ObjectiveDietary supplements and alternative therapies are commercialized as a panacea for obesity/weight gain as a result of the minimal regulatory requirements in demonstrating efficacy. These products may indirectly undermine the value of guideline‐driven obesity treatments. Included in this study is a systematic review of the literature of purported dietary supplements and alternative therapies for weight loss.MethodsA systematic review was conducted to evaluate the efficacy of dietary supplements and alternative therapies for weight loss in participants aged ≥18 years. Searches of Medline (PubMed), Cochrane Library, Web of Science, CINAHL, and Embase (Ovid) were conducted. Risk of bias and results were summarized qualitatively.ResultsOf the 20,504 citations retrieved in the database search, 1,743 full‐text articles were reviewed, 315 of which were randomized controlled trials evaluating the efficacy of 14 purported dietary supplements, therapies, or a combination thereof. Risk of bias and sufficiency of data varied widely. Few studies (n = 52 [16.5%]) were classified as low risk and sufficient to support efficacy. Of these, only 16 (31%) noted significant pre/post intergroup differences in weight (range: 0.3‐4.93 kg).ConclusionsDietary supplements and alternative therapies for weight loss have a limited high‐quality evidence base of efficacy. Practitioners and patients should be aware of the scientific evidence of claims before recommending use.

Coronavirus disease‐2019 (COVID‐19) pandemic is the biggest global health threat in the 21st century. We describe a case of a patient with suspected COVID‐19 who needed urgent coronary artery interrogation, in which we utilized robotic assistance to minimize the risk of exposure to COVID‐19 and reduced personal protective equipment needed by the procedural team.

The use of robotic assistance in endovascular interventions may facilitate smoother procedures with fewer device manipulations, improve precision and accuracy of device deployment, and reduce exposure to fluoroscopic radiation. We used the CorPath GRX Robotic System for carotid balloon angioplasty and stent placement in a patient with limited surgical options.

No abstract

The efficacy of renal sympathetic denervation (RSD) in the treatment of uncontrolled hypertension (HTN) remains uncertain. A systematic review of randomized controlled trials was performed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of RSD for resistant HTN. PubMed, EMBASE, MEDLINE, Cochrane, Directory of Open Access Journals, CINAHL, and Google Scholar were searched from January 01, 2001, through July 30, 2020. Randomized controlled trials comparing RSD with the sham procedure for uncontrolled HTN were selected. The primary efficacy outcome was the reduction in ambulatory systolic blood pressure. We used random-effects models. Nine prospective clinical trials met the inclusion criteria. The ReSet and Symplicity HTN-3 Trial showed no significant changes because of discrepancies in complete circumferential ablation during RSD. The Relief study, The Radiance HTN solo, and the SPYRAL HTN OFF medical trials showed a significant reduction in systolic blood pressure in the group that had undergone the intervention compared with the sham group attributed to rigorous trial design. In conclusion, our systematic review suggests that efficacy of RSD seems to be superior to sham-controlled interventions provided circumferential denervation is performed. However, difference in efficacy is marginal.