Background: Cancer rehabilitation represents a series of measures adopted for the recovery of psychological, emotional, social, and financial functioning in the case of cancer patients. The purpose of this study is to identify the main elements of therapeutic management in the field of medical rehabilitation, as well as integrative, complementary medicine and holistic approaches that can be performed on the oncological patient. Methods: This systematic literature review follows the methodology outlined in the “Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis” (“PRISMA”) statement, which is an internationally recognized and widely accepted standard. Results: Active rehabilitative therapies offer therapeutic options for improving the functioning and quality of life of oncological patients; these therapies comprehensively address both the physical and psychological aspects of the disease. This review also includes the latest novelties and nanotechnologies applied in oncological rehabilitation, for example, drugs (or supplements) inspired by nature. Conclusions: Physical and rehabilitation medicine, mostly using stimulating therapeutic methods, was recently added to the list of contraindications in the management of oncological patients, both as an approach to the pathological concept itself and as an approach to the main clinical consequences and functional aspects of oncological therapies. Integrative, complementary medicine presents an important therapeutic resource in the case of oncological patients. Advanced studies are needed in the future to further ascertain the role of these therapies.

Background: Chronic low back pain markedly impairs quality of life and imposes a significant economic burden on public health. The complex pathophysiology of chronic low back pain arises from the complex anatomical configuration of the lumbar region, which includes a diverse array of structures. Consequently, etiologies may involve intervertebral disc degeneration, facet joint osteoarthritis, spinal stenosis, spondylosis, and spondylolisthesis. Therapeutic interventions for chronic low back pain are equally varied, ranging from pharmacological treatments to physiotherapy, kinetotherapy, balneotherapy, and image-guided local injectable procedures such as prolotherapy. Prolotherapy is a regenerative injection technique designed to stimulate the body’s healing processes by applying a regenerative treatment (typically dextrose), which aims to modulate neurogenic inflammation and diminish nociceptive signaling. Methods: A systematic review of the literature was performed in alignment with the PRISMA guidelines (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses). Studies published within the last ten years evaluating the effects of prolotherapy on pain reduction in individuals with chronic low back pain were included, following a search across six databases. Results: The review revealed several studies evaluating the influence of prolotherapy on pain in chronic low back pain patients. Findings were heterogeneous, with some studies indicating significant pain reduction and others showing minimal or no improvement. Conclusions: The current evidence regarding the efficacy of prolotherapy for pain relief in chronic low back pain remains inconclusive, highlighting the necessity for further in-depth research. Continued and updated investigations into prolotherapy’s role are imperative for enhancing the quality of life of affected patients.

Background and Objectives: Despite their high prevalence, sarcopenia and sarcopenic obesity remain underdiagnosed worldwide, significantly impacting the health and quality of life of aging individuals. Due to their multifactorial nature, the current management strategies do not address their underlying pathogenesis. This systematic review aims to identify single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) associated with sarcopenia and/or sarcopenic obesity in humans. Materials and Methods. This systematic literature review followed the “Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA)” guidelines and the protocol registered in PROSPERO. Extensive research was performed in six databases (PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Scopus, ScienceDirect, and SpringerLink) using keywords such as “sarcopenia”, “sarcopenic obesity”, “single nucleotide polymorphisms”, “SNPs”, and “genetic variants”. The Q-Genie and ROBINS-E tools were utilized to assess the quality of the included studies. Results: The final analysis included 12 studies, which were classified as good-quality according to the Q-Genie assessment and indicated a low to moderate risk of bias according to the ROBINS-E evaluation, collectively identifying 43 SNPs significantly associated with sarcopenia or sarcopenic obesity. Specifically, 24 SNPs were linked to sarcopenia, while 19 were associated with sarcopenic obesity. Conclusions: Understanding the implications of SNPs provides valuable insights into individual susceptibility and the variability observed across populations, potentially leading to more targeted and effective diagnostic and treatment strategies. Advancing clinical practice requires ongoing research into the genetic aspects of sarcopenia and sarcopenic obesity.

Background and Objectives: Parkinson’s disease is the second most common neurodegenerative disorder after Alzheimer’s disease, and its incidence increases with age, being particularly high in people over 70 years of age. For patients with this condition, medical rehabilitation can have a profound impact, helping to improve mobility, preserve functional autonomy, and enhance quality of life. Focal vibration stimulation is a promising, well-tolerated, and easy-to-apply method with potential to facilitate motor activity and support the motor learning process, making it also useful in gait reeducation for patients with various neurological conditions. This systematic review aims to analyze the existing scientific evidence on the effectiveness of focal muscle vibration therapy in managing symptoms of Parkinson’s disease. Materials and Methods: This systematic review of the literature was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, and the protocol was registered in PROSPERO under the protocol registration number CRD420251120737. Searches were conducted in five databases (PubMed, PEDro, ScienceDirect, Cochrane Library, Web of Science). The selection criteria targeted original clinical studies, published in English between 2010 and the present, that investigated focal muscle vibration therapy in patients with Parkinson’s disease and were fully available, excluding review papers, meta-analyses, books, and articles inaccessible in full text. Version 2 of the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials (RoB 2) was used to assess the quality of the included studies. Results: The results of the studies were interpreted individually for each study, and the main information was synthesized in a comparative table to facilitate analysis. The final analysis included five studies that investigated the effects of focal muscle vibration in patients with Parkinson’s disease. The results suggest that this form of stimulation may offer benefits for patients with gait disorders, improving balance and stability. Among the study’s limitations are the small number of included articles (n = 5) and the restriction to English-language publications, which may limit the applicability of the results. Conclusions: Given the promising results, focal muscle vibration therapy could represent a useful option in the management of Parkinson’s disease. Integrating this method into rehabilitation plans could bring significant functional benefits, but further studies are needed to confirm its long-term effectiveness and to establish standardized application protocols. No external funding was received for the conduct of this review.

Background and Objectives: Low back pain (LBP) represents a major cause of disability worldwide, with a significant impact on quality of life and functional capacity. Standard physiotherapy is widely used for LBP, whereas comparative short-term evidence on balneotherapy and prolotherapy remains limited. This study aimed to compare clinical outcomes across therapeutic approaches in patients with LBP. Materials and Methods: This non-randomized, three-group interventional cohort study included adult patients diagnosed with LBP lasting more than three months and presenting a baseline Visual Analog Scale (VAS) score ≥ 4. 84 patients were allocated to one of three treatment groups: standard physiotherapy (CG) (25 patients), balneotherapy plus physiotherapy (BG) (28 patients), or prolotherapy (PG) (31 patients). Outcome measures included pain intensity, functional disability, lumbar mobility, quality of life, and psychological status. This clinical study has been officially registered on ClinicalTrials.gov under the identifier NCT07399145. Results: Statistical analyses were performed to assess within- and between-group differences over time. At the 4-week follow-up, all three treatment groups showed significant improvements compared to baseline in pain intensity (VAS; p < 0.001 for PG, BG, and CG) and lumbar mobility (Schober test; p < 0.001 for PG, BG, and CG), and functional disability (RMDQ; p < 0.001 for PG, p = 0.027 for BG, and p = 0.016 for CG). Between-group analyses at T1 revealed significant differences for RMDQ, ODI, Schober, and EQ-5D-5L. In contrast, no significant intergroup differences were observed for VAS, PPT-RS, PPT-LS, total PPT, HADS-A, HADS-D, BDI-II, or PHQ-9. Conclusions: All evaluated interventions improved clinical, functional, and psychological outcomes in patients with LBP. Prolotherapy showed a pattern of more consistent improvements, particularly in disability, spinal mobility, and health-related quality of life. These findings should be interpreted cautiously, given the non-randomized design and baseline differences between groups. Further randomized studies with larger samples and longer follow-up are warranted to confirm these results.