Migraine is a frequent neurological condition manifested by several episodes of headache. Calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) has been shown to play a key role in the pathophysiology of migraine. Galcanezumab is a monoclonal antibody that binds CGRP and inhibits its action, without affecting the CGRP receptor. The aim of this study is to carry out a systematic review and meta-analysis of all randomized placebo-controlled trials that evaluated the efficacy of galcanezumab (120 mg or 240 mg) for the management of migraine. We screened four databases (PubMed, SCOPUS, Embase, and Cochrane Central) from inception to October 10, 2020. Studies meeting the following criteria were included: (i) Patients: individuals with migraine, (ii) Intervention: galcanezumab at a dose of 120 mg or 240 mg, (iii) Comparator: placebo, (iv) Outcomes: prespecified efficacy and safety outcomes, and (v) Study design: randomized placebo-controlled trials. Efficacy outcomes included change in migraine headache days (MHDs), change in MHDs with acute medication use, patient global impression of severity (PGI-S) score, migraine-specific quality of life role function-restrictive domain (MSQ RF-R) score, and migraine disability assessment (MIDAS) score. Safety outcomes included frequency of injection-site pain, nasopharyngitis, and upper respiratory tract infection (URTI). Moreover, we used the Cochrane Collaboration's risk of bias tool to assess the risk of bias of the included studies. Review Manager Software, version 5.4.1, was used for statistical analysis. Mean difference and risk ratio with 95% confidence interval were used to analyze continuous and dichotomous outcomes, respectively. We used the fixed-effects and random-effects models to analyze homogeneous and heterogeneous data, respectively. A total of six studies comprising 4,023 patients were included in this systematic review and meta-analysis. When compared to placebo, both doses of galcanezumab were highly effective in decreasing MHDs (p<0.001), reducing MHDs with acute medication use (p<0.001), and improving the PGI-S score (p<0.001). On the other hand, MSQ RF-R and MIDAS scores were significantly enhanced only in the 240-mg dose group (p<0.001). With regard to side effects, the rates of injection-site pain and nasopharyngitis did not substantially differ between galcanezumab (inclusive of 120 mg and 240 mg) and placebo groups. Nonetheless, when compared to placebo, galcanezumab 120 mg, but not galcanezumab 240 mg, substantially correlated with a higher rate of URTI. Galcanezumab is clinically safe and efficient for the management of migraine, and the use of a higher dose increases its efficacy. Future research directions should be geared toward determining the optimal dose of galcanezumab in the management of patients with migraine. Moreover, head-to-head comparative studies between galcanezumab and other related anti-CGRP receptor monoclonal antibodies are warranted.

Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) rupture is a common and debilitating knee injury that can significantly impair knee function and stability. The optimal management of ACL injuries remains a topic of ongoing debate, with two primary treatment approaches being surgical reconstruction and adequate rehabilitation. The aim of this study is to compare the knee function and stability outcomes between these two treatment modalities, shedding light on their respective effectiveness. We utilized Scopus, PubMed, Cochrane Database, MEDLINE, and Web of Science from inception until April 20, 2022. We utilized the Cochrane risk of bias tool for quality assessment. The following outcomes were assessed: Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) Subjective Knee score, Lysholm score, the occurrence of the knee giving way, Tegner score, KT1000, Lachman test, pivot shift test, SF-36 score to assess the quality of life, and incidence of reinjury and reoperation. We included a total of six trials with a population sample size of 691 patients, which were divided into surgical versus non-surgical groups, accounting for 348 and 343 patients, respectively. The pooled estimate demonstrated that the surgical reconstruction was associated with a significant increase in the IKDC score (MD = 7.49 [2.04, 12.94], (P = 0.007)), and KOOS score was significant in the reconstruction cohort (MD = 5.87 [1.64, 10.09], (P = 0.007)). The incidences of reoperation (RR = 0.43 [0.20, 0.91], (P = 0.03)), reinjury (RR = 0.49 [0.27, 0.88], (P = 0.02)), and occurrence of the knee giving way (RR = 0.19 [0.08, 0.49], (P = 0.005)) were significantly decreased in the surgical cohort. There is no significant difference between both cohorts regarding the Lysholm score (1.27 [−1.39, 3.93], (P = 0.35)). The findings of this comprehensive analysis indicate that early reconstruction does not demonstrate clear superiority over rehabilitation alone in terms of knee function, Lysholm score, and Tegner score among patients with ACL rupture. However, early reconstruction does exhibit a substantial reduction in the incidence of reinjury, reoperation, and knee giving way, suggesting potential benefits in terms of stability outcomes. These results underscore the importance of considering individual patient characteristics and preferences in treatment decision-making.

Background: Post-operative pain management is essential for optimizing recovery, patient comfort, and satisfaction. Peripheral nerve blockade, or lumbar plexus block (LPB), has been widely used for analgesia and regional anesthesia. This study explored the existing literature to determine the efficacy of continuous lumbar plexus blockade in managing post-operative pain following hip or femur surgery. Methods: Reviewers comprehensively searched electronic databases to identify peer-reviewed scholarly articles reporting the efficacy of lumbar plexus block in managing post-operative pain after orthopedic surgery. The potential articles were carefully selected and assessed for the risk of bias using the Cochrane Collaboration Risk of Bias assessment tool. Data were systematically extracted and analyzed. Results: The literature search yielded 206 articles, 20 of which were randomized controlled trials. Lumbar plexus block demonstrated superior pain relief compared to conventional pain management approaches like general anesthetics. In addition, LPB reduced patients’ overall opioid consumption compared to controls, reduced adverse effects, and enhanced functional recovery, which underlines the broader positive impact of meticulous pain management. More patients could walk more than 40 feet after the second day post-operatively among the lumbar plexus group (14.7%) compared to the continuous femoral group (1.3%). Other parameters, including cortisol levels and hemodynamic stability, were evaluated, showing comparable outcomes. Conclusions: Lumbar plexus block is effective in pain management after orthopedic surgery, as shown by the lower pain scores and less opioid consumption. Additionally, patient satisfaction was relatively higher in LPB-treated patients compared to other approaches like general anesthesia.