Similar long-term swallowing outcomes for accelerated, mildly-hypofractionated radiotherapy compared to conventional fractionation in oropharynx cancer: a multi-centre study

alexandrossfakianakis shared this article with you from Inoreader Similar long-term swallowing outcomes for accelerated, mildly-hypofractionated radiotherapy compared to conventional fractionation in oropharynx cancer: a multi-centre study via radiotheraphy Publication date: Available online 17 May 2022 Source: Radiotherapy and Oncology Author(s): J.M. Price, C.M. West, L.M. Dixon, Z. Iyizoba-Ebozue, K. Garcez, L. Lee, A. McPartlin, F. Slevin, A. Sykes, R.J.D. Prestwich, D.J. Thomson View on Web

Inoreader. Take back control of your news feed. Follow us on Twitter and Facebook.

The Conventional Technique Versus the No-touch Isolation Technique for Primary Tumor Resection in Patients With Colon Cancer (JCOG1006): A Multicenter, Open-label, Randomized, Phase III Trial

alexandrossfakianakis shared this article with you from Inoreader The Conventional Technique Versus the No-touch Isolation Technique for Primary Tumor Resection in Patients With Colon Cancer (JCOG1006): A Multicenter, Open-label, Randomized, Phase III Trial via Annals of Surgery - Most Popular Articles Objective: This phase III trial evaluated whether the no touch was superior to the conventional in patients with cT3/T4 colon cancer. Background: No touch involves ligating blood vessels that feed the primary tumor to limit cancer cell spreading. However, previous studies did not confirm the efficacy of the no touch. Methods: This open-label, randomized, phase III trial was conducted at 30 Japanese centers. The eligibility criteria were histologically proven colon cancer; clinical classification of T3–4, N0–2, andM0; and patients aged 20 to 80years. Patients were randomized (1:1) to undergo open surgery with conventional or the no touch. Patients with pathological stage III disease received adjuvant capecitabine chemotherapy. The primary endpoint was disease-free survival (DFS) according to the intention-to-treat principle. Results: Between January 2011 and November 2015, 853 patients were randomized to the conventional group (427 patients) or the no touch group (426 patients). The 3-year DFS were 77.3% [95% confidence interval (CI) 73.1%–81.0%] and 76.2% (95% CI 71.9%–80.0%) in the conventional and no touch groups, respectively. The superiority of no touch was not confirmed: hazard ratio for DFS = 1.029 (95% CI 0.800– 1.324; 1-sided P = 0.59). Operative morbidity was observed in 31 of 427 conventional patients (7%) and 26 of 426 no touch patients (6%). All grade adverse events were similar between the conventional and no touch groups. No in-hospital mortality occurred in either group. Conclusion: The present study failed to confirm the superiority of the no touch. View on Web

Inoreader. Take back control of your news feed. Follow us on Twitter and Facebook.

Effects of different universal adhesives and surface treatments on repair bond strength between resin composites

alexandrossfakianakis shared this article with you from Inoreader Effects of different universal adhesives and surface treatments on repair bond strength between resin composites via Journal of Esthetic and Restorative Dentistry Abstract Objective This study aimed to evaluate the effects of different universal adhesives and surface treatments on the repair bond strength between resin composites. Materials and Methods A total of 220 composite samples were divided into three groups according to the adhesive resin to be applied: 1) Scotchbond Universal, 2) G-Premio Bond, and 3) Peak Universal Bond. They were then divided into seven subgroups according to surface treatments (n = 10): A) air abrasion, B) air abrasion+silane, C) hydrofluoric acid, D) hydrofluoric acid+silane, E) air abrasion+hydrofluoric acid+silane, F) silane, and G) no surface treatment (negative control). After surface treatment, a repair composite was applied. Samples aged in the thermocycle were subjected to micro-tensile bond strength testing. Cohesive strength values of 10 non-aged composite blocks were used as a positive control. Kruskal–Wallis and one-way ANOVA tests were used for statistical evaluation. Fractured surfaces were evaluated using a scanning electron microscope. Results In Scotchbond Universal and G-Premio Bond, the mean micro-tensile bond strength value of the no surface treatment subgroup was significantly lower than that of the positive control. All subgroups of Peak Universal Bond showed similar values to the positive control. Conclusion While Scotchbond Universal and G-Premio Bond required mechanical roughening before adhesive application, Peak Universal Bond did not require any surface treatment. Clinical Significance Different universal adhesives may show different repair bonding strengths with different surface treatments. Since achieving a standard in this regard can be associated with many independent factors, clinicians should determine how to apply the adhesive they use most effectively with the most appropriate surface treatment based on their own clinical experience. View on Web

Inoreader. Take back control of your news feed. Follow us on Twitter and Facebook.

Relationship between meteorological factors, air pollutants and hand, foot and mouth disease from 2014 to 2020

alexandrossfakianakis shared this article with you from Inoreader Relationship between meteorological factors, air pollutants and hand, foot and mouth disease from 2014 to 2020 via Most Recent Articles: BMC Public Health Meteorological factors and air pollutants have been reported to be associated with hand, foot, and mouth disease (HFMD) epidemics before the introduction of vaccine. However, there is limited evidence for stud... View on Web

Inoreader. Take back control of your news feed. Follow us on Twitter and Facebook.

The influence of implant design on implant stability in low‐density bone under guided surgical template in inexperienced surgeons: A pilot randomized controlled clinical trial using resonance frequency analysis

alexandrossfakianakis shared this article with you from Inoreader The influence of implant design on implant stability in low‐density bone under guided surgical template in inexperienced surgeons: A pilot randomized controlled clinical trial using resonance frequency analysis via Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research Abstract Introduction There are several factors that greatly influence implant stability with implant design being a paramount factor; however, few studies investigate its impact. Aim To investigate the implant stability in relation to two different implant designs, a cylindrical shaped single-threaded design (CS/ST) and a tapered shaped double-threaded design (TS/DT) using resonance frequency analysis over the first 8 weeks after implantation. Materials and Methods Twenty-eight implants were randomly allocated using computer-generated random numbers into two groups and were placed as single tooth implant in the posterior arch in human jaw as specimens. iCAT™ CBCT scan (Hatfield, PA) was used to determine the bone density according to Misch's Bone classification. The osseotomy sites were prepared and implants were placed with guided surgical template by inexperienced surgeons which were prepared with the same implant planning software (3shape® implant studio). The implant stability was measured using the resonance frequency analysis Osstell® ISQ (Osstell AB, Sweden) on the implant level over the first 8 weeks at three different time intervals. A mean implant stability quotient (ISQ) value was recorded at each measurement time points. The first ISQ of each implant recorded at the time of implant placement were considered as baseline and were the so-called primary stability. Results All 28 dental implants were analyzed. A similar pattern of implant stability changes was observed in both implant designs. A significant decreased was found at the first 4 weeks after implantation (p < 0.05) before ascending to maximum cumulative stability by the eighth week (p < 0.05). Between the two groups, TS/DT group had a higher mean ISQ values than that of the CS/ST group at all three observation periods but did not reach statistical significance (p = 0.69). Regarding different types of bone, TS/DT showed a significant difference in mean ISQ values in D4 bone. To date, all 28 implants are in function with no failure/and or complications. Conclusions The difference in implant design did not significantly influence the implant stability. TS/DT shows superiority over CS/ST when placed in D4 bone and offer a significant advantage due to their positive bounce back of the ISQ values by the eighth week after implant installation. Clinical Trial Registration: TCTR20211020005. View on Web

Inoreader. Take back control of your news feed. Follow us on Twitter and Facebook.