OBJECTIVES: The objective of this review is to assess the effects of lumbar sympathectomy by open, laparoscopic and percutaneous methods compared with no treatment or compared with any other method of lumbar sympathectomy in patients with CLI due to non-reconstructable PAD.

SEARCH METHODS: The Cochrane Vascular Information Specialist (CIS) searched the Specialised Register (January 2016) and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2015, Issue 12). In addition, the CIS searched clinical trials databases for details of ongoing and unpublished studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing any of the treatment modalities of lumbar sympathectomy, such as open, laparoscopic and chemical percutaneous methods, with no treatment or with any other method of lumbar sympathectomy for CLI due to non-reconstructable PAD were eligible. To decrease the bias of including participants that may be incorrectly diagnosed with CLI, review authors defined CLI as persistently recurring ischaemic rest pain requiring regular analgesia for more than two weeks, or ulceration or gangrene of the foot or toes, attributable to objectively proven arterial occlusive disease by measurement of ankle pressure of < 50 mmHg or toe pressure < 30 mmHg. We defined non-reconstructable PAD as a resting ankle brachial index (ABI) < 0.9 when no reasonable open surgical or endovascular revascularisation treatment option is available, as determined by individual trial vascular specialists.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed studies identified for potential inclusion in the review. We planned to conduct data collection and analysis in accordance with the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Review of Interventions.

MAIN RESULTS: We identified no studies that met the predefined inclusion criteria. To decrease the bias of including participants who may be incorrectly diagnosed with CLI, we based our inclusion criteria on objective tests, as described above. The randomised trials identified by the literature search were performed before such objective criteria for selection were applied and therefore were not eligible for inclusion in the review.

Methods: Fifty-seven participants were assessed for their demographics and functional ability relating to the requirement for walking devices, including the Timed Up and Go Test (TUGT) and lower limb loading during sit-to-stand (LLL-STS).

Results: Thirty-five participants (61%) used a walking device, particularly a standard walker, for daily walking. More than half of them (n = 23, 66%) had potential of walking progression (i.e., safely walk with a less-support device than the usual one). The ability of walking progression was significantly associated with a mild severity of injury, increased lower-limb muscle strength, decreased time to complete the TUGT, and, in particular, increased LLL-STS.

BACKGROUND: The back squat is an integral aspect of any resistance training program to improve athletic performance. It is also used for injury prevention of the lower limbs.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to examine the effect of back squat training at different intensities on strength and flexibility of the hamstring muscle group (HMG).

METHODS: Twenty-two male recreational bodybuilders with at least two years of experience in resistance training were recruited to participate in a nine-week training program. They were randomly assigned to a heavy back squat group (90-95% of one repetition maximum) or a moderate-intensity back squat group (60-65% of one repetition maximum).

RESULTS: The heavy back squat group resulted in a significantly (p < 0.001) increased in one repetition maximum strength but a significant (p < 0.001) reduction in HMG flexibility when compared to their counterparts. The results of the study indicate that while a heavy back squat training program is effective in improving strength, it has an adverse effect on the flexibility of the HMG.