Background/Aims: Amitriptyline is prescribed off-label for irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). We conducted a meta-analysis to assess its efficacy. Methods: A systematic literature review was conducted until November 10, 2023, using MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science to study the efficacy of amitriptyline in patients with IBS. We included all randomized controlled trials that compared amitriptyline to placebo. Revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool was used to assess the quality of studies. Meta-analyses were performed using a bivariate random-effects model. Statistical analyses were performed using R Software 4.2.3 and heterogeneity was assessed with I 2 statistics. Results: Seven trials were included with 796 patients (61% female). Amitriptyline was associated with better treatment response (OR, 5.30; 95% CI, 2.47 to 11.39; P < 0.001), reduced Irritable Bowel Syndrome Symptom Severity Scores (MD, –50.72; 95% CI, –94.23 to –7.20; P = 0.020) and improved diarrhea (OR, 10.55; 95% CI, 2.90 to 38.41; P < 0.001). No significant difference between the 2 groups regarding the adverse effects was observed. Three trials showed an overall low risk of bias, 2 trials showed an overall high risk of bias due to randomization and missing data, and 2 trials had some concerns regarding missing data. Conclusions Amitriptyline was found to be well-tolerated and effective in treating IBS compared to placebo. These findings support the use of amitriptyline for the management of IBS, particularly among patients with the IBS diarrhea subtype. Future research should focus on the dose-dependent effects of amitriptyline in IBS to better guide clinicians in personalized titration regimens.

Background/Aims: Amitriptyline is prescribed off-label for irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). We conducted a meta-analysis to assess its efficacy. Methods: A systematic literature review was conducted until November 10, 2023, using MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science to study the efficacy of amitriptyline in patients with IBS. We included all randomized controlled trials that compared amitriptyline to placebo. Revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool was used to assess the quality of studies. Meta-analyses were performed using a bivariate random-effects model. Statistical analyses were performed using R Software 4.2.3 and heterogeneity was assessed with I 2 statistics. Results: Seven trials were included with 796 patients (61% female). Amitriptyline was associated with better treatment response (OR, 5.30; 95% CI, 2.47 to 11.39; P < 0.001), reduced Irritable Bowel Syndrome Symptom Severity Scores (MD, –50.72; 95% CI, –94.23 to –7.20; P = 0.020) and improved diarrhea (OR, 10.55; 95% CI, 2.90 to 38.41; P < 0.001). No significant difference between the 2 groups regarding the adverse effects was observed. Three trials showed an overall low risk of bias, 2 trials showed an overall high risk of bias due to randomization and missing data, and 2 trials had some concerns regarding missing data. Conclusions Amitriptyline was found to be well-tolerated and effective in treating IBS compared to placebo. These findings support the use of amitriptyline for the management of IBS, particularly among patients with the IBS diarrhea subtype. Future research should focus on the dose-dependent effects of amitriptyline in IBS to better guide clinicians in personalized titration regimens.

Background/Aims: Amitriptyline is prescribed off-label for irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). We conducted a meta-analysis to assess its efficacy. Methods: A systematic literature review was conducted until November 10, 2023, using MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science to study the efficacy of amitriptyline in patients with IBS. We included all randomized controlled trials that compared amitriptyline to placebo. Revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool was used to assess the quality of studies. Meta-analyses were performed using a bivariate random-effects model. Statistical analyses were performed using R Software 4.2.3 and heterogeneity was assessed with I 2 statistics. Results: Seven trials were included with 796 patients (61% female). Amitriptyline was associated with better treatment response (OR, 5.30; 95% CI, 2.47 to 11.39; P < 0.001), reduced Irritable Bowel Syndrome Symptom Severity Scores (MD, –50.72; 95% CI, –94.23 to –7.20; P = 0.020) and improved diarrhea (OR, 10.55; 95% CI, 2.90 to 38.41; P < 0.001). No significant difference between the 2 groups regarding the adverse effects was observed. Three trials showed an overall low risk of bias, 2 trials showed an overall high risk of bias due to randomization and missing data, and 2 trials had some concerns regarding missing data. Conclusions Amitriptyline was found to be well-tolerated and effective in treating IBS compared to placebo. These findings support the use of amitriptyline for the management of IBS, particularly among patients with the IBS diarrhea subtype. Future research should focus on the dose-dependent effects of amitriptyline in IBS to better guide clinicians in personalized titration regimens.

Purpose: Cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection affects the hepatic, neurologic, hematopoietic, respiratory, gastrointestinal, and other organs, resulting in a high mortality rate and longterm sequelae. It may cause acute or chronic hepatitis, or even lead to hepatic cirrhosis.Valganciclovir (VGCV) is an effective, safe, and well-tolerated treatment for congenital CMV infection, without any serious adverse effects. This study was conducted to evaluate the clinical, biochemical, and virological profiles of infants with CMV with intrahepatic cholestasis and to determine the outcomes with or without treatment with VGCV. Methods: Twenty infants aged <6 months diagnosed with congenital CMV infection with evidence of intrahepatic cholestasis were included in this study. Randomization was used to divide the study participants into 2 groups. The control group (n=10) was treated with only supportive management, and the intervention group (n=10) was treated with oral VGCV at 16 mg/kg/dose 12 hours a day for 6 weeks plus supportive treatments. Physical examinations and biochemical, serological, and virological tests were performed at the time of diagnosis and at the end of 6 weeks and 6 months. Results: The control and intervention groups were compared in terms of clinical and laboratory parameters such as jaundice, dark urine, pale stool, hepatomegaly, total bilirubin, aminotransferases, gamma-glutamyl transferase, alkaline phosphatase, and CMV polymerase chain reaction load, which showed a significant reduction after treatment in the intervention group (p<0.05) with oral VGCV, with very few side effects, whereas the control group showed no significant changes. Conclusion Oral VGCV can be used to effectively treat CMV infection with intrahepatic cholestasis without notable side effects.

Purpose: Cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection affects the hepatic, neurologic, hematopoietic, respiratory, gastrointestinal, and other organs, resulting in a high mortality rate and longterm sequelae. It may cause acute or chronic hepatitis, or even lead to hepatic cirrhosis.Valganciclovir (VGCV) is an effective, safe, and well-tolerated treatment for congenital CMV infection, without any serious adverse effects. This study was conducted to evaluate the clinical, biochemical, and virological profiles of infants with CMV with intrahepatic cholestasis and to determine the outcomes with or without treatment with VGCV. Methods: Twenty infants aged <6 months diagnosed with congenital CMV infection with evidence of intrahepatic cholestasis were included in this study. Randomization was used to divide the study participants into 2 groups. The control group (n=10) was treated with only supportive management, and the intervention group (n=10) was treated with oral VGCV at 16 mg/kg/dose 12 hours a day for 6 weeks plus supportive treatments. Physical examinations and biochemical, serological, and virological tests were performed at the time of diagnosis and at the end of 6 weeks and 6 months. Results: The control and intervention groups were compared in terms of clinical and laboratory parameters such as jaundice, dark urine, pale stool, hepatomegaly, total bilirubin, aminotransferases, gamma-glutamyl transferase, alkaline phosphatase, and CMV polymerase chain reaction load, which showed a significant reduction after treatment in the intervention group (p<0.05) with oral VGCV, with very few side effects, whereas the control group showed no significant changes. Conclusion Oral VGCV can be used to effectively treat CMV infection with intrahepatic cholestasis without notable side effects.

Purpose: Cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection affects the hepatic, neurologic, hematopoietic, respiratory, gastrointestinal, and other organs, resulting in a high mortality rate and longterm sequelae. It may cause acute or chronic hepatitis, or even lead to hepatic cirrhosis.Valganciclovir (VGCV) is an effective, safe, and well-tolerated treatment for congenital CMV infection, without any serious adverse effects. This study was conducted to evaluate the clinical, biochemical, and virological profiles of infants with CMV with intrahepatic cholestasis and to determine the outcomes with or without treatment with VGCV. Methods: Twenty infants aged <6 months diagnosed with congenital CMV infection with evidence of intrahepatic cholestasis were included in this study. Randomization was used to divide the study participants into 2 groups. The control group (n=10) was treated with only supportive management, and the intervention group (n=10) was treated with oral VGCV at 16 mg/kg/dose 12 hours a day for 6 weeks plus supportive treatments. Physical examinations and biochemical, serological, and virological tests were performed at the time of diagnosis and at the end of 6 weeks and 6 months. Results: The control and intervention groups were compared in terms of clinical and laboratory parameters such as jaundice, dark urine, pale stool, hepatomegaly, total bilirubin, aminotransferases, gamma-glutamyl transferase, alkaline phosphatase, and CMV polymerase chain reaction load, which showed a significant reduction after treatment in the intervention group (p<0.05) with oral VGCV, with very few side effects, whereas the control group showed no significant changes. Conclusion Oral VGCV can be used to effectively treat CMV infection with intrahepatic cholestasis without notable side effects.

Muscle weakness is prevalent in intensive care patients. This study focused on comparing the effects of massage and range of motion (ROM) exercises on muscle strength and intensive care unit-acquired weakness (ICU-AW) among patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Methods: This study was a randomized clinical trial that recruited patients (n=45) with COVID-19 admitted to the ICU and divided them into three groups (ROM exercises, massage, and control). We evaluated muscle strength and ICU-AW in the arms and legs using a hand dynamometer. The Medical Research Council sum score was determined before and after the intervention. Results: The study findings were that 0%, 20%, and 100% of the participants in the ROM exercises, massage, and control groups had ICU-AW on the 7th day of ICU admission. The ROM exercise group had greater muscle strength in the hands and legs than the massage and control groups, and the massage group had greater muscle strength than the control group. Conclusions: Massage and ROM exercises could improve muscle strength and reduce ICU-AW in COVID-19 patients admitted to the ICU.

Muscle weakness is prevalent in intensive care patients. This study focused on comparing the effects of massage and range of motion (ROM) exercises on muscle strength and intensive care unit-acquired weakness (ICU-AW) among patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Methods: This study was a randomized clinical trial that recruited patients (n=45) with COVID-19 admitted to the ICU and divided them into three groups (ROM exercises, massage, and control). We evaluated muscle strength and ICU-AW in the arms and legs using a hand dynamometer. The Medical Research Council sum score was determined before and after the intervention. Results: The study findings were that 0%, 20%, and 100% of the participants in the ROM exercises, massage, and control groups had ICU-AW on the 7th day of ICU admission. The ROM exercise group had greater muscle strength in the hands and legs than the massage and control groups, and the massage group had greater muscle strength than the control group. Conclusions: Massage and ROM exercises could improve muscle strength and reduce ICU-AW in COVID-19 patients admitted to the ICU.

Muscle weakness is prevalent in intensive care patients. This study focused on comparing the effects of massage and range of motion (ROM) exercises on muscle strength and intensive care unit-acquired weakness (ICU-AW) among patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Methods: This study was a randomized clinical trial that recruited patients (n=45) with COVID-19 admitted to the ICU and divided them into three groups (ROM exercises, massage, and control). We evaluated muscle strength and ICU-AW in the arms and legs using a hand dynamometer. The Medical Research Council sum score was determined before and after the intervention. Results: The study findings were that 0%, 20%, and 100% of the participants in the ROM exercises, massage, and control groups had ICU-AW on the 7th day of ICU admission. The ROM exercise group had greater muscle strength in the hands and legs than the massage and control groups, and the massage group had greater muscle strength than the control group. Conclusions: Massage and ROM exercises could improve muscle strength and reduce ICU-AW in COVID-19 patients admitted to the ICU.

Muscle weakness is prevalent in intensive care patients. This study focused on comparing the effects of massage and range of motion (ROM) exercises on muscle strength and intensive care unit-acquired weakness (ICU-AW) among patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Methods: This study was a randomized clinical trial that recruited patients (n=45) with COVID-19 admitted to the ICU and divided them into three groups (ROM exercises, massage, and control). We evaluated muscle strength and ICU-AW in the arms and legs using a hand dynamometer. The Medical Research Council sum score was determined before and after the intervention. Results: The study findings were that 0%, 20%, and 100% of the participants in the ROM exercises, massage, and control groups had ICU-AW on the 7th day of ICU admission. The ROM exercise group had greater muscle strength in the hands and legs than the massage and control groups, and the massage group had greater muscle strength than the control group. Conclusions: Massage and ROM exercises could improve muscle strength and reduce ICU-AW in COVID-19 patients admitted to the ICU.