Background: Chronic Inflammatory Demyelinating Polyneuropathy (CIDP) presents significant treatment challenges due to its chronic nature, varied clinical presentations, and rarity. Subcutaneous immunoglobulin (SCIG) has emerged as a maintenance therapy, offering potential advantages in administration and patient experience over the previously recognized intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG). Methods: We included all clinical studies involving CIDP patients treated with SCIG from eleven databases up to March 2024. Results: 50 clinical studies were included in the systematic review, with 22 involved in the meta-analysis. These studies offer clinical data on around 1400 CIDP patients. Almost all studies considered SCIG a maintenance therapy, with the majority of results suggesting it as a viable substitute that may offer comparable or enhanced advantages. Studies covered aspects such as efficacy, safety, quality of life, practicality, economic evaluation, and patient preference. Meta-analysis showed SCIG significantly improved muscle strength and sensory function, had fewer and milder side effects, reduced relapse rates, and received a strong preference. Conclusions: Findings suggest that SCIG for CIDP maintenance not only provides a more feasible alternative, with economic evaluations showing considerable cost reductions over time, and patient preference for SCIG being pronounced, but may also deliver comparable or superior health outcomes. Ongoing research lines on formulations, techniques, and direct comparative studies are critical to further illuminate, enhance, and expand SCIG's role in treatment.

To evaluate the safety and efficacy of Edaravone-Dexborneol as a neuroprotective agent in patients with acute ischemic stroke (AIS). We conducted a comprehensive search in PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane CENTRAL until January 22, 2026, including clinical trials and observational studies comparing Edaravone-Dexborneol with Edaravone monotherapy, standard treatment, and placebo. Data on functional recovery (Modified Rankin Scale [mRS], National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale [NIHSS], Barthel Index [BI]), safety outcomes, and mortality were extracted. A random effects model was used for statistical analysis. Overall, 13 studies (5 cohort studies and 8 randomized controlled trials) involving 7,846 patients were included, demonstrating that Edaravone-Dexborneol significantly improved 90-day mRS scores (0-1) compared with Edaravone alone (RD: 0.08, 95% CI: [0.03, 0.13], P = 0.001). When compared with standard treatment, NIHSS scores were significantly lower in the Edaravone-Dexborneol group (MD: -2.18, 95% CI: [-3.75, -0.62], P = 0.006), and no significant difference was observed in mRS (0-1) or the risk of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH). Safety outcomes showed a possible dose-dependent adverse event (AE), including hyperhomocysteinemia and hypokalemia. Edaravone-Dexborneol might be an effective treatment for improving functional recovery in patients with AIS and appears to have a relatively favorable safety profile. However, careful dosing is necessary to minimize AEs. Future research should focus on large-scale trials, long-term outcomes, and mechanistic studies to optimize treatment protocols.

Migraine, a chronic neurological disorder, imposes a significant burden on individuals and healthcare systems globally. This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated the efficacy and safety of atogepant in preventing episodic migraine (EM) in adults. A systematic search was conducted in four major databases (PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane CENTRAL) up to June 2024. The inclusion criteria targeted randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing atogepant to placebo or standard care in patients with EM. Statistical analyses were performed using Review Manager (RevMan) software. Four RCTs with 2,018 patients receiving atogepant and 761 patients receiving placebo or standard care were included. Atogepant significantly reduced monthly migraine days compared to placebo at 10 mg daily (mean difference [MD], –1.16 days; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], –1.60 to –0.73), 30 mg daily (MD, –1.15 days; 95% CI, –1.64 to –0.66), 60 mg daily (MD, –1.48 days; 95% CI: –2.36 to –0.61 days), 30 mg twice daily (MD, –1.30 days; 95% CI, –2.17 to –0.43), and 60 mg twice daily (MD, –1.20 days; 95% CI, –1.90 to –0.50). A ≥50% reduction in migraine days was frequently significantly achieved with atogepant across all dosages. Atogepant was generally well tolerated, though it was associated with higher incidence rates of constipation and nausea compared to placebo. Atogepant is an effective and well-tolerated option for preventing EM, offering patients a noninvasive oral alternative to injectable therapies. Further research is warranted to explore its long-term safety and efficacy in diverse patient populations and refine its role in this field.

Objective: To compare the accuracy, efficiency, and safety of robot-assisted versus frame-based stereoelectroencephalography (sEEG) in patients with drug-resistant epilepsy. Methods: In accordance with the PRISMA guidelines, a comprehensive literature search was conducted across four databases (PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane) up to September 2025. We included comparative studies that evaluated robot-assisted versus frame-based sEEG in patients with drug-resistant epilepsy. A random-effects model was applied to calculate the mean difference (MD) and risk ratio (RR) with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI). Results: Eight retrospective comparative cohort studies (758 patients) were included. Regarding accuracy, there was no significant difference between the robot-assisted and frame-based sEEG in depth error (MD: 0.24 mm; 95% CI: -0.79 to 1.27), radial error (MD: 0.07 mm; 95% CI: -0.70 to 0.84), entry point error (EPE; MD: -1.35 mm; 95% CI: -2.74 to 0.04), and target point error (MD: -0.02 mm; 95% CI: -0.57 to 0.53). Robot-assisted sEEG demonstrated a significantly shorter overall operation time (MD: -32.58 min; 95% CI: -47.92 to -17.24) and operation time per electrode (MD: -6.55 min; 95% CI: -8.08 to -5.02). However, pre-implantation time (MD: -1.46 min; 95% CI: -14.02 to 11.11) and electrode number per patient (MD: 0.86; 95% CI: -0.84 to 2.56) were comparable between groups. There was no significant difference between the two groups in overall complication rates, including hemorrhagic events, neurological deficits, infections, and technical complications. Conclusion: Robot-assisted sEEG significantly reduced both overall operation time and operation time per electrode compared with the frame-based group. Both techniques demonstrated comparable accuracy and safety profiles.