PURPOSE: Nausea and vomiting during pregnancy (NVP) are common symptoms in pregnancy. Although no definitive treatment option for NVP, pyridoxine (Vitamin B6) supplementation has been used widely. The present study aims to systematically evaluate the current evidence regarding pyridoxine for the treatment of NVP. METHODS: Data were obtained using a stepwise search process using keywords in the following online medical databases; PubMed®, Web of Science®, and Scopus® for studies published before 1st May 2021. Studies reporting intervention with pyridoxine supplementation alone and/or with other active substances were included. A meta-analysis was performed on the PUQE score and Rhode's score for nausea and vomiting. FINDINGS: Initial database searching indicated 548 potentially eligible articles, of which 18 studies satisfying the inclusion criteria were selected. Eight studies showed beneficial effects with pyridoxine alone as the supplementation, while six others found that the supplementation of pyridoxine in combination with another active substance had favourable effects. Supplementation of pyridoxine alone as well as combined treatment of pyridoxine with an active ingredient as the intervention significantly improved the symptoms of nausea according to Rhode's score [0.78 [95% CI: 0.26, 1.31; p = 0.003; I2 = 57%, p = 0.10)] and PUQE score [0.75 (95% CI: 0.28, 1.22; p = 0.002; I2 = 0%, p = 0.51)], respectively. CONCLUSION: Supplementation of pyridoxine alone as well as with an active ingredient demonstrated beneficial effects for women suffering from NVP. ※ 파이프라인이 API로 수집·저장한 초록 원문 그대로. 한국어 핵심요약은 이 텍스트만을 근거로 작성됩니다.

IMPORTANCE: Nausea and vomiting affects approximately 85% of pregnant women. The most severe form, hyperemesis gravidarum, affects up to 3% of women and can have significant adverse physical and psychological sequelae. OBJECTIVE: To summarize current evidence on effective treatments for nausea and vomiting in pregnancy and hyperemesis gravidarum. EVIDENCE REVIEW: Databases were searched to June 8, 2016. Relevant websites and bibliographies were also searched. Titles and abstracts were assessed independently by 2 reviewers. Results were narratively synthesized; planned meta-analysis was not possible because of heterogeneity and incomplete reporting of findings. FINDINGS: Seventy-eight studies (n = 8930 participants) were included: 67 randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and 11 nonrandomized studies. Evidence from 35 RCTs at low risk of bias indicated that ginger, vitamin B6, antihistamines, metoclopramide (for mild symptoms), pyridoxine-doxylamine, and ondansetron (for moderate symptoms) were associated with improved symptoms compared with placebo. One RCT (n = 86) reported greater improvements in moderate symptoms following psychotherapy (change in Rhodes score [range, 0 {no symptoms} to 40 {worst possible symptoms}], 18.76 [SD, 5.48] to 7.06 [SD, 5.79] for intervention vs 19.18 [SD, 5.63] to 12.81 [SD, 6.88] for comparator [P < .001]). For moderate-severe symptoms, 1 RCT (n = 60) suggested that pyridoxine-doxylamine combination taken preemptively reduced risk of recurrence of moderate-severe symptoms compared with treatment once symptoms begin (15.4% vs 39.1% [P < .04]). One RCT (n = 83) found that ondansetron was associated with lower nausea scores on day 4 than metoclopramide (mean visual analog scale [VAS] score, 4.1 [SD, 2.9] for ondansetron vs 5.7 [SD, 2.3] for metoclopramide [P = .023]) but not episodes of emesis (5.0 [SD, 3.1] vs 3.3 [SD, 3], respectively [P = .013]). Although there was no difference in trend in nausea scores over the 14-day study period, trend in vomiting scores was better in the ondansetron group (P = .042). One RCT (n = 159) found no difference between metoclopramide and promethazine after 24 hours (episodes of vomiting, 1 [IQR, 0-5] for metoclopramide vs 2 [IQR, 0-3] for promethazine [P = .81], VAS [0-10 scale] for nausea, 2 [IQR, 1-5] vs 2 [IQR, 1-4], respectively [P = .99]). Three RCTs compared corticosteroids with placebo or promethazine or metoclopramide in women with severe symptoms. Improvements were seen in all corticosteroid groups, but only a significant difference between corticosteroids vs metoclopramide was reported (emesis reduction, 40.9% vs 16.5% at day 2; 71.6% vs 51.2% at day 3; 95.8% vs 76.6% at day 7 [n = 40, P < .001]). For other interventions, evidence was limited. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: For mild symptoms of nausea and emesis of pregnancy, ginger, pyridoxine, antihistamines, and metoclopramide were associated with greater benefit than placebo. For moderate symptoms, pyridoxine-doxylamine, promethazine, and metoclopramide were associated with greater benefit than placebo. Ondansetron was associated with improvement for a range of symptom severity. Corticosteroids may be associated with benefit in severe cases. Overall the quality of evidence was low. ※ 파이프라인이 API로 수집·저장한 초록 원문 그대로. 한국어 핵심요약은 이 텍스트만을 근거로 작성됩니다.

CONTEXT: Premenstrual syndrome (PMS) affects approximately 48% of women of reproductive age worldwide. It can lead to functional impairment, lower quality of life, and decreased work productivity. Despite the availability of medical treatment options, women are seeking alternative interventions because of concerns of harmful side effects and limited evidence of efficacy associated with pharmacological treatments. To date, high-quality research investigating the effects of dietary and nutrient intervention on PMS is limited. OBJECTIVE: This systematic review investigated the effect of nutritional interventions on the psychological symptoms of PMS. DATA SOURCES: Five electronic databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published in English from inception to October 2022. Trials eligible for inclusion were nutritional intervention studies involving women of reproductive age that measured PMS-associated psychological outcomes. DATA EXTRACTION: Articles were selected using prespecified inclusion criteria. Data screening and extraction and risk-of-bias assessments were conducted by 3 independent reviewers using article screening software and the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool. DATA ANALYSIS: Thirty-two articles reporting on 31 RCTs involving 3254 participants, ranging in age from 15 to 50 years were included and narratively reviewed. Only 1 of the included studies had a low risk of bias. Treatment with vitamin B6, calcium, and zinc consistently had significant positive effects on the psychological symptoms of PMS. There was insufficient evidence to support the effects of vitamin B1, vitamin D, whole-grain carbohydrates, soy isoflavones, dietary fatty acids, magnesium, multivitamin supplementation, or PMS-specific diets. CONCLUSIONS: There is some evidence to support the use of nutritional interventions for improving psychological symptoms of PMS. However, more research using consistent protocols, procedures to minimize risk of bias, intention-to-treat analysis, and clearer reporting is required to provide conclusive nutritional recommendations for improving PMS-related psychological outcomes. ※ 파이프라인이 API로 수집·저장한 초록 원문 그대로. 한국어 핵심요약은 이 텍스트만을 근거로 작성됩니다.

BACKGROUND: Women juggling multiple roles in our complex society are increasingly experiencing psychological stress. Dietary supplementation to manage stress is widespread despite limited supporting evidence. A systematic review of the available literature was undertaken to investigate the efficacy of specific dietary supplements in managing female stress and anxiety. OBJECTIVES: To identify the impact of essential fatty acids (EFAs), B vitamins, vitamin C, magnesium and/or zinc, consumed as dietary supplements to the daily diet, on female stress and anxiety levels. INCLUSION CRITERIA TYPES OF PARTICIPANTS: Women aged 18 years and over, who had participated in a study where stress and/or anxiety were assessed. TYPES OF INTERVENTION(S): Dietary supplementation with EFAs, B vitamins, vitamin C, magnesium and/or zinc. TYPES OF COMPARATORS: Supplements, either alone or combined, were compared with either no intervention or placebo. TYPES OF STUDIES: Randomized controlled and pseudo-randomized trials were included. OUTCOMES: Stress and anxiety were assessed using self-report or physiological outcome measures. SEARCH STRATEGY: Published and unpublished studies were sought via MEDLINE (via PubMed), Embase, Scopus, CINAHL, PsycINFO, PsycARTICLES, MedNar, National Institute of Mental Health and the International Association for Women's Mental Health. METHODOLOGICAL QUALITY: Methodological quality was evaluated using standardized critical appraisal instruments from the Joanna Briggs Institute. DATA EXTRACTION: Data were extracted using the standardized data extraction instruments from the Joanna Briggs Institute. DATA SYNTHESIS: Due to heterogeneity of the included studies, narrative synthesis was performed. RESULTS: Fourteen studies were included in this review. Essential fatty acids were effective in reducing perceived stress and salivary cortisol levels during pregnancy and anxiety in premenstrual women, and anxiety during menopause in the absence of depression, but were ineffective when depression was disregarded. Disregarding the hormonal phase, EFAs were ineffective in reducing stress or anxiety in four groups of women. Combined magnesium and vitamin B6 supplementation reduced premenstrual anxiety but had no effect when used in isolation and did not affect stress in women suffering from dysmenorrhea when combined or used in isolation. Older women experienced anxiety reduction using vitamin B6, but not folate or vitamin B12. High-dose sustained-release vitamin C was effective in reducing anxiety and blood pressure in response to stress. CONCLUSION: The current review suggests that EFAs may be effective in reducing prenatal stress and salivary cortisol and may reduce anxiety during premenstrual syndrome and during menopause in the absence of depression. Magnesium and vitamin B6 may be effective in combination in reducing premenstrual stress, and vitamin B6 alone may reduce anxiety effectively in older women. High-dose sustained-release vitamin C may reduce anxiety and mitigate increased blood pressure in response to stress. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Essential fatty acids may be effective in reducing prenatal stress and salivary cortisol levels, and premenstrual or menopausal anxiety in the absence of depression. Combining magnesium and vitamin B6 may reduce premenstrual anxiety and vitamin B6 may reduce anxiety in older women. High-dose sustained-release vitamin C may reduce anxiety and mitigate increased blood pressure in response to stress. IMPLICATIONS FOR RESEARCH: Investigating supplementation in longer term studies is warranted and should include compliance testing, the use of inert substances as controls and reliable outcome measures. ※ 파이프라인이 API로 수집·저장한 초록 원문 그대로. 한국어 핵심요약은 이 텍스트만을 근거로 작성됩니다.

BACKGROUND: Cardiovascular disease, which includes coronary artery disease, stroke and peripheral vascular disease, is a leading cause of death worldwide. Homocysteine is an amino acid with biological functions in methionine metabolism. A postulated risk factor for cardiovascular disease is an elevated circulating total homocysteine level. The impact of homocysteine-lowering interventions, given to patients in the form of vitamins B6, B9 or B12 supplements, on cardiovascular events has been investigated. This is an update of a review previously published in 2009, 2013, and 2015. OBJECTIVES: To determine whether homocysteine-lowering interventions, provided to patients with and without pre-existing cardiovascular disease are effective in preventing cardiovascular events, as well as reducing all-cause mortality, and to evaluate their safety. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 2017, Issue 5), MEDLINE (1946 to 1 June 2017), Embase (1980 to 2017 week 22) and LILACS (1986 to 1 June 2017). We also searched Web of Science (1970 to 1 June 2017). We handsearched the reference lists of included papers. We also contacted researchers in the field. There was no language restriction in the search. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials assessing the effects of homocysteine-lowering interventions for preventing cardiovascular events with a follow-up period of one year or longer. We considered myocardial infarction and stroke as the primary outcomes. We excluded studies in patients with end-stage renal disease. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We performed study selection, 'Risk of bias' assessment and data extraction in duplicate. We estimated risk ratios (RR) for dichotomous outcomes. We calculated the number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB). We measured statistical heterogeneity using the I2 statistic. We used a random-effects model. We conducted trial sequential analyses, Bayes factor, and fragility indices where appropriate. MAIN RESULTS: In this third update, we identified three new randomised controlled trials, for a total of 15 randomised controlled trials involving 71,422 participants. Nine trials (60%) had low risk of bias, length of follow-up ranged from one to 7.3 years. Compared with placebo, there were no differences in effects of homocysteine-lowering interventions on myocardial infarction (homocysteine-lowering = 7.1% versus placebo = 6.0%; RR 1.02, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.95 to 1.10, I2 = 0%, 12 trials; N = 46,699; Bayes factor 1.04, high-quality evidence), death from any cause (homocysteine-lowering = 11.7% versus placebo = 12.3%, RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.06, I2 = 0%, 11 trials, N = 44,817; Bayes factor = 1.05, high-quality evidence), or serious adverse events (homocysteine-lowering = 8.3% versus comparator = 8.5%, RR 1.07, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.14, I2 = 0%, eight trials, N = 35,788; high-quality evidence). Compared with placebo, homocysteine-lowering interventions were associated with reduced stroke outcome (homocysteine-lowering = 4.3% versus comparator = 5.1%, RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.82 to 0.99, I2 = 8%, 10 trials, N = 44,224; high-quality evidence). Compared with low doses, there were uncertain effects of high doses of homocysteine-lowering interventions on stroke (high = 10.8% versus low = 11.2%, RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.22, I2 = 72%, two trials, N = 3929; very low-quality evidence).We found no evidence of publication bias. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: In this third update of the Cochrane review, there were no differences in effects of homocysteine-lowering interventions in the form of supplements of vitamins B6, B9 or B12 given alone or in combination comparing with placebo on myocardial infarction, death from any cause or adverse events. In terms of stroke, this review found a small difference in effect favouring to homocysteine-lowering interventions in the form of supplements of vitamins B6, B9 or B12 given alone or in combination comparing with placebo.There were uncertain effects of enalapril plus folic acid compared with enalapril on stroke; approximately 143 (95% CI 85 to 428) people would need to be treated for 5.4 years to prevent 1 stroke, this evidence emerged from one mega-trial.Trial sequential analyses showed that additional trials are unlikely to increase the certainty about the findings of this issue regarding homocysteine-lowering interventions versus placebo. There is a need for additional trials comparing homocysteine-lowering interventions combined with antihypertensive medication versus antihypertensive medication, and homocysteine-lowering interventions at high doses versus homocysteine-lowering interventions at low doses. Potential trials should be large and co-operative. ※ 파이프라인이 API로 수집·저장한 초록 원문 그대로. 한국어 핵심요약은 이 텍스트만을 근거로 작성됩니다.

INTRODUCTION: Vitamin B6 is a water-soluble vitamin that is naturally present in many foods and is accessible in many dietary supplements. The three natural forms are pyridoxine, pyridoxal, and pyridoxamine. Both vitamin B6 deficiency and high B6 intake have been described as risk factors for developing peripheral neuropathy (PN). The aim of this systematic review is to characterize and comprehensively describe B6-related PN. METHOD: A systematic, computer-based search was conducted using the PubMed database. Twenty articles were included in this review. RESULTS: Higher vitamin B6 levels, which usually occur following the taking of nutritional supplements, may lead to the development of a predominantly, if not exclusively, sensory neuropathy of the axonal type. After pyridoxine discontinuation, such patients subjectively report improved symptoms. However, although low vitamin B6 levels can be seen in patients suffering from peripheral neuropathy of various etiologies, there is no firm evidence that low B6 levels have a direct causal relationship with PN. Many studies suggest subjective improvement of neuropathy symptoms in patients suffering from PN of various etiologies after receiving B6 supplementation; however, no data about B6 administration as a monotherapy exist, only as part of a combination treatment, usually with other vitamins. Therefore, the potential therapeutic role of B6 cannot be confirmed to date. Supplementation with vitamin B6, even as part of a nutritional multivitamin supplement, has not been proven harmful at permitted daily doses in patients who already suffer from PN. CONCLUSION: Current scientific evidence supports a neurotoxic role of B6 at high levels. Although some studies suggest that low B6 is also a potential risk factor, further studies in this area are needed. ※ 파이프라인이 API로 수집·저장한 초록 원문 그대로. 한국어 핵심요약은 이 텍스트만을 근거로 작성됩니다.

Vitamin B-6 in the form of pyridoxine (PN) is commonly used by the general population. The use of PN-containing supplements has gained lots of attention over the past years as they have been related to the development of peripheral neuropathy. In light of this, the number of reported cases of adverse health effects due to the use of vitamin B-6 have increased. Despite a long history of study, the pathogenic mechanisms associated with PN toxicity remain elusive. Therefore, the present review is focused on investigating the mechanistic link between PN supplementation and sensory peripheral neuropathy. Excessive PN intake induces neuropathy through the preferential injury of sensory neurons. Recent reports on hereditary neuropathy due to pyridoxal kinase (PDXK) mutations may provide some insight into the mechanism, as genetic deficiencies in PDXK lead to the development of axonal sensory neuropathy. High circulating concentrations of PN may lead to a similar condition via the inhibition of PDXK. The mechanism behind PDXK-induced neuropathy is unknown; however, there is reason to believe that it may be related to γ-aminobutyric acid (GABA) neurotransmission. Compounds that inhibit PDXK lead to convulsions and reductions in GABA biosynthesis. The absence of central nervous system-related symptoms in PDXK deficiency could be due to differences in the regulation of PDXK, where PDXK activity is preserved in the brain but not in peripheral tissues. As PN is relatively impermeable to the blood-brain barrier, PDXK inhibition would similarly be confined to the peripheries and, as a result, GABA signaling may be perturbed within peripheral tissues, such as sensory neurons. Perturbed GABA signaling within sensory neurons may lead to excitotoxicity, neurodegeneration, and ultimately, the development of peripheral neuropathy. For several reasons, we conclude that PDXK inhibition and consequently disrupted GABA neurotransmission is the most plausible mechanism of toxicity. ※ 파이프라인이 API로 수집·저장한 초록 원문 그대로. 한국어 핵심요약은 이 텍스트만을 근거로 작성됩니다.

Carpal tunnel syndrome is the most common entrapment neuropathy, affecting approximately 3 to 6 percent of adults in the general population. Although the cause is not usually determined, it can include trauma, repetitive maneuvers, certain diseases, and pregnancy. Symptoms are related to compression of the median nerve, which results in pain, numbness, and tingling. Physical examination findings, such as hypalgesia, square wrist sign, and a classic or probable pattern on hand symptom diagram, are useful in making the diagnosis. Nerve conduction studies and electromyography can resolve diagnostic uncertainty and can be used to quantify and stratify disease severity. Treatment options are based on disease severity. Six weeks to three months of conservative treatment can be considered in patients with mild disease. Lifestyle modifications, including decreasing repetitive activity and using ergonomic devices, have been traditionally advocated, but have inconsistent evidence to support their effectiveness. Cock-up and neutral wrist splints and oral corticosteroids are considered first-line therapies, with local corticosteroid injections used for refractory symptoms. Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, diuretics, and pyridoxine (vitamin B6) have been shown to be no more effective than placebo. Most conservative treatments provide short-term symptom relief, with little evidence supporting long-term benefits. Patients with moderate to severe disease should be considered for surgical evaluation. Open and endoscopic surgical approaches have similar five-year outcomes. ※ 파이프라인이 API로 수집·저장한 초록 원문 그대로. 한국어 핵심요약은 이 텍스트만을 근거로 작성됩니다.