Abdulrahman Alnwiji

Purpose: This study aimed to evaluate the effects of active transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) compared with sham stimulation on circulating brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF), pain-related outcomes, working memory, and inflammatory and neuroplasticity biomarkers. Methods: PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched from inception to May 2026. Randomized and controlled clinical trials comparing active with sham tDCS in adults were included. The primary outcome was post-treatment BDNF concentration. Secondary outcomes included pain intensity, pain catastrophizing, pain-related disability and functional interference, working memory, and circulating inflammatory or neuroplasticity biomarkers. Risk of bias was assessed using the revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool. Mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were pooled using random-effects models. Serum and plasma BDNF were analyzed separately. Results: Twenty-one studies were included in the systematic review, of which 15 contributed to at least one quantitative synthesis and 12 study comparisons contributed to the primary BDNF analyses. Active tDCS did not significantly affect serum BDNF (MD = −0.01 [−0.15, 0.13], p = 0.890) or plasma BDNF (MD = 0.02 [−0.25, 0.29], p = 0.870) compared with sham stimulation. In contrast, active tDCS was associated with lower pain intensity (MD = −1.79 [−2.34, −1.23], p < 0.00001). No statistically significant difference was observed in the PCS total score or in the helplessness, magnification, or rumination subscales, although the point estimates generally favored active tDCS. For pain-related disability and functional interference, active tDCS was associated with lower PCP:S total scores and lower emotional interference, whereas no significant differences were observed for interference with daily activities or pain frequency. No significant differences were observed for working memory, interleukins, tumor necrosis factor-alpha, glial cell line-derived neurotrophic factor, interleukin-18, or soluble tumor necrosis factor receptors. Substantial heterogeneity was present in several pain-related and inflammatory biomarker analyses. Conclusions: Active tDCS was not associated with consistent differences in circulating serum or plasma BDNF or in the assessed peripheral inflammatory and neuroplasticity biomarkers compared with sham stimulation; however, these null peripheral findings should not be interpreted as evidence of absent central neuroplastic effects, because circulating measures may not adequately capture localized or transient biological changes within the central nervous system. Active tDCS was associated with improvements in some pain-related outcomes; however, the limited number of studies, substantial heterogeneity, and low certainty of the available evidence preclude firm conclusions regarding its clinical effectiveness for pain management.

Patients with prior acute myocardial infarction (AMI) generally show low rates of achieving secondary prevention targets. Here we evaluated adherence to guideline-recommended secondary prevention strategies after AMI in Saudi Arabia. This ambispective multicenter cohort study included consecutive patients seen for follow-up visits 6–24 months after hospitalization for AMI. A standardized questionnaire was used to evaluate control of blood pressure (2), physical activity targets, smoking habits, guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT), and referral to cardiac rehabilitation. Among 108 AMI patients (mean age 58.4 ± 10.9 years; 80.6% male; 76.9% Saudi nationals), 53.7% had uncontrolled blood pressure, ~40% uncontrolled glucose, and 67% above-target LDL-C levels. Most participants were overweight (40.7%) or obese (37%), and 28.7% achieved the physical activity targets. One-third of patients were not receiving all GDMT, 15.7% were current smokers, and 25% had been referred to cardiac rehabilitation. No patient met all guideline-recommended secondary prevention targets. This pilot study highlights gaps in secondary prevention among AMI survivors. Upcoming study phases will aim for national representation and help identify key clinical and demographic drivers to improve secondary prevention efforts across Saudi Arabia.

Background: Denys‐Drash syndrome (DDS) is a rare genetic disorder characterized by mutations in the Wilms tumor suppressor gene ( WT1 ), leading to a triad of conditions including nephrotic syndrome progressing to end‐stage renal disease (ESRD), Wilms tumor, and ambiguous genitalia. We present two pediatric cases illustrating the complexity and variability of DDS. Case presentation: The first case is a 7‐month‐old male presenting with ambiguous genitalia, nephropathy, and intussusception. Genetic analysis identified a likely pathogenic heterozygous WT1 variant: c.1384C >T (p.Gln462Ter). Despite surgical interventions, treatment was delayed due to COVID‐19 restrictions, and the patient unfortunately passed away at 16 months during the lockdown period. The second case involves an 8‐month‐old female with normal external genitalia, a horseshoe kidney, bilateral renal masses, and recurrent hypotensive episodes. Genetic testing revealed a pathogenic heterozygous WT1 variant: c.453G >A (p.Trp151Ter). She was diagnosed with DDS–associated Wilms tumor and, despite aggressive management, passed away at 21 months. Conclusion: These cases underscore the importance of early diagnosis, multidisciplinary management, and personalized therapeutic approaches in DDS patients. Bilateral nephrectomy, renal transplantation, and monitoring for Wilms tumor are pivotal in improving prognosis, though variability in clinical presentations often complicates decision‐making.

Background: Intracerebral hemorrhage management presents clinicians with a significant therapeutic challenge. Maintaining antiplatelet therapy potentially increases the risk of recurrent bleeding, while discontinuation heightens susceptibility to ischemic stroke, particularly during the critical first month after hemorrhage. In contemporary practice, physicians demonstrate considerable hesitancy regarding early antiplatelet reinitiation, complicated by the absence of clear evidence-based treatment guidelines. Aim: This meta-analysis assesses the safety of early antiplatelet resumption following ICH. Methods: We conducted a systematic review by searching Web of Science, Scopus, PubMed, and Cochrane Library from inception to April 2025. Articles were independently screened and data extracted by two reviewers who also assessed study quality. The inclusion criteria are enrollment of adults (≥18 years) with imaging-confirmed intracerebral hemorrhage surviving >24 h, comparing early vs. delayed or withheld antiplatelet therapy. Randomized trials underwent separate evaluation using Cochrane’s Risk of Bias. Statistical analysis was performed using R software (version 4.4.2), with categorical outcomes pooled as risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals. Statistical significance was established at p < 0.05. The evidence is limited by the availability of few RCTs, variable antiplatelet regiments, male predominance, and other confounding factors. The review was registered in SFO. Results: Our meta-analysis included 10 studies (8 observational, 2 RCTs) with 5554 patients. Early antiplatelet therapy significantly reduced recurrent intracerebral hemorrhage by 46% (RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.37–0.78, p = 0.001). All-cause mortality showed a non-significant difference (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.65–1.01, p = 0.06). No significant differences were found for ischemic stroke (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.60–1.63, p = 0.96), major hemorrhagic events (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.49–1.13, p = 0.17), or ischemic vascular outcomes (RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.49–1.02, p = 0.60). Conclusions: Our meta-analysis reveals that early antiplatelet therapy following intracerebral hemorrhage significantly reduces recurrent hemorrhagic events (46% reduction) without increasing major ischemic or hemorrhagic complications.