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.     

Confounded association between proton pump inhibitor use and risk of biliary tract cancer: Result from three cohorts

Recent epidemiological studies suggested that proton pump inhibitor (PPI) use was associated with an increased risk of biliary tract cancer (BTC), however, confounders were not adequately controlled. Our study aimed to evaluate PPI use and subsequent risk of BTC and its subtypes in three well-established cohorts. We conducted a pooled analysis of the subjects free of cancers in UK Biobank (n = 463 643), Nurses' Health Study (NHS, n = 80 235) and NHS II (n = 95 869). Propensity score weighted Cox models were used to estimate marginal HRs of PPIs use on BTC risk, accounting for potential confounders. We documented 284 BTC cases in UK Biobank (median follow-up: 7.6 years), and 91 cases in NHS and NHS II cohorts (median follow-up: 15.8 years). In UK biobank, PPI users had a 96% higher risk of BTC compared to nonusers in crude model (HR 1.96, 95% CI 1.44-2.66), but the effect was attenuated to null after adjusting for potential confounders (HR 0.95, 95% CI 0.60-1.49). PPI use was not associated with risk of BTC in the pooled analysis of three cohorts (HR 0.93, 95% CI 0.60-1.43). We also observed no associations between PPI use with risk of intrahepatic (HR 1.00, 95% CI 0.49-2.04), extrahepatic bile duct (HR 1.09, 95% CI 0.52-2.27) and gallbladder cancers (HR 0.66, 95% CI 0.26-1.66) in UK Biobank. In summary, regular use of PPIs was not associated with the risk of BTC and its subtypes.