Background/Objectives: Rotator cuff disease (RCD) is one of the most common causes of shoulder dysfunction, often resulting in pain, limited range of motion (ROM), and reduced function. Mulligan Mobilization with Movement (MWM) has been proposed as an effective adjunct to conventional therapy by correcting positional faults and improving joint mechanics. However, the overall evidence in RCD remains inconclusive. This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the efficacy of Mulligan mobilization combined with conventional therapy versus conventional therapy alone on pain, functionality, ROM, joint position sense, and quality of life (QoL) in patients with RCD. Methods: A comprehensive literature search was carried out in PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library from database inception to 12 October 2025, with no restrictions on publication year. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared Mulligan mobilization combined with conventional therapy against conventional therapy alone in individuals with rotator cuff-related pain. The predefined outcomes were pain intensity, range of motion (ROM), quality of life (QoL), joint position sense, and functional performance. All statistical analyses were conducted using R version 4.3.1. Heterogeneity was assessed using the I² statistic and the Cochrane Q test. Pooled mean differences (MDs) were calculated using the Inverse Variance approach with a restricted maximum-likelihood (REML) random-effects model. The review protocol was prospectively registered in PROSPERO (ID: CRD420251166854). Results: Four RCTs met the eligibility criteria and were included in the meta-analysis, comprising a total of 160 participants. Of these, 80 (50%) received Mulligan mobilization in combination with conventional therapy (mean age: 51 years; mean proportion of females: 45%). In the pooled analysis, Mulligan mobilization significantly improved pain at rest (MD −1.19; 95% CI [−1.64; −0.74]; p = 0.01; I² = 0%), pain during activity (MD −2.25; 95% CI [−3.18; −1.31]; p = 0.01; I² = 67%), functionality (MD −14.71; 95% CI [−20.10; −9.33]; p = 0.01; I² = 51%), ROM (MD 19.92; 95% CI [11.25; 28.39]; p = 0.01; I² = 58%), and joint position sense (MD −3.31; 95% CI [−6.22; −0.40]; p = 0.03; I² = 80%) compared with conventional therapy alone. No significant difference was observed for QoL (MD 10.58; 95% CI [−3.18; 24.34]; p = 0.13; I² = 76%). Conclusions: Mulligan mobilization combined with conventional therapy provides significant improvements in pain, functionality, ROM, and joint position sense in RCD. However, no statistically significant differences were observed in QoL between the groups. Integration of this technique into rehabilitation protocols may enhance clinical outcomes and functional recovery.

Background: Tranexamic acid (TXA) is increasingly used to reduce perioperative blood loss during scoliosis surgery; however, its effectiveness in pediatric patients with non-idiopathic scoliosis remains underexplored. Unlike adolescent idiopathic scoliosis, non-idiopathic scoliosis is frequently associated with neuromuscular, syndromic, or other underlying disorders that increase surgical complexity and may limit the generalizability of evidence from idiopathic populations. This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated the impact of TXA on surgical outcomes in pediatric patients undergoing posterior spinal fusion for non-idiopathic scoliosis. Methods: This analysis encompassed five studies (comprising one randomized controlled trial and four observational studies) involving a total of 230 patients (TXA group: 98; control group: 132). The primary outcomes were estimated blood loss and the volume of packed red blood cells (PRBCs) transfused. Secondary outcomes included total transfusion amount, operation duration, complications, cell salvage application, preoperative hematocrit levels and blood loss percentage. A random-effects model was used. Mean difference (MD) was used for continuous outcomes, and odds ratio (OR) for dichotomous variables, both with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Results: The use of TXA during posterior fusion surgery showed to be of benefit and was associated with significantly less estimated blood loss (p < 0.0001) and cell salvage volume transfusion (p < 0.0001). The remaining secondary outcomes did not show significant differences when compared with the control. Conclusion: Current evidence suggests that TXA is an effective blood conservation strategy in pediatric patients undergoing posterior spinal fusion for non-idiopathic scoliosis. However, the available evidence remains limited, particularly regarding perioperative complications, and further high-quality prospective studies are required to strengthen the evidence base. Clinical relevance: Exploring the use of TXA in scoliosis surgery has the potential to influence the standard of care, especially if associated with significantly more desirable post-operative and long-term outcomes.