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.     

脾脏血管性病变与淋巴瘤CT鉴别诊断

目的 运用CT区分脾脏血管性病变与淋巴瘤。方法 回顾性分析20例经手术、穿刺病理学检查证实的脾脏病变的发病年龄、性别、脾脏指数、病变大小、数目、有无液化、钙化、强化幅度、强化方式等特征,并进行统计学分析。结果 20例脾脏病变中,11例血管性病变(6例海绵状血管瘤,3例窦岸细胞血管瘤,2例硬化性血管瘤样结节性转化),9例淋巴瘤;两组间发病年龄、病变大小、数目、有无液化、钙化等差异无统计学意义;两组间脾脏指数、动脉期强化幅度差异具有统计学意义(P＜0.05)。5例海绵状血管瘤呈不均匀性强化,1例呈渐进性填充式强化,2例窦岸细胞血管瘤呈“雀斑征”,1例硬化性血管瘤样结节性转化呈“辐轮征”;9例淋巴瘤实质部分均呈均匀、轻中度强化。结论 脾脏血管性病变与淋巴瘤CT表现不同,CT有助于明确诊断。