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...     

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.     

Efficacy and safety of transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) created using covered stents of different diameters: A systematic review and meta-analysis

PurposeThe purpose of this study was to make a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the stent diameter (8 mm vs. 10 mm) that conveys better safety and clinical efficacy for transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS).Materials and methodsFour databases were used to identify clinical trials published from inception until March 2020. Data were extracted to estimate and compare one-year and three-year overall survivals, hepatic encephalopathy, variceal rebleeding, and shunt dysfunction rates between patients with 8 mm covered stents and those with 10 mm covered stents.ResultsFive eligible studies were selected, which included 489 patients (316 men, 173 women). The 8 mm covered stent group had higher efficacy regarding one-year or three-year overall survival (odds ratio [OR], 2.88; P = 0.003) and (OR, 1.81; P = 0.04) and lower hepatic encephalopathy (OR, 0.69; P = 0.04) compared with 10 mm covered stent group. There were no significant differences in variceal rebleeding rate (OR 0.80; P = 0.67). However, shunt dysfunction was lower in 10 mm covered stent group (OR, 2.26; P = 0.003).ConclusionsOur results suggest that the use of 8 mm covered stents should be preferred to that of 10 mm covered stents for TIPS placement when portal pressure is frequently monitored.