Recreational runners with Achilles tendinopathy have clinically detectable impairments: A case-control study

ObjectivesTo confirm what impairments are present in runners with Achilles tendinopathy (AT) and explore the variance of AT severity in an adequately powered study.DesignCase-control study.SettingTwo private physiotherapy clinics in Australia and Spain.ParticipantsForty-four recreational male runners with AT and 44 healthy controls matched by age, height, and weight.Main outcome measuresDemographics, activity (IPAQ-SF), pain and function (VISA-A), pain during hopping (Hop pain VAS), hopping duration, psychological factors (TSK-11, PASS20), and physical tests regarding lower-limb maximal strength and endurance.ResultsBody mass index (BMI), activity, VISA-A, pain, and duration of hopping, TSK-11, PASS20, standing heel raise to failure, seated heel raise and leg extension 6RM, hip extension and abduction isometric torque were significantly different between groups (P < 0.05) with varied effect sizes (V = 0.22, d range = 0.05–4.18). 46% of AT severity variance was explained by higher BMI (β = −0.41; p = 0.001), weaker leg curl 6RM (β = 0.32; p = 0.009), and higher pain during hopping (β = −0.43; p = 0.001).ConclusionRunners with AT had lower activity levels, lower soleus strength, and were less tall. BMI, pain during hopping, and leg curl strength explained condition severity. This information, identified with clinically applicable tools, may guide clinical assessment, and inform intervention development.     

胶质瘤复发与放射性脑损伤的MRI鉴别诊断探讨

目的:讨论胶质瘤复发与放射性脑损伤的MRI鉴别诊断。方法:回顾性分析2018年1月~2020年2月本院收治的68例胶质瘤术后患者,对所有患者进行MRI平扫、增强以及灌注加权成像(PWI)扫描,记录影像学特征,对脑血容量中位数最大值(rCBV_max)、表观扩散系数(ADC_mean、ADC_min)指标进行对比。结果:有15例患者复发,其胶质瘤复发率为22.06%,其放射性脑损伤的发生率为8.82%(6例);胶质瘤复发与放射性脑损伤患者rCBV_max、ADC_min值有明显差异(P<0.05),ADC_mean比较无明显差异(P>0.05)。结论:进行MRI检查临床效果较好,可准确鉴别胶质瘤复发与反射性脑损伤。     

Glycaemic control for patients with severe acute brain injury: Protocol for a systematic review

Background

Hyperglycaemia is common in patients with acute brain injury admitted to an intensive care unit (ICU). Many studies have found associations between development of hyperglycaemia and increased mortality in hospitalised patients. However, the optimal target for blood glucose control is unknown. We want to conduct a systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis to explore the beneficial and harmful effects of restrictive versus liberal glucose control on patient outcomes in adults with severe acute brain injury.

Methods

We will systematically search medical databases including CENTRAL, Embase, MEDLINE and trial registries. We will search the following websites for ongoing or unpublished trials: http://www.controlled-trials.com/ , http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ , www.eudraCT.com , http://centerwatch.com/ , The Cochrane Library's CENTRAL, PubMed, EMBASE, Science Citation Index Expanded and CINAHL. Two authors will independently review and select trials and extract data. We will include randomised trials comparing levels of glucose control in our analyses and observational studies will be included to address potential harms. The primary outcomes are defined as all-cause mortality, functional outcome and health-related quality of life. Secondary outcomes include serious adverse events including hypoglycaemia, length of ICU stay and duration of mechanical ventilation, and explorative outcomes including intracranial pressure and infection. Trial Sequential Analysis will be used to investigate the risk of type I error due to repetitive testing and to further explore imprecision. Quality of trials will be evaluated using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool, and quality of evidence will be assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) approach.

Discussion

The results of the systematic review will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publication. With the review, we hope to inform future randomised clinical trials and improve clinical practice.