Objective: This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess the effects of the combination of acupuncture-related therapies with conventional medication compared with conventional medication in patients with Parkinson's disease (PD).Methods: A literature search within eight databases [including Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Library, PubMed, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), China Biology Medicine (CBM), VIP, and Wanfang Database] was performed covering a time frame from their inception to August 2020. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing acupuncture-related therapies combined with conventional medication vs. conventional medication in patients with PD were eligible. Two authors independently assessed the risk of bias. Assessments were performed with the total and subscales scores of the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS), 39-item Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39), the dosage of Madopar, Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), and 17-item Hamilton Depression Scale (HAMD). Data were analyzed by adopting the Cochrane Collaboration's RevMan 5.4 (Review Man, Copenhagen, Denmark); and mean effect sizes and 95% confidence intervals were estimated. Tests for heterogeneity were used to assess differences in treatment effects across different types of acupuncture used.Results: Sixty-six trials met the inclusion criteria, of which 61 trials provided data for the meta-analysis. We defined high-quality articles as those with a low risk of bias in four or more domains; and only 10 (15.15%) articles were of high quality. Compared with the controls, acupuncture-related therapies with conventional medication achieved a benefit in the primary outcomes of UPDRS (motor subscore: −3.90, −4.33 to −3.49, P < 0.01; total score: −7.37 points, −8.91 to −5.82, P < 0.001; activities of daily living subscore: −3.96, −4.96 to −2.95, P < 0.01). For the subgroup difference test among the effects of different acupuncture methods, significant differences existed in outcomes with the UPDRS-III, UPDRS-I, UPDRS-IV, and PDQ-39 scores and Madopar dosage, while non-significant differences existed with the UPDRS-total, UPDRS-II, HAMD, and MMSE scores.Conclusions: Acupuncture-related therapies combined with conventional medication may benefit individuals with PD. Our review findings should be considered with caution because of the methodological weaknesses in the included trials. Future, large randomized trials of acupuncture-related therapies for PD with high methodological quality are warranted.Systematic Review Registration: Identifier CRD42021228110.

Objective: This study aimed to systematically evaluate the effects of mind–body exercise on global cognitive function, depression, sleep disorders, fatigue level, and quality of life (QOL) in a Parkinson’s disease (PD) population.Methods: Total six English and Chinese databases were searched for articles published up to May 2021. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating mind–body excises on non-motor symptoms of PD were included. The Cochrane risk of bias tool was used to assess the methodological quality, and we defined high-quality studies as having a low risk of bias in four or more domains. Global cognitive function was considered the primary outcome and was assessed using the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA). The secondary outcomes included QOL, fatigue, depression, and sleep quality, which were measured using the Parkinson’s Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39), 16-item Parkinson’s Disease Fatigue Scale (PFS-16), Beck Depression Inventory (BDI), and revised Parkinson’s Disease Sleep Scale (PDSS-2), respectively. Subgroup analyses were conducted for global cognitive function and QOL to assess the optimal treatment measure across the various mind–body exercises.Results: Fourteen RCTs with 404 patients were finally included in the meta-analysis. Eight (57.14%) studies were of high quality. The pooled results showed that mind–body exercises generally had a significant advantage over the control intervention in improving global cognitive function (MD = 1.68; P = 0.0008). The dose subgroup analysis revealed that the low dose (60–120 min per week) and moderate dose (120–200 min per week) significantly increased MoCA scores compared with the control group (MD = 2.11, P = 0.01; MD = 1.27, P = 0.02, respectively). The duration subgroup analysis indicated a significant difference in the effect of the duration (6–10 and >15 weeks) on increasing MoCA scores compared with the control group (MD = 3.74, P < 0.00001; MD = 1.45, P = 0.01, respectively).Conclusion: Mind–body exercise may improve global cognitive function, sleep quality, and QOL in the PD population. In addition, low to moderate doses and appropriate durations significantly improved global cognitive function.Clinical Trial Registration: [www.ClinicalTrials.gov], identifier [CRD42021275522].

Objective: To evaluate the diagnostic performance of standard diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI), intravoxel incoherent motion (IVIM), and diffusion kurtosis imaging (DKI), for differentiating benign and malignant soft tissue tumors (STTs). Materials and methods: A thorough search was carried out to identify suitable studies published up to September 2020. The quality of the studies involved was evaluated using Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 (QUADAS-2). The pooled sensitivity (SEN), specificity (SPE), and summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curve were calculated using bivariate mixed effects models. A subgroup analysis was also performed to explore the heterogeneity. Results: Eighteen studies investigating 1319 patients with musculoskeletal STTs (malignant, n =623; benign, n =696) were enrolled. Thirteen standard DWI studies using the apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) showed that the pooled SEN and SPE of ADC were 0.80 (95% CI: 0.77-0.82) and 0.63 (95% CI: 0.60-0.67), respectively. The area under the curve (AUC) calculated from the SROC curve was 0.806. The subgroup analysis indicated that the percentage of myxoid malignant tumors, magnet strength, study design, and ROI placement were significant factors affecting heterogeneity. Four IVIM studies showed that the AUCs calculated from the SROC curves of the parameters ADC and D were 0.859 and 0.874, respectively. The AUCs for the IVIM parameters pseudo diffusion coefficient (D*) and perfusion fraction (f) calculated from the SROC curve were 0.736 and 0.573, respectively. Two DKI studies showed that the AUCs of the DKI parameter mean kurtosis (MK) were 0.97 and 0.89, respectively. Conclusion: The DWI-derived ADC value and the IVIM DWI-derived D value might be accurate tools for discriminating musculoskeletal STTs, especially for non-myxoid SSTs, using more than two b values, with maximal b value ranging from 600 to 800 s/mm 2 , additionally, a high-field strength (3.0 T) optimizes the diagnostic performance.

No abstract

Objectives: Investigating the efficacy and safety of noninvasive cerebellar stimulation in improving the balance and walking function of patients with stroke.Methods: We searched 7 databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) related to noninvasive cerebellar stimulation in the treatment of stroke. The Berg Balance Scale (BBS), 6-minute walk test (6MWT), and Barthel Index (BI) were used as the outcome indexes to evaluate balance, walking and activities of daily living (ADL). The quality of the research was evaluated using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool. A meta-analysis was performed to evaluate the difference between the noninvasive cerebellar stimulation and control groups. Heterogeneity tests were performed to assess differences in treatment effects across noninvasive cerebellar stimulation modalities. A sensitivity analysis was performed to evaluate the robustness of the results.Results: Seven studies were included, and 5 articles (71.43%) were rated as having a low risk of bias. Among the primary outcome indicators, 4 of the 7 articles were combined into the fixed effect model (I2 = 38%, P = .18). Compared with the control group, noninvasive cerebellar stimulation improved the BBS score, and the difference was statistically significant (mean difference [MD]: 3.00, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.10-5.40, P = .03); the sensitivity analysis showed that the statistical model was still stable after sequentially eliminating each article. Compared with the control group, noninvasive cerebellar stimulation improved the 6MWT results of patients with stroke (MD: 25.29, 95% CI: 4.86-45.73, P = .02). However, noninvasive cerebellar stimulation did not improve the BI (MD: 15.61, 95% CI: −7.91 to 39.13, P = .19). No safety problems or adverse reactions to noninvasive cerebellar stimulation were observed.Conclusions: Noninvasive cerebellar stimulation improves balance and walking function of patients with stroke, but its effect on ADL is uncertain. Due to the methodological weaknesses in the included trials, more RCTs are needed to confirm our conclusions.