vaccination strategy for phase-2 trials based on current evidence. A literature search was conducted using the electronic databases MEDLINE through Pubmed, Web of Science, and Cochrane Database for relevant studies on candidate anti-zika vaccines. Studies on animal models were excluded from our study. Healthy individuals who were administered candidate Zika vaccines to evaluate the immune response and adverse events (AEs) compared to placebo were considered. Data were extracted, tabulated, and analysed using Microsoft Excel, while the risk of bias plots were generated using tidyverse and Robvis packages in R-studio. A total of five phase-1 clinical trials were included in our analysis comprising of studies on inactivated, viral vector, and DNA vaccines. Immunogenicity ranged from 10% to 100% after vaccination with the lowest seroconversion rate (10%) and geometric mean titre (GMT) (6.3; 95% confidence interval (CI):3.7-10.8) observed among recipients of single-dose inactivated anti-zika vaccine (ZPIV). For DNA vaccines, the seroconversion rate ranged from 60% to 100% with the highest seroconversion rate (100%) and GMT (2871; 95% CI:705.3-11688) observed among recipients of three shots of high dose GLS-5700 vaccine. For viral vector vaccine (Ad26.ZIKV.001) seroconversion rate (100%) and GMT peaked after two shots with both low and high-dose vaccines. In all those studies AEs were mostly local including injection site pain, erythema, and itching. The most common systemic AEs included fever, myalgia, nausea, and fatigue. In phase-1 clinical trials, all candidate vaccines were found to be highly immunogenic and relatively safe, especially when administered in higher doses and with the help of needle-free devices.
Topics: Animals; Zika Virus; Zika Virus Infection; Vaccines, DNA; Viral Vaccines; Vaccination; Antibodies, Viral
PubMed: 35986594
DOI: 10.1002/rmv.2385 -
The Journal of Pain Dec 2022The effectiveness of electrical stimulation (ES) in preventing or treating delayed-onset muscle soreness (DOMS) and its effects on muscle recovery is unclear. The... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Is Electrical Stimulation Effective in Preventing or Treating Delayed-onset Muscle Soreness (DOMS) in Athletes and Untrained Adults? A Systematic Review With Meta-Analysis.
The effectiveness of electrical stimulation (ES) in preventing or treating delayed-onset muscle soreness (DOMS) and its effects on muscle recovery is unclear. The systematic review investigated the benefits or harms of ES on DOMS and muscle recovery. Databases (PubMed, Medline, CENTRAL, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, PEDro, LILACS, SPORTDiscus) were searched up to March, 31st 2021 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of athletes or untrained adults with DOMS treated with ES and compared to placebo/sham (simulation or without ES), or control (no intervention). Data were pooled in a meta-analysis. Risk of bias (Cochrane Collaboration tool) and quality of evidence (GRADE) were analyzed. Fourteen trials (n=435) were included in this review and 12 trials (n=389) were pooled in a meta-analysis. Evidence of very low to low quality indicates that ES does not prevent or treat DOMS as well as ES does not help to promote muscle recovery immediately, 24, 48, 72, 96 hours after the intervention. Only one study monitored adverse events. There are no recommendations that support the use of ES in DOMS and muscle recovery. PERSPECTIVES: No recommendations support the use of electrical stimulation in delayed-onset muscle soreness and muscle recovery in athletes and untrained adults. This means that electrical stimulation is not fruitful for this population according those protocols used. Therefore, unlikely that further randomized controlled trials with the same approach will yield promising results.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Myalgia; Athletes; Electric Stimulation
PubMed: 35964921
DOI: 10.1016/j.jpain.2022.05.004 -
Journal of Clinical Medicine Aug 2022COVID-19 mRNA vaccinations have recently been implicated in causing myocarditis. Therefore, the primary aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to...
COVID-19 mRNA vaccinations have recently been implicated in causing myocarditis. Therefore, the primary aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to investigate the clinical characteristics of patients with myocarditis following mRNA vaccination. The secondary aims were to report common imaging and laboratory findings, as well as treatment regimes, in these patients. A literature search was performed from December 2019 to June 2022. Eligible studies reported patients older than 18 years vaccinated with mRNA, a diagnosis of myocarditis, and subsequent outcomes. Pooled mean or proportion were analyzed using a random-effects model. Seventy-five unique studies (patient = 188, 89.4% male, mean age 18-67 years) were included. Eighty-six patients had Moderna vaccines while one hundred and two patients had Pfizer-BioNTech vaccines. The most common presenting symptoms were chest pain (34.5%), fever (17.1%), myalgia (12.4%), and chills (12.1%). The most common radiologic findings were ST-related changes on an electrocardiogram (58.7%) and hypokinesia on cardiac magnetic resonance imaging or echocardiography (50.7%). Laboratory findings included elevated Troponin I levels (81.7%) and elevated C-reactive protein (71.5%). Seven patients were admitted to the intensive care unit. The most common treatment modality was non-steroid anti-inflammatory drugs (36.6%) followed by colchicine (28.5%). This meta-analysis presents novel evidence to suggest possible myocarditis post mRNA vaccination in certain individuals, especially young male patients. Clinical practice must therefore take appropriate pre-cautionary measures when administrating COVID-19 mRNA vaccinations.
PubMed: 35956137
DOI: 10.3390/jcm11154521 -
Journal of Evidence-based Medicine Sep 2022Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has rapidly spread worldwide, but there is so far no comprehensive analysis of all known symptoms of the disease. Our study aimed to...
OBJECTIVE
Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has rapidly spread worldwide, but there is so far no comprehensive analysis of all known symptoms of the disease. Our study aimed to present a comprehensive picture of the clinical symptoms of COVID-19 using an evidence map.
METHODS
We systematically searched MEDLINE via PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane library from their inception to March 16, 2021. We included systematic reviews reporting the clinical manifestations of COVID-19 patients. We followed the PRISMA guidelines, and the study selection, data extraction, and quality assessment were done by two individuals independently. We assessed the methodological quality of the studies using AMSTAR. We visually presented the clinical symptoms of COVID-19 and their prevalence.
RESULTS
A total of 102 systematic reviews were included, of which, 68 studies (66.7%) were of high quality, 19 studies (18.6%) of medium quality, and 15 studies (14.7%) of low quality. We identified a total of 74 symptoms including 17 symptoms of the respiratory system, 21 symptoms of the neurological system, 10 symptoms of the gastrointestinal system, 16 cutaneous symptoms, and 10 ocular symptoms. The most common symptoms were fever (67 studies, ranging 16.3%-91.0%, pooled prevalence: 64.6%, 95%CI, 61.3%-67.9%), cough (68 studies, ranging 30.0%-72.2%, pooled prevalence: 53.6%, 95%CI, 52.1%-55.1%), muscle soreness (56 studies, ranging 3.0%-44.0%, pooled prevalence: 18.7%, 95%CI, 16.3%-21.3%), and fatigue (52 studies, ranging 3.3%-58.5%, pooled prevalence: 29.4%, 95%CI, 27.5%-31.3%). The prevalence estimates for COVID-19 symptoms were generally lower in neonates, children and adolescents, and pregnant women than in the general populations.
CONCLUSION
At least 74 different clinical manifestations are associated with COVID-19. Fever, cough, muscle soreness, and fatigue are the most common, but attention should also be paid to the rare symptoms that can help in the early diagnosis of the disease.
Topics: Adolescent; COVID-19; Child; Cough; Fatigue; Female; Humans; Infant, Newborn; Myalgia; Pregnancy; SARS-CoV-2
PubMed: 35909298
DOI: 10.1111/jebm.12483