Objective : To investigate the antidepressant effects and the underlying mechanisms of tetrahydrocurcumin(THC) and its nanoparticle formulation(THCN). Methods : Forty-six male ICR mice were randomly divided into Con group, LPS group, THC group, THCN group and SER group. A mouse depression model was established by intraperitoneal administration of LPS. The anxiety and depression-like behaviors of mice were evaluated by open field test(OFT) and forced swimming test(FST). Myelin staining was applied to assess the extent of demyelination in the prefrontal cortex of the mice. The prefrontal cortex and hippocampus were further examined for the expression levels of glial fibrillary acidic protein(GFAP) and Toll-like receptor 4(TLR4) through quantitative immunofluorescence assays. Results : Compared with the Con group, the LPS group showed increased anxiety-like and depressive-like behaviors in both the long-term and short-term experiments(P<0.05); the degree of demyelination increased in the LPS group of the long-term experiment(P<0.01); the expression of GFAP was reduced in the LPS group of the short-term experiment(P<0.01), while the expression of TLR4 increased(P<0.05); the expression of TLR4 decreased in the THC group(P<0.01); the expression of GFAP in the prefrontal cortex of the THCN group was reduced(P<0.01), while the expression of TLR4 increased(P<0.05). Compared with the LPS group, the THC group showed reduced depressive-like behaviors in the long-term experiment(P<0.05), while the anxiety-like and depressive-like behaviors of the THCN group and the SER group were reduced(P<0.05), and the anxiety-like and depressive-like behaviors of the THC group and the THCN group were reduced in the short-term experiment(P<0.05); the degree of demyelination was reduced in the THC group, THCN group and SER group in the long-term experiment(P<0.05); the expression of GFAP increased in the THC group of the short-term experiment(P<0.05), while the expression of TLR4 was reduced(P<0.05), and the expression of GFAP increased in the THCN group(P<0.05). Compared with the THC group, the THCN group and the SER group showed reduced anxiety-like behaviors in the long-term experiment(P<0.05); the expression of GFAP in the prefrontal cortex of the THCN group was reduced in the short-term experiment(P<0.05), while the expression of TLR4 in the hippocampal DG area increased in the short-term experiment(P<0.01). Conclusion Tetrahydrocurcumin and its nanoparticle formulation both exert significant ameliorative effects on depression-like behaviors and demyelination in mice induced by lipopolysaccharide. The antidepressant mechanism of THC appears to be mediated through the down-regulation of TLR4 and the up-regulation of GFAP. The mechanism underlying the antidepressant action of THCN seems predominantly focused on the enhancement of GFAP expression.

Objective: Full endoscopic cervical surgery (FECS) is an evolving minimally invasive approach for treating cervical spine disorders. This systematic review synthesizes current evidence on the clinical outcomes and patient perspectives associated with FECS, specifically evaluating its safety, efficacy, and overall patient satisfaction. Methods: A systematic search of the PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, Embase, and Web of Science databases was conducted following PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. Studies published between January 2000 and September 2024 that reported on clinical outcomes or patient perspectives related to FECS were included. Risk of bias was assessed using the ROBINS-I (Risk Of Bias In Non-randomized Studies - of Interventions) tool and the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. Inclusion criteria encompassed randomized controlled trials, prospective cohort studies, retrospective studies, and observational studies focused on adult populations undergoing FECS for cervical spine surgery. Results: The final synthesis included 30 studies. FECS was associated with significant reductions in both cervical and radicular pain, as well as meaningful functional improvements, measured by standardized clinical scales such as the Neck Disability Index and visual analogue scale. Patient satisfaction rates were consistently high, with most studies reporting satisfaction exceeding 85%. Complication rates were low, primarily involving transient neurological deficits that were typically resolved without the need for further intervention. Nonrandomized studies generally presented a moderate risk of bias due to confounding and selection, whereas randomized controlled trials exhibited a low risk of bias. Conclusion FECS is a safe and effective minimally invasive surgical option for cervical spine disorders associated with substantial pain relief, functional improvement and high levels of patient satisfaction.

Obesity presents significant challenges in spinal surgery, including higher rates of perioperative complications, prolonged operative times, and delayed recovery. Traditional open spine surgery often exacerbates these risks, particularly in patients with obesity, because of extensive tissue dissection and larger incisions. Endoscopic spine surgery (ESS) has emerged as a promising minimally invasive alternative, offering advantages such as reduced tissue trauma, minimal blood loss, lower infection rates, and faster recovery. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the safety, efficacy, and outcomes of ESS techniques, including fully endoscopic and biportal endoscopic lumbar discectomy and decompression, in patients with obesity and lumbar spine pathologies. A comprehensive literature search of the PubMed/Medline, Embase, and Scopus databases yielded 2,975 studies published between 2000 and 2024, of which 10 met the inclusion criteria. The meta-analysis revealed significant improvements in pain relief (Visual Analog Scale) and functional outcomes (Oswestry Disability Index), with comparable results between patients with and without obesity. Patients who are obese experienced longer operative times and have a slightly higher risk of symptom recurrence; however, ESS demonstrated lower rates of wound infections, shorter hospital stays, and faster recovery than traditional surgery. These findings position ESS as a viable and effective option for managing lumbar spine conditions in patients with obesity, addressing obesity-related surgical challenges while maintaining favorable clinical outcomes. However, limitations such as study heterogeneity and the lack of randomized controlled trials highlight the need for further high-quality research to refine ESS techniques and optimize patient care in this high-risk population.

Objective: Full endoscopic cervical surgery (FECS) is an evolving minimally invasive approach for treating cervical spine disorders. This systematic review synthesizes current evidence on the clinical outcomes and patient perspectives associated with FECS, specifically evaluating its safety, efficacy, and overall patient satisfaction. Methods: A systematic search of the PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, Embase, and Web of Science databases was conducted following PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. Studies published between January 2000 and September 2024 that reported on clinical outcomes or patient perspectives related to FECS were included. Risk of bias was assessed using the ROBINS-I (Risk Of Bias In Non-randomized Studies - of Interventions) tool and the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. Inclusion criteria encompassed randomized controlled trials, prospective cohort studies, retrospective studies, and observational studies focused on adult populations undergoing FECS for cervical spine surgery. Results: The final synthesis included 30 studies. FECS was associated with significant reductions in both cervical and radicular pain, as well as meaningful functional improvements, measured by standardized clinical scales such as the Neck Disability Index and visual analogue scale. Patient satisfaction rates were consistently high, with most studies reporting satisfaction exceeding 85%. Complication rates were low, primarily involving transient neurological deficits that were typically resolved without the need for further intervention. Nonrandomized studies generally presented a moderate risk of bias due to confounding and selection, whereas randomized controlled trials exhibited a low risk of bias. Conclusion FECS is a safe and effective minimally invasive surgical option for cervical spine disorders associated with substantial pain relief, functional improvement and high levels of patient satisfaction.

Objective: Full endoscopic cervical surgery (FECS) is an evolving minimally invasive approach for treating cervical spine disorders. This systematic review synthesizes current evidence on the clinical outcomes and patient perspectives associated with FECS, specifically evaluating its safety, efficacy, and overall patient satisfaction. Methods: A systematic search of the PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, Embase, and Web of Science databases was conducted following PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. Studies published between January 2000 and September 2024 that reported on clinical outcomes or patient perspectives related to FECS were included. Risk of bias was assessed using the ROBINS-I (Risk Of Bias In Non-randomized Studies - of Interventions) tool and the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. Inclusion criteria encompassed randomized controlled trials, prospective cohort studies, retrospective studies, and observational studies focused on adult populations undergoing FECS for cervical spine surgery. Results: The final synthesis included 30 studies. FECS was associated with significant reductions in both cervical and radicular pain, as well as meaningful functional improvements, measured by standardized clinical scales such as the Neck Disability Index and visual analogue scale. Patient satisfaction rates were consistently high, with most studies reporting satisfaction exceeding 85%. Complication rates were low, primarily involving transient neurological deficits that were typically resolved without the need for further intervention. Nonrandomized studies generally presented a moderate risk of bias due to confounding and selection, whereas randomized controlled trials exhibited a low risk of bias. Conclusion FECS is a safe and effective minimally invasive surgical option for cervical spine disorders associated with substantial pain relief, functional improvement and high levels of patient satisfaction.

Obesity presents significant challenges in spinal surgery, including higher rates of perioperative complications, prolonged operative times, and delayed recovery. Traditional open spine surgery often exacerbates these risks, particularly in patients with obesity, because of extensive tissue dissection and larger incisions. Endoscopic spine surgery (ESS) has emerged as a promising minimally invasive alternative, offering advantages such as reduced tissue trauma, minimal blood loss, lower infection rates, and faster recovery. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the safety, efficacy, and outcomes of ESS techniques, including fully endoscopic and biportal endoscopic lumbar discectomy and decompression, in patients with obesity and lumbar spine pathologies. A comprehensive literature search of the PubMed/Medline, Embase, and Scopus databases yielded 2,975 studies published between 2000 and 2024, of which 10 met the inclusion criteria. The meta-analysis revealed significant improvements in pain relief (Visual Analog Scale) and functional outcomes (Oswestry Disability Index), with comparable results between patients with and without obesity. Patients who are obese experienced longer operative times and have a slightly higher risk of symptom recurrence; however, ESS demonstrated lower rates of wound infections, shorter hospital stays, and faster recovery than traditional surgery. These findings position ESS as a viable and effective option for managing lumbar spine conditions in patients with obesity, addressing obesity-related surgical challenges while maintaining favorable clinical outcomes. However, limitations such as study heterogeneity and the lack of randomized controlled trials highlight the need for further high-quality research to refine ESS techniques and optimize patient care in this high-risk population.

Objective: Full endoscopic cervical surgery (FECS) is an evolving minimally invasive approach for treating cervical spine disorders. This systematic review synthesizes current evidence on the clinical outcomes and patient perspectives associated with FECS, specifically evaluating its safety, efficacy, and overall patient satisfaction. Methods: A systematic search of the PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, Embase, and Web of Science databases was conducted following PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. Studies published between January 2000 and September 2024 that reported on clinical outcomes or patient perspectives related to FECS were included. Risk of bias was assessed using the ROBINS-I (Risk Of Bias In Non-randomized Studies - of Interventions) tool and the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. Inclusion criteria encompassed randomized controlled trials, prospective cohort studies, retrospective studies, and observational studies focused on adult populations undergoing FECS for cervical spine surgery. Results: The final synthesis included 30 studies. FECS was associated with significant reductions in both cervical and radicular pain, as well as meaningful functional improvements, measured by standardized clinical scales such as the Neck Disability Index and visual analogue scale. Patient satisfaction rates were consistently high, with most studies reporting satisfaction exceeding 85%. Complication rates were low, primarily involving transient neurological deficits that were typically resolved without the need for further intervention. Nonrandomized studies generally presented a moderate risk of bias due to confounding and selection, whereas randomized controlled trials exhibited a low risk of bias. Conclusion FECS is a safe and effective minimally invasive surgical option for cervical spine disorders associated with substantial pain relief, functional improvement and high levels of patient satisfaction.

Obesity presents significant challenges in spinal surgery, including higher rates of perioperative complications, prolonged operative times, and delayed recovery. Traditional open spine surgery often exacerbates these risks, particularly in patients with obesity, because of extensive tissue dissection and larger incisions. Endoscopic spine surgery (ESS) has emerged as a promising minimally invasive alternative, offering advantages such as reduced tissue trauma, minimal blood loss, lower infection rates, and faster recovery. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the safety, efficacy, and outcomes of ESS techniques, including fully endoscopic and biportal endoscopic lumbar discectomy and decompression, in patients with obesity and lumbar spine pathologies. A comprehensive literature search of the PubMed/Medline, Embase, and Scopus databases yielded 2,975 studies published between 2000 and 2024, of which 10 met the inclusion criteria. The meta-analysis revealed significant improvements in pain relief (Visual Analog Scale) and functional outcomes (Oswestry Disability Index), with comparable results between patients with and without obesity. Patients who are obese experienced longer operative times and have a slightly higher risk of symptom recurrence; however, ESS demonstrated lower rates of wound infections, shorter hospital stays, and faster recovery than traditional surgery. These findings position ESS as a viable and effective option for managing lumbar spine conditions in patients with obesity, addressing obesity-related surgical challenges while maintaining favorable clinical outcomes. However, limitations such as study heterogeneity and the lack of randomized controlled trials highlight the need for further high-quality research to refine ESS techniques and optimize patient care in this high-risk population.

Objective: Full endoscopic cervical surgery (FECS) is an evolving minimally invasive approach for treating cervical spine disorders. This systematic review synthesizes current evidence on the clinical outcomes and patient perspectives associated with FECS, specifically evaluating its safety, efficacy, and overall patient satisfaction. Methods: A systematic search of the PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, Embase, and Web of Science databases was conducted following PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. Studies published between January 2000 and September 2024 that reported on clinical outcomes or patient perspectives related to FECS were included. Risk of bias was assessed using the ROBINS-I (Risk Of Bias In Non-randomized Studies - of Interventions) tool and the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. Inclusion criteria encompassed randomized controlled trials, prospective cohort studies, retrospective studies, and observational studies focused on adult populations undergoing FECS for cervical spine surgery. Results: The final synthesis included 30 studies. FECS was associated with significant reductions in both cervical and radicular pain, as well as meaningful functional improvements, measured by standardized clinical scales such as the Neck Disability Index and visual analogue scale. Patient satisfaction rates were consistently high, with most studies reporting satisfaction exceeding 85%. Complication rates were low, primarily involving transient neurological deficits that were typically resolved without the need for further intervention. Nonrandomized studies generally presented a moderate risk of bias due to confounding and selection, whereas randomized controlled trials exhibited a low risk of bias. Conclusion FECS is a safe and effective minimally invasive surgical option for cervical spine disorders associated with substantial pain relief, functional improvement and high levels of patient satisfaction.

Exercise fatigue is a complex physiological and psychological phenomenon that includes peripheral fatigue in the muscles and central fatigue in the brain. Peripheral fatigue refers to the loss of force caused at the distal end of the neuromuscular junction, whereas central fatigue involves decreased motor output from the primary motor cortex, which is associated with modulations at anatomical sites proximal to nerves that innervate skeletal muscle. The central regulatory failure reflects a progressive decline in the central nervous system’s capacity to recruit motor units during sustained physical activity. Emerging evidence highlights the critical involvement of central neurochemical regulation in fatigue development, particularly through neurotransmitter-mediated modulation. Alterations in neurotransmitter release and receptor activity could influence excitatory and inhibitory signal pathways, thus modulating the perception of fatigue and exercise performance. Increased serotonin (5-HT) could increase perception of effort and lethargy, reduce motor drive to continue exercising, and contribute to exercise fatigue. Decreased dopamine (DA) and noradrenaline (NE) neurotransmission can negatively impact arousal, mood, motivation, and reward mechanisms and impair exercise performance. Furthermore, the serotonergic and dopaminergic systems interact with each other; a low 5-HT/DA ratio enhances motor motivation and improves performance, and a high 5-HT/DA ratio heightens fatigue perception and leads to decreased performance. The expression and activity of neurotransmitter receptors would be changed during prolonged exercise to fatigue, affecting the transmission of nerve signals. Prolonged high-intensity exercise causes excess 5-HT to overflow from the synaptic cleft to the axonal initial segment and activates the 5-HT1A receptor, thereby inhibiting the action potential of motor neurons and affecting the recruitment of motor units. During exercise to fatigue, the DA secretion is decreased, which blocks the binding of DA to D1 receptor in the caudate putamen and inhibits the activation of the direct pathway of the basal ganglia to suppress movement, meanwhile the binding of DA to D2 receptor is restrained in the caudate putamen, which activates the indirect pathway of the basal ganglia to influence motivation. Furthermore, other neurotransmitters and their receptors, such as adenosine (ADO), glutamic acid (Glu), and γ‑aminobutyric acid (GABA) also play important roles in regulating neurotransmitter balance and fatigue. The occurrence of central fatigue is not the result of the action of a single neurotransmitter system, but a comprehensive manifestation of the interaction between multiple neurotransmitters. This review explores the important role of neurotransmitters and their receptors in central motor fatigue, reveals the dynamic changes of different neurotransmitters such as 5-HT, DA, NE, and ADO during exercise, and summarizes the mechanisms by which these neurotransmitters and their receptors regulate fatigue perception and exercise performance through complex interactions. Besides, this study presents pharmacological evidence that drugs such as agonists, antagonists, and reuptake inhibitors could affect exercise performance by regulating the metabolic changes of neurotransmitters. Recently, emerging interventions such as dietary bioactive components intake and transcranial electrical stimulation may provide new ideas and strategies for the prevention and alleviation of exercise fatigue by regulating neurotransmitter levels and receptor activity. Overall, this work offers new theoretical insights into the understanding of exercise central fatigue, and future research should further investigate the relationship between neurotransmitters and their receptors and exercise fatigue.