Purpose: The relationship between changes in muscle size and strength may be affected by both measurement and statistical approaches, but their effects have not been fully considered or quantified. Therefore, the purpose of this investigation was to explore how different methods of measurement and analysis can affect inferences surrounding the relationship between hypertrophy and strength gain. Methods: Data from a previous study—in which participants performed eight weeks of elbow flexor training, followed by an eight-week period of detraining—were reanalyzed using different statistical models, including standard between-subject correlations, analysis of covariance, and hierarchical linear modeling. Results: The associative relationship between strength and hypertrophy is highly dependent upon both method/site of measurement and analysis; large differences in variance accounted for (VAF) by the statistical models were observed (VAF = 0–24.1%). Different sites and measurements of muscle size showed a range of correlations coefficients with one another (r = 0.326–0.945). Finally, exploratory analyses revealed moderate-to-strong relationships between within-individual strength-hypertrophy relationships and strength gained over the training period (ρ = 0.36–0.55). Conclusions: Methods of measurement and analysis greatly influence the conclusions that may be drawn from a given dataset. Analyses that do not account for inter-individual differences may underestimate the relationship between hypertrophy and strength gain, and different methods of assessing muscle size will produce different results. It is suggested that robust experimental designs and analysis techniques, which control for different mechanistic sources of strength gain and inter-individual differences (e.g., muscle moment arms, muscle architecture, activation, and normalized muscle force), be employed in future investigations.

Background Transjugular liver biopsy (TJLB) procedurally samples liver tissue through the internal jugular vein. It is indicated in the presence of coagulopathies and/or ascites. Aims This meta-analysis aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of TJLB in children. Methods A literature search of several databases was conducted from inception to August 2022. Eligible studies reported pediatric patients (< 18 years old) who underwent TJLB. The pooled proportion was analyzed using a random-effects model. This review was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42022354421). Results From 921 initial studies screened, eight met the eligibility criteria, with a total of 361 pediatric patients who underwent 374 TJLBs. All eight studies reported pooled rates of technical success at 99.1% (95% CI 0.982, 1.001; I² = 0%) and histological adequacy of sampling at 97.5% (95% CI 0.954, 0.995; I² = 27.66%). A total of 49 complications were reported across six studies, the most common being bleeding from the entry site (38.78%), fevers for less than 24 h (12.24%), red blood cells transfusion requirement (10.2%), supraventricular tachycardia (8.16%), and pain requiring analgesia (8.16%). Conclusion Pediatric TJLB demonstrates high rates of technical success and adequate liver core biopsy samples, with a low rate of complications. These results suggest that TJLB is an effective method for diagnostic yield and postprocedural outcomes, especially in patients with preexisting coagulopathies and ascites where percutaneous liver biopsy is contraindicated. Additional studies evaluating larger groups of pediatric patients may provide further support for the use of TJLB in this population.

This meta‐analysis investigated the effects of exercise on Visual Analog Scale (VAS) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores following vertebroplasty or kyphoplasty in osteoporotic fractures. A literature search of PubMed, EMBASE (Elsevier), CiNAHL, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Scopus, and Web of Science was conducted from database inception to October 6, 2022. Eligible studies reported osteoporosis patients over 18 years of age with a diagnosis of at least one vertebral fracture via radiography or clinical assessment. This review was registered in PROSPERO (ID: CRD42022340791). Ten studies met the eligibility criteria (n = 889). VAS scores at baseline were 7.75 (95% CI: 7.54, 7.97, I² = 76.11%). Following initiation of exercise, VAS scores at the endpoint of 12 months were 1.91 (95% CI: 1.53, 2.29, I² = 92.69%). ODI scores at baseline were 68.66 (95% CI: 56.19, 81.13, I² = 85%). Following initiation of exercise, ODI scores at the endpoint of 12 months were 21.20 (95% CI: 14.52, 27.87, I² = 99.30). A two‐arm analysis demonstrated improved VAS and ODI for the exercise group compared to non‐exercise control at 6 months (MD = −0.70, 95% CI: −1.08, −0.32, I² = 87% and MD = −6.48, 95% CI: −7.52, −5.44, I² = 46%, respectively) and 12 months (MD = −0.88, 95% CI: −1.27, −0.49, I² = 85% and MD = −9.62, 95% CI: −13.24, −5.99, I² = 93%). Refracture was the only adverse event reported and occurred almost twice as frequently in the non‐exercise group than in the exercise group. Exercise rehabilitation post vertebral augmentation is associated with improved pain and functionality, particularly after 6 months of exposure, and may reduce refracture rate.