This meta-analysis examined the effect of probiotics on outcomes associated with cardiovascular disease risk factors (high blood pressure, overweight BMI, high cholesterol and triglycerides, elevated HbA1c and serum glucose). All randomised controlled trials publish on PubMed, Scopus, Embase, Grey Literature and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) from 1990 to 2020 were systematically searched. The PEDro scale was used to assess the quality of studies. A total of 34 studies with 2177 adults were selected for inclusion in the analysis. The mean difference and effect size with a 95% confidence interval (CI) were analysed for the pooled results. Statistically significant pooled effects of probiotics were found in the reduction of systolic and diastolic blood pressure, total cholesterol, LDL-C, serum glucose, HbA1C and BMI; and elevation of HDL-C. No significant changes were observed in the outcome of triglycerides. Subgroup analysis revealed statistically significant effects of probiotics on the treatment of risk factors, with results favouring longer duration of treatment (> 1.5 months), use of alternate formulations (kefir and powder), higher dosage of probiotics (> 1.0 × 10 9 CFU), lower rate of study attrition (< 15%), double blinding of the study, diabetic patients and female populations. In summary, our meta-analysis showed a highly significant reduction in SBP, DBP associated with type 2 diabetes and in patients with diabetes mellitus, milk intake and more than 1.5 months duration intake. The effect on the reduction of total cholesterol LDL-C was associated with diabetes, hypertension, hypercholesterolemia, yoghurt intake and less than 1.5 months probiotic intake. The effect on the reduction of glucose and HbA1c was associated with diabetes, small dosage of probiotics, milk type and less than 1.5 months duration intake. Additionally, probiotic supplement had a beneficial effect in reducing BMI associated with obesity, higher dosage intake of probiotics and more than 1.5 months duration of intake.

Purpose Adductor canal block has emerged as a favourable element of multimodal analgesia regimens for total knee arthroplasty, due to the exclusive sensory blockade it provides. However, it is controversial as to whether a single shot or continuous technique adductor canal block is superior. This meta-analysis examined the effect of both these techniques on pain management associated with total knee arthroplasty. Methods All randomised controlled trials published on Cochrane Library, PubMed, and EMBASE, Scopus, and PsychINFO were systematically searched. The PEDro scale was used to assess the quality of studies. A total of 8 articles, 2 of which were split by subgroup analyses to create 10 studies, with 828 adults were selected for inclusion in the analysis. The mean difference and effect size with a 95% confidence interval (CI) were analysed for the pooled results. Results Statistically significant pooled effects of analgesia technique in favour of catheter use were found in the reduction of pain scores and VAS scores, and total rescue analgesia dosage. No significant changes were observed in the hospital stay time. Subgroup analysis revealed that patients with BMI 30 or more reported higher pain scores than those with BMI below 30. Conclusion Based upon studies that are currently available, our meta-analysis appears to demonstrate that continuous administration of analgesia through an adductor canal catheter provides greater pain reduction in total knee arthroplasty than single shot analgesia. Despite these current findings, future studies with larger sample sizes and greater control of study parameters are required to confirm the current findings.