Kaitan Yang

Ketorolac is widely utilized for postoperative pain management, including back pain after lumbar spinal surgery. Several trials have assessed the efficacy of Ketorolac alone and in combination with other analgesics such as bupivacaine, morphine, epinephrine, paracetamol, and pregabalin. However, the effects and safety profile of ketorolac in these contexts remain controversial. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to evaluate the efficacy and safety of Ketorolac administration, both as a monotherapy and in combination with other analgesics, for managing postoperative pain in adults undergoing lumbar spinal surgery. We searched PubMed, EMbase, Web of Science, EBSCO, CNKI, WanFang, VIP, and Cochrane library databases through July 2024 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the analgesic efficacy of Ketorolac administration for postoperative pain of lumbar surgery. The meta-analysis was conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statements. Data were extracted and analyzed using open-source meta-analysis software OpenMeta-Analyst, focusing on outcomes such as VAS pain scores, postoperative morphine requirements (PMR), length of hospital stay (LOS), and adverse effects, such as nausea, vomiting, pruritus, and constipation. The quality of evidence was assessed using the Jada scale. Thirteen RCTs comprising a total of 938 patients were included. The methodological quality of the studies was high, with three studies scoring 5, six studies scoring 4, and four studies scoring 3 on the Jadad scale. Ketorolac significantly reduced pain compared to controls at 0–6 h, with a mean difference (MD) of − 1.42 (95% CI: − 2.03 to − 0.80; P < 0.0001), exceeding the Minimal Clinically Important Difference (MCID) of 1.2 to 2.0 points on the Visual Analog Scale (VAS), indicating clinically meaningful pain relief. During the 6–12-h period, the pain reduction was significant (MD = − 0.58; 95% CI: − 0.80 to − 0.35; P < 0.0001), though below the MCID threshold. In the 12–24-h period, Ketorolac continued to show significant pain reduction (MD = − 0.48; 95% CI: − 0.68 to − 0.28; P < 0.0001), but this reduction was also below the MCID. Heterogeneity was low in the 12–24-h period (I2 = 13%), indicating consistent results across studies. There was a significant reduction in PMR (SMD = − 1.83; 95% CI = − 3.42 to − 0.23; P < 0.0001), although with considerable heterogeneity among the studies (I2 = 93%, heterogeneity P < 0.01). Ketorolac administration also significantly reduced the LOS compared to controls (MD = − 0.45 days; 95% CI = − 0.74 to − 0.16; P = 0.0001), though this reduction, which is less than a full day (0.45 days), may have limited clinical significance. The findings suggest that Ketorolac effectively reduces pain and opioid use postoperatively, supporting its role in multimodal analgesia for lumbar spinal surgery. The significant reduction in PMR indicates a beneficial opioid-sparing effect, crucial in the context of reducing opioid-related complications. The observed reduction in LOS, while statistically significant, may not translate into substantial clinical benefit due to its limited magnitude. No significant increase in common adverse effects was noted, indicating Ketorolac’s safety profile. Ketorolac administration, either alone or in combination with other analgesics, effectively reduces postoperative pain and opioid consumption in adults following lumbar spinal surgery. And Ketorolac did not significantly increase the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting relative to other analgesics or placebos. While it also decreases LOS, the clinical relevance of this reduction is modest. However, the variability in study designs, dosages, and combination therapies contribute to significant heterogeneity in outcomes. Future research should focus on standardizing protocols and exploring optimal dosing strategies. Additionally, long-term safety and effectiveness studies are needed to better understand Ketorolac’s role in postoperative pain management.

Background: Previous studies have shown controversy about whether dried fruit intake is associated with type 2 diabetes. This study aimed to examine the potential causal effect of dried fruit intake on type 2 diabetes by conducting a two-sample Mendelian randomization study. Methods: We used genome-wide association study (GWAS) summary statistics for MR analysis to explore the causal association of dried fruit intake with T2D. The inverse-variance weighted (IVW) method was used as the main analytical method for MR analysis. In addition, the MR-Egger method and the weighted median method were applied to supplement the IVW method. Furthermore, Cochrane’s Q test, MR-Egger intercept test, and leave-one-out analysis were used to perform sensitivity analysis. The funnel plot was used to assess publication bias. Results: The results from the IVW analysis indicated that dried fruit intake could reduce the risk of T2D [odds ratio (OR) = 0.392, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.241–0.636, p-value = 0.0001]. In addition, the result of additional method Weighted median is parallel to the effects estimated by IVW. Furthermore, the sensitivity analysis illustrates that our MR analysis was unaffected by heterogeneity and horizontal pleiotropy. Finally, the results of the leave-one-out method showed the robustness of our MR results. And the funnel plot shows a symmetrical distribution. Conclusion: Our study provides evidence for the benefits of dried fruit intake on T2D. Therefore, a reasonable consumption of dried fruit may provide primary prevention.

Background: As an emerging technology in robot-assisted (RA) surgery, the potential benefits of its application in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) lack substantial support from current evidence. Objective: We aimed to investigate whether the RA TLIF is superior to FG TLIF in the treatment of lumbar degenerative disease. Methods: We systematically reviewed studies comparing RA versus FG TLIF for lumbar degenerative diseases through July 2022 by searching PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, CINAHL (EBSCO), Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), WanFang, VIP, and the Cochrane Library, as well as the references of published review articles. Both cohort studies (CSs) and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included. Evaluation criteria included the accuracy of percutaneous pedicle screw placement, proximal facet joint violation (FJV), radiation exposure, duration of surgery, estimated blood loss (EBL), and surgical revision. Methodological quality was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias and ROBINS-I Tool. Random-effects models were used, and the standardized mean difference (SMD) was employed as the effect measure. We conducted subgroup analyses based on surgical type, the specific robot system used, and the study design. Two investigators independently screened abstracts and full-text articles, and the certainty of evidence was graded using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach. Results: Our search identified 539 articles, of which 21 met the inclusion criteria for quantitative analysis. Meta-analysis revealed that RA had 1.03-folds higher “clinically acceptable” accuracy than FG (RR: 1.0382, 95% CI: 1.0273–1.0493). And RA had 1.12-folds higher “perfect” accuracy than FG group (RR: 1.1167, 95% CI: 1.0726–1.1626). In the case of proximal FJV, our results indicate a 74% reduction in occurrences for patients undergoing RA pedicle screw placement compared to those in the FG group (RR: 0.2606, 95%CI: 0.2063- 0.3293). Seventeen CSs and two RCTs reported the duration of time. The results of CSs suggest that there is no significant difference between RA and FG group (SMD: 0.1111, 95%CI: -0.391–0.6131), but the results of RCTs suggest that the patients who underwent RA-TLIF need more surgery time than FG (SMD: 3.7213, 95%CI: 3.0756–4.3669). Sixteen CSs and two RCTs reported the EBL. The results suggest that the patients who underwent RA pedicle screw placement had fewer EBL than FG group (CSs: SMD: -1.9151, 95%CI: -3.1265–0.7036, RCTs: SMD: -5.9010, 95%CI: -8.7238–3.0782). For radiation exposure, the results of CSs suggest that there is no significant difference in radiation time between RA and FG group (SMD: -0.5256, 95%CI: -1.4357–0.3845), but the patients who underwent RA pedicle screw placement had fewer radiation dose than FG group (SMD: -2.2682, 95%CI: -3.1953–1.3411). And four CSs and one RCT reported the number of revision case. The results of CSs suggest that there is no significant difference in the number of revision case between RA and FG group (RR: 0.4087,95% CI 0.1592–1.0495). Our findings are limited by the residual heterogeneity of the included studies, which may limit the interpretation of the results. Conclusion: In TLIF, RA technology exhibits enhanced precision in pedicle screw placement when compared to FG methods. This accuracy contributes to advantages such as the protection of adjacent facet joints and reductions in intraoperative radiation dosage and blood loss. However, the longer preoperative preparation time associated with RA procedures results in comparable surgical duration and radiation time to FG techniques. Presently, FG screw placement remains the predominant approach, with clinical surgeons possessing greater proficiency in its application. Consequently, the integration of RA into TLIF surgery may not be considered the optimal choice. Systematic review registration: PROSPERO CRD42023441600.

Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), a prevalent chronic metabolic disorder, is closely linked to persistent low-grade inflammation, significantly contributing to its development and progression. This review provides a comprehensive examination of the inflammatory mechanisms underlying T2DM, focusing on the role of the NLRP3 inflammasome and interleukin-1β (IL-1β) in mediating inflammatory responses. We discuss the therapeutic potential of IL-1 inhibitors and colchicine, highlighting their mechanisms in inhibiting the NLRP3 inflammasome and reducing IL-1β production. Recent studies indicate that these agents could effectively mitigate inflammation, offering promising avenues for the prevention and management of T2DM. By exploring the intricate connections between metabolic disturbances and chronic inflammation, this review underscores the need for novel anti-inflammatory strategies to address T2DM and its complications.

Background: Observational studies have suggested that type 2 Diabetes Mellitus (DM2) is a potentially modifiable risk factor for lower BMD, but the causal relationship is unclear. This study aimed to examine whether the association of DM2 with lower BMD levels was causal by using Mendelian randomization (MR) analyses. Methods: We collected genome-wide association study data for DM2 and BMD of total body and different skeletal sites from the IEU database. Subsequently, we performed a two-sample Mendelian randomization analysis using the Two Sample MR package. Results: We identified a positive association between DM2 risk (61,714 DM2 cases and 596,424 controls) and total BMD, and other skeletal sites BMD, such as femoral neck BMD, ultra-distal forearm BMD and heel BMD. However, non-significant trends were observed for the effects of DM2 on lumbar-spine BMD. Conclusion: In two-sample MR analyses, there was positive causal relationship between DM2 and BMD in both overall samples. In summary, while observational analyses consistently indicate a strong association between DM2 and low BMD, our MR analysis introduces a nuanced perspective. Contrary to the robust association observed in observational studies, our MR analysis suggests a significant link between DM2 and elevated BMD.