Adhesive luting of orthodontic devices to silica-based ceramic crowns—comparison of shear bond strength and surface properties

Clinical Oral Investigations - The aim of this study was to analyse the impact of different clinical conditioning approaches and an ammonium polyfluoride- and trimethoxysilylpropyl...     

In vivo reliability of 3D cephalometric landmark determination on magnetic resonance imaging: a feasibility study

Clinical Oral Investigations - 3D cephalometric analysis performed on cone-beam or multi-slice computed tomography (CBCT, MSCT) has superior diagnostic value compared to 2D cephalometry based on...     

Association between SNPs in defined functional pathways and risk of early or late toxicity as well as individual radiosensitivity

Background and purpose

The aim of this study was to determine the impact of functional single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) pathways involved in the ROS pathway, DNA repair, or TGFB1 signaling on acute or late normal toxicity as well as individual radiosensitivity.

Materials and methods

Patients receiving breast-conserving surgery and radiotherapy were examined either for erythema (n?=?83), fibrosis (n?=?123), or individual radiosensitivity (n?=?123). The 17 SNPs analyzed are involved in the ROS pathway (GSTP1, SOD2, NQO1, NOS3, XDH), DNA repair (XRCC1, XRCC3, XRCC6, ERCC2, LIG4, ATM) or TGFB signaling (SKIL, EP300, APC, AXIN1, TGFB1). Associations with biological and clinical endpoints were studied for single SNPs but especially for combinations of SNPs assuming that a SNP is either beneficial or deleterious and needs to be weighted.

Results

With one exception, no significant association was seen between a single SNP and the three endpoints studied. No significant associations were also observed when applying a multi-SNP model assuming that each SNP was deleterious. In contrast, significant associations were obtained when SNPs were suggested to be either beneficial or deleterious. These associations increased, when each SNP was weighted individually. Detailed analysis revealed that both erythema and individual radiosensitivity especially depend on SNPs affecting DNA repair and TGFB1 signaling, while SNPs in ROS pathway were of minor importance.

Conclusion

Functional pathways of SNPs may be used to form a risk score allowing to predict acute and late radiation-induced toxicity but also to unravel the underlying biological mechanisms.

     

Is Implantation of a Left Ventricular Assist Device in Patients With Critical or Impending Cardiogenic Shock an Absolute Contraindication? Looking Back at Our Past Experience Trying to Identify Contraindicative Risk Factors

Poor survival has been demonstrated after ventricular assist device (VAD) implantation for Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support (INTERMACS) profile 1 and 2 patients compared with more stable levels. However, risk factors within this high‐risk cohort have not been determined so far. The aim of the present study was to identify risk factors associated with this very high mortality rate. Between February 1993 and January 2013, 298 patients underwent VAD implantation in our institution. One hundred nine patients were in INTERMACS level 1 and 49 patients were in INTERMACS level 2 and were therefore defined as hemodynamically critical (overall 158 patients). Assist devices implanted were: HVAD HeartWare n = 18; Incor n = 11; VentrAssist n = 2; DeBakey n = 22; and pulsatile systems n = 105. After cumulative support duration of 815.35 months, Kaplan–Meier analysis revealed a survival of 63.9, 48.8, and 40.3% at 1, 6, and 12 months, respectively. Cox regression analyses identified age > 50 (P = 0.001, odds ratio [OR] 2.48), white blood cell count > 13.000/μL (P = 0.01, OR 2.06), preoperative renal replacement therapy (P = 0.001, OR 2.63), and postcardiotomy failure (P < 0.001, OR 2.79) as independent predictors of mortality. Of note, last generation VADs were not associated with significantly better 6‐month survival (P = 0.59). Patients without the aforementioned risk factors could yield a survival of 79.2% at 6 months. This single‐center experience shows that VAD implantation in hemodynamically unstable patients generally results in poor early outcome, even in third‐generation pumps. However, avoiding the aforementioned risk factors could result in improved outcome.