Comparative Efficacy of Noninvasive Neurostimulation Therapies for Acute and Subacute Poststroke Dysphagia: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effectiveness of noninvasive neurostimulation therapies in patients with poststroke dysphagia. DATA SOURCES: Electronic databases, including Embase, PubMed, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library, were searched up to May 31, 2018. STUDY SELECTION: All published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing neurostimulation therapies, including repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS), transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), surface neuromuscular electrical stimulation (sNMES), and pharyngeal electrical stimulation (PES), in patients with acute and subacute poststroke dysphagia were included. Nineteen RCTs were enrolled in the meta-analysis. DATA EXTRACTION: Full texts were independently reviewed. Two independent raters assessed the risk of bias of RCTs with the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool. The primary outcome measure was swallowing function evaluated before and after neurostimulation therapy. DATA SYNTHESIS: Both pairwise and network meta-analysis revealed that rTMS, tDCS, and sNMES significantly improved poststroke dysphagia compared with placebo. Differences in functional improvement between PES and placebo were not significant. Based on probability ranking, rTMS seemed the best treatment among the 4 neurostimulation therapies. In the network meta-analysis, rTMS showed the best efficacy compared with placebo (standardized mean difference=1.02, 95% confidence interval, 0.61-1.43). CONCLUSIONS: Among the 4 noninvasive neurostimulation therapies, rTMS, tDCS, and sNMES were effective for treating poststroke dysphagia; furthermore, rTMS may be the most effective therapy according to probability ranking.

Comparative Effectiveness of Injection Therapies in Rotator Cuff Tendinopathy: A Systematic Review, Pairwise and Network Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the effectiveness of diverse injections in patients with rotator cuff tendinopathy using pairwise and network meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, and Cochrane Library were searched for studies published up to September 31, 2017. STUDY SELECTION: We included all published or unpublished randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing diverse injections including corticosteroid, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, hyaluronic acid, botulinum toxin, platelet-rich plasma (PRP), and prolotherapy in patients with rotator cuff tendinopathy. Among the 1495 records screened, 18 studies were included in the meta-analysis. DATA EXTRACTION: The quality of RCTs was assessed with Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool by 2 independent raters. The primary outcome was pain reduction, and the secondary outcome was functional improvement. DATA SYNTHESIS: Standardized mean difference (SMD) was used for pairwise and network meta-analysis. In pairwise meta-analysis, corticosteroid was more effective only in the short term in both pain reduction and functional improvement. Network meta-analysis indicated that prolotherapy significantly reduced pain compared with placebo in the long term (over 24wk; SMD: 2.63; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.88-3.38); meanwhile PRP significantly improved shoulder function compared with placebo in the long term (over 24wk; SMD: 0.44; 95% CI, 0.05-0.84). CONCLUSIONS: For patients with rotator cuff tendinopathy, corticosteroid plays a role in the short term (3-6wk) but not in long-term (over 24wk) pain reduction and functional improvement. By contrast, PRP and prolotherapy may yield better outcomes in the long term (over 24wk). On account of heterogeneity, interpreting these results with caution is warranted.

Meta-analysis Comparing Autologous Blood-Derived Products (Including Platelet-Rich Plasma) Injection Versus Placebo in Patients With Achilles Tendinopathy.

PURPOSE: To compare the effectiveness of autologous blood-derived products (ABP) injection with that of placebo (sham injection, no injection, or physiotherapy alone) in patients with Achilles tendinopathy. METHODS: Electronic databases, including PubMed, Scopus, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library were searched up to June 2017. All published or unpublished randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included. Two independent raters assessed the risk of bias of RCTs with the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool. The primary outcome was Victorian Institute of Sports Assessment-Achilles (VISA-A) score. Weighted mean differences (WMDs) were used for random effect meta-analysis. RESULTS: Seven RCTs were enrolled in meta-analysis. The ABP injection and placebo revealed equal effectiveness in VISA-A score improvement at 4 to 6 weeks (short term, WMD 2.29, 95% confidence interval [CI]: -1.69, 6.27), 12 weeks (medium term, WMD 2.63, 95% CI: -1.72, 6.98), 24 weeks (long term, WMD 4.61, 95% CI: -1.25, 10.47), and 48 weeks (very long term, WMD 4.16, 95% CI: -6.82, 15.14). In meta-regression, there was no association between change in VISA-A score and duration of symptoms at 4 to 6 weeks (short term), 12 weeks (medium term), and 24 weeks (long term). CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis revealed that ABP injection was not more effective than placebo (sham injection, no injection, or physiotherapy alone) in Achilles tendinopathy and that no association was found between therapeutic effects and duration of symptoms. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level I, meta-analysis of Level I studies.