Treatment of multiple adjacent RT 1 gingival recessions with the modified coronally advanced tunnel (MCAT) technique and a collagen matrix or palatal connective tissue graft: 9-year results of a split-mouth randomized clinical trial

Clinical Oral Investigations - To evaluate t he long-term outcomes following treatment of RT 1 multiple adjacent gingival recessions (MAGR) using the modified coronally advanced tunnel (MCAT) with...     

Study on the Value of Ultrasound Elastography Combined with Plasma miRNA Expression in the Early Detection of Breast Cancer

Background: Breast cancer (BC) is the most common malignant tumor in women, and its morbidity and mortality are increasing each year, due to the lack of specific clinical symptoms in the early stage of BC, and the lack of diagnostic methods for early breast cancer. Therefore, identifying an effective diagnostic method for early BC has become urgent. Materials and Methods: Breast lesions with a histological diagnosis that were examined by ultrasonic elastography (UE) in our department from June 2020 to December 2021 were reviewed. qRT-PCR was performed to measure the expression levels of miR-144-5p and miR-26b-5p in the plasma of patients with BC. The receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curve and area under the curve (AUC) were used to investigate the potential diagnostic value of miR- 144-5p, miR-26b-5p and the elastographic score in BC. Results: The ultrasonic elastography score(UES) was found to be significantly upregulated in BC compared with that in benign breast lesions, and the AUC, sensitivity and specificity were 0.809, 0.717 and 0.806 for distinguishing BC from benign breast lesions, respectively. miR-144-5p and miR-26b- 5p were found to be upregulated in the plasma of BC patients, and miR-144-5p+miR-26b-5p had 0.781 sensitivity and 0.780 specificity for the diagnosis of BC. Furthermore, we found that the diagnostic performance of miR-144-5p and miR-26b-5p combined with UES for BC had 0.913 sensitivity and 0.890 specificity. Conclusions: The combination of plasma miR-144-5p, miR-26b-5p and UES has a very high clinical application value for the early detection of BC.     

Update PONV – Was gibt es Neues bei der Prophylaxe und Therapie von postoperativer Übelkeit und postoperativem Erbrechen?

Die Anaesthesiologie - Auch wenn für Anästhesiologen über Jahrzehnte die Prophylaxe und Therapie postoperativer Schmerzen im Rahmen des postoperativen Patientenkomforts an vorderster...     

A systematic review of the methodological quality of economic evaluations in genetic screening and testing for monogenic disorders

PurposeUnderstanding the value of genetic screening and testing for monogenic disorders requires high-quality, methodologically robust economic evaluations. This systematic review sought to assess the methodological quality among such studies and examined opportunities for improvement.MethodsWe searched PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, and Web of Science for economic evaluations of genetic screening/testing (2013-2019). Methodological rigor and adherence to best practices were systematically assessed using the British Medical Journal checklist.ResultsAcross the 47 identified studies, there were substantial variations in modeling approaches, reporting detail, and sophistication. Models ranged from simple decision trees to individual-level microsimulations that compared between 2 and >20 alternative interventions. Many studies failed to report sufficient detail to enable replication or did not justify modeling assumptions, especially for costing methods and utility values. Meta-analyses, systematic reviews, or calibration were rarely used to derive parameter estimates. Nearly all studies conducted some sensitivity analysis, and more sophisticated studies implemented probabilistic sensitivity/uncertainty analysis, threshold analysis, and value of information analysis.ConclusionWe describe a heterogeneous body of work and present recommendations and exemplar studies across the methodological domains of (1) perspective, scope, and parameter selection; (2) use of uncertainty/sensitivity analyses; and (3) reporting transparency for improvement in the economic evaluation of genetic screening/testing.