Pain management and prevention of muscle atrophy are key rehabilitation challenges following arthroscopic rotator cuff repair (ARCR). Despite the potential muscle atrophy-reducing and analgesic effects of neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES), evidence supporting its use in post-ARCR rehabilitation remains limited. This study aimed to evaluate the clinical efficacy of home-based NMES intervention for promoting early functional recovery after ARCR. A total of 63 ARCR patients were randomized into the NMES group (n = 32) and MENS (Micro-current electrical nerve stimulation) group (n = 31), both receiving a 6-week home-based intervention (5 sessions weekly, 30 min per session) following surgery. The NMES group used neuromuscular electrical stimulation equipment, while the MENS group used identical devices without current output. The primary outcome was the Constant-Murley Shoulder (CMS) score, with secondary outcomes including resting and active visual analog scale (VAS) pain scores, deltoid muscle thicknes, shoulder range of motion (ROM), muscle strength, and Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia scores. Assessments were conducted preoperatively, at 6 weeks, and 3 months postoperatively. At 6 weeks postoperatively, the NMES group exhibited a significantly higher CMS than the MENS group (76.10 ± 9.43 vs. 71.22 ± 9.2 p = 0.032), along with superior active pain relief (active VAS: 4.1 ± 0.9 vs. 3.4 ± 0.7 p = 0.003), greater forward flexion ROM (151.7 ± 11.3 vs. 141.8 ± 13.6 p = 0.003), and thicker deltoid muscle thickness (1.02 ± 0.06 vs. 0.91 ± 0.06 p < 0.001). The NMES group also demonstrated lower TSK scores (31.06 ± 6.69 vs. 35.42 ± 7.76 p = 0.020) and greater adductor strength (40.9 ± 16.7 vs. 33.5 ± 12.2 p = 0.048). By 3 months postoperatively, intergroup differences persisted only in abductor ROM, muscle strength, and deltoid thickness, with no significant disparities in other measured indices. Home-based NMES effectively accelerates functional recovery, enhances pain management, and mitigates kinesiophobia within 6 weeks post-ARCR, with partial maintenance of these benefits at the 3-month follow-up. This intervention offers a safe adjunctive strategy for early rehabilitation, particularly suited to patients requiring rapid functional restoration; however, long-term efficacy remains to be confirmed.To evaluate the acceptability of MyCheck for asymptomatic sexually transmissible infections (STIs) testing. (Chinese Clinical Trial Registry ( https://www.chictr.org.cn ), No. ChiCTR2400088194, 13/08/2024)

Objective The present study aimed to identify the relationship of α‐2‐macroglobulin and microvascular vessel pathology with steroid‐induced femoral head necrosis in the Southeast Chinese population. Methods This study enrolled 40 patients diagnosed with steroid‐induced necrosis of the femoral head. Patients had various stages of femoral head necrosis. The differential expression of serum proteins and mRNA from patients with steroid‐induced necrosis of the femoral head (SINFH) and healthy volunteers was analyzed by western blot and quantitative polymerase chain reaction (QT‐PCR). The pathological change in osteocyte necrosis was indicated by hematoxylin and eosin stain and immunohistochemistry. Results Hematoxylin and eosin stain showed histopathology changes in the necrotic area of patients with steroid‐induced INFH: bone trabeculae were fewer and thinner, became broken, fragmented and structurally disordered; intraosseous adipose cells became enlarged; the arrangement of the osteoblasts became irregular; and vacant bone lacunae increased. QT‐PCR showed significantly lower levels of α‐2‐macroglobulin in the serum of patients with SINFH than in controls (P < 0.05). Immunohistochemical staining and western blotting demonstrated that the expression of α‐2‐macroglobulin was significantly decreased in the necrotic area of SINFH patients (P < 0.05). Conclusion The α‐2‐macroglobulin may be associated with the pathology of SINFH. The multiple pathological reactions occur in SINFH and α‐2‐macroglobulin may serve as a potential biomarker for the diagnosis of SINFH or a promising therapeutic target.

A decrease in proprioceptive sensation occurs after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR). However, there is relatively little research on proprioceptive rehabilitation, compared with studies on muscle strength and range of motion (ROM). The purpose of this study was to assess the effect of supplementing a traditional rehabilitation program with proprioceptive training in ACLR patients to improve knee function, psychological readiness, pain and dynamic balance in the early postoperative period. This was a randomized, parallel-group, controlled trial in which 48 patients were enrolled in either proprioceptive group (n = 24) or control group (n = 24) from the first week up to 12 th weeks of the operation. Participants in the control group received a traditional ACLR rehabilitation program, while the proprioceptive group received additional proprioceptive training in addition to the traditional ACLR rehabilitation program. The outcome measures included the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC), the ACL Return to Sport After Injury scale (ACL-RSI), the visual analog scale (VAS), and the Y-Balance Test before and after surgery. We found that, at 12 weeks post—surgery, patients in the proprioceptive group had significantly higher IKDC scores compared to those in the control group (74.8 ± 4.3 vs 71.6 ± 5.2, P = 0.04). At the 12 th week, the ACL-RSI score of patients in the proprioceptive group was greater than that of the control group (68.2 ± 9.2 vs 62.8 ± 8.2, P = 0.04). The Y balance comprehensive index (YBCI) in the proprioceptive group of patients was greater than that in the control group (94.5% ± 3.3% vs 91.5% ± 4.1%, P = 0.01) at 12 weeks after surgery. No statistically significant differences in the VAS score were found between the two groups. Proprioceptive training is superior to conventional training in terms of knee function, psychological readiness and dynamic balance 12 weeks after ACL reconstruction surgery, but has no statistically significant effect on pain. (Chinese Clinical Trial Registry ( https://www.chictr.org.cn ), No. ChiCTR2400087631, 7/31/2024).