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...     

携带同源重组修复相关基因突变的消化道肿瘤的临床特点

目的:探讨消化道肿瘤中同源重组修复相关基因(homologous recombination repair related gene，HRR)突变的发生情况及临床意义。方法:共92例消化道肿瘤患者，79例患者进行了血液标本HRR检测，53例患者进行了组织标本HRR检测，40例患者同时行血液和组织的HRR基因检测，收集患者基因检测结果及临床相关资料。结果:在79例患者血液标本检测中发现10例（12.6%）有临床意义HRR突变，在53例患者组织标本检测中发现9例（17.0%）有临床意义HRR突变。40例同时行血液和组织的HRR基因检测患者中常见的有临床意义HRR突变为CDK12突变4例（10.0%）、ATM突变3例（7.5%）、BRCA1突变2例（5.0%）。13例有临床意义HRR突变患者中常见共存突变为TP53突变10例（76.9%）、APC突变5例（38.5%）、PIK3CA突变4例（30.8%）。40例患者中13例患者血液和/或组织中有临床意义HRR突变，27例患者血液和组织中均无任何临床意义HRR突变且两组相比，有临床意义HRR突变组肿瘤突变负荷（tumor mutational burden，TMB）为6.17(2.24～11.52)，而未携带HRR突变组TMB为0.4(0～3.75)，差异有统计学意义（P＜0.05）。40例患者组织检测中7例HRR有临床意义的突变，33例无HRR突变，血液检测中10例HRR有临床意义的突变，30例无HRR突变，一致性检验的Kappa值为0.333（P=0.031）。结论:携带有临床意义HRR突变的消化道肿瘤患者TMB更高，血液和组织检测HRR突变有较好的一致性。     

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...     

Effect of Replacement of Wharton Acellular Jelly With FBS on the Expression of Megakaryocyte Linear Markers in Hematopoietic Stem Cells CD34+

Objective: Animal environments for the growth of stem cells cause the transmission of some diseases and immune problems for the recipient. Accordingly, replacing these environments with healthy environments, at least with human resources, is essential.  One of the media that can be used as an alternative to animal serums is Wharton acellular jelly (AWJ).  Therefore, in this study, we intend to replace FBS with Wharton jelly and investigate its effect on the expression of megakaryocyte-related genes and markers in stem cells. Materials and Methods: In this study, cord blood-derived CD34 positive HSCs were cultured and expanded in the presence of cytokines including SCF, TPO, and FLT3-L. Then, the culture of expanded CD34 positive HSCs was performed in two groups: 1) IMDM culture medium containing 10% FBS and 100 ng / ml thrombopoietin cytokine 2) IMDM culture medium containing 10% AWJ, 100 ng / ml thrombopoietin cytokine.  Finally, CD41 expressing cells were analyzed with the flow cytometry method. The genes related to megakaryocyte lineage including FLI1 and GATA2 were also evaluated using the RT-PCR technique.  Results: The expression of CD41, a specific marker of megakaryocyte lineage in culture medium containing Wharton acellular jelly was increased compared to the FBS group. Additionally, the expression of GATA2 and FLI1 genes was significantly increased related to the control group. Conclusion: This study provided evidence of differentiation of CD34 positive hematopoietic stem cells from umbilical cord blood to megakaryocytes in a culture medium containing AWJ.     

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.