6 research outputs found

    ์ธ์ง€์ •์ƒ ๋…ธ์ธ๊ตฐ ๋ฐ ์•Œ์ธ ํ•˜์ด๋จธ๋ณ‘ ํ™˜์ž๊ตฐ์—์„œ ์†ก๊ณผ์ฒด ์šฉ์ ๊ณผ ์œ ๋ ฅ ๋ ˜์ˆ˜๋ฉดํ–‰๋™์žฅ์•  ์‚ฌ์ด์˜ ๊ด€๊ณ„์— ๋Œ€ํ•œ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ

    Get PDF
    ํ•™์œ„๋…ผ๋ฌธ (๋ฐ•์‚ฌ) -- ์„œ์šธ๋Œ€ํ•™๊ต ๋Œ€ํ•™์› : ์ž์—ฐ๊ณผํ•™๋Œ€ํ•™ ๋‡Œ์ธ์ง€๊ณผํ•™๊ณผ, 2020. 8. ๊น€๊ธฐ์›….Background and Objectives: Rapid eye movement (REM) sleep behavior disorder (RBD) is a parasomnia characterized by loss of normal skeletal muscle atonia during REM sleep and dream-enacting behavior. RBD can occur in association with (secondary RBD) or without (idiopathic RBD) a neurodegenerative disorder, and idiopathic RBD accounts for up to 60% at the diagnosis. Although secondary RBD is strongly related to synucleinopathies, it has also been reported in the Alzheimers disease (AD) and the prevalence of RBD in AD is estimated to be around 10%. Although melatonin has been reported to improve the symptoms of RBD, the association of pineal gland with RBD has never been investigated in cognitively normal (CN) elderly individuals as well as in AD patients. In the current study, we first investigated the association between pineal gland volume and RBD symptoms in both CN elderly individuals and AD patients. Methods: We enrolled 245 community-dwelling CN elderly individuals without major psychiatric or neurological disorders and 296 community-dwelling probable AD patients who did not meet the diagnostic criteria for possible or probable dementia with Lewy bodies. Among the AD participants, 93 were Aฮฒ-positive on 18F-Florbetaben amyloid positron emission tomography. We assessed RBD symptoms using the REM Sleep Behavior Disorder Screening Questionnaire (RBDSQ) and defined probable RBD (pRBD) as achieving a score of 5 or higher in the RBDSQ. We manually segmented the pineal gland on 3T T1-weighted brain magnetic resonance imaging and estimated its volume. Results: Smaller pineal parenchyma volume was associated with more severe RBD symptoms in both CN elderly individuals (p < 0.001) and AD patients (p < 0.001). The participants with pRBD showed smaller pineal parenchyma volume than those without pRBD in both CN (p < 0.001) and AD (p < 0.001) groups. The larger pineal parenchyma volume was associated with lower risk of prevalent pRBD in both CN (OR = 0.939, 95% CI = 0.912โ€“0.966, p < 0.001) and AD (OR = 0.909, 95% CI = 0.878โ€“0.942, p < 0.001) patients. The pineal parenchyma volume showed good diagnostic accuracy for prevalent pRBD in both CN (AUC = 0.82, 95% CI = 0.762โ€“0.863, p < 0.0001) and AD (AUC = 0.80, 95% CI = 0.750โ€“0.844, p < 0.0001) patients. These results were not changed when we analyzed the 93 participants with Aฮฒ-positive AD separately. Conclusion: Our findings suggest that smaller pineal parenchyma volume is associated with more symptoms of RBD and the risk of prevalent pRBD in both CN elderly individuals and AD patients.์—ฐ๊ตฌ๋ฐฐ๊ฒฝ ๋ฐ ๋ชฉ์ : ๋ ˜์ˆ˜๋ฉดํ–‰๋™์žฅ์•  (REM sleep behavior disorder, RBD)๋Š” ๋ ˜์ˆ˜๋ฉด ๋™์•ˆ ์ •์ƒ์ ์œผ๋กœ ๋ฐœ์ƒํ•˜๋Š” ๊ณจ๊ฒฉ๊ทผ์˜ ๋ฌด๊ธด์žฅ์ฆ์ด ์†Œ์‹ค๋˜์–ด ๊ฟˆ์˜ ๋‚ด์šฉ๊ณผ ๊ด€๋ จ๋œ ์›€์ง์ž„์ด ๋‚˜ํƒ€๋‚˜๋Š” ๊ฒƒ์„ ํŠน์ง•์œผ๋กœ ํ•˜๋Š” ์‚ฌ๊ฑด์ˆ˜๋ฉด ์ค‘ ํ•˜๋‚˜์ด๋‹ค. RBD๋Š” ๋‹ค๋ฅธ ์‹ ๊ฒฝํ•™์  ์งˆํ™˜์ด ๋™๋ฐ˜๋˜๊ฑฐ๋‚˜ (secondary RBD) ๋™๋ฐ˜๋˜์ง€ ์•Š์€ ์ƒํƒœ (idiopathic RBD)์—์„œ ๋ฐœ๋ณ‘ํ•  ์ˆ˜ ์žˆ์œผ๋ฉฐ, ์ง„๋‹จ ์‹œ idiopathic RBD์˜ ๊ฒฝ์šฐ๊ฐ€ ์ตœ๋Œ€ 60%๋ฅผ ์ฐจ์ง€ํ•œ๋‹ค. Secondary RBD๋Š” ์‹œ๋ˆ„ํด๋ ˆ์ธ๋ณ‘์ฆ๋“ค๊ณผ ๋ฐ€์ ‘ํ•˜๊ฒŒ ์—ฐ๊ด€๋˜์–ด ์žˆ์œผ๋‚˜, ์•Œ์ธ ํ•˜์ด๋จธ๋ณ‘ (Alzheimers disease, AD)ํ™˜์ž์—์„œ๋„ ๋ณด๊ณ ๋˜์—ˆ์œผ๋ฉฐ ๊ทธ ์œ ๋ณ‘๋ฅ ์€ ์•ฝ 10%๋กœ ์ถ”์ •๋œ๋‹ค. ๋น„๋ก ๋ฉœ๋ผํ† ๋‹Œ์ด RBD ์ฆ์ƒ์™„ํ™”์— ํšจ๊ณผ์ ์ด๋ผ๊ณ  ๋ณด๊ณ ๋˜๊ณ  ์žˆ์ง€๋งŒ, ์ธ์ง€์ •์ƒ ๋…ธ์ธ๊ณผ AD ํ™˜์ž์—์„œ ์†ก๊ณผ์ฒด์™€ RBD ์‚ฌ์ด์˜ ๊ด€๊ณ„์„ฑ์€ ์•„์ง๊นŒ์ง€ ์กฐ์‚ฌ๋œ ๋ฐ” ์—†๋‹ค. ๋ณธ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ์—์„œ๋Š” ์ธ์ง€์ •์ƒ ๋…ธ์ธ๊ณผ AD ํ™˜์ž๋ฅผ ๋Œ€์ƒ์œผ๋กœ ์†ก๊ณผ์ฒด ์šฉ์ ๊ณผ RBD ์ฆ์ƒ ๊ฐ„์˜ ๊ด€๊ณ„์„ฑ์„ ์กฐ์‚ฌํ•˜์˜€๋‹ค. ์—ฐ๊ตฌ๋ฐฉ๋ฒ•: ๋ณธ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ๋Š” ์ฃผ์š” ์ •์‹ ํ•™์  ๋˜๋Š” ์‹ ๊ฒฝํ•™์  ์งˆํ™˜์ด ์—†๋Š” 245๋ช…์˜ ์ง€์—ญ์‚ฌํšŒ ๊ฑฐ์ฃผ ์ธ์ง€์ •์ƒ ๋…ธ์ธ๊ณผ, ๊ฐ€๋Šฅ ๋˜๋Š” ์œ ๋ ฅ ๋ฃจ์ด์†Œ์ฒด ์น˜๋งค ์ง„๋‹จ๊ธฐ์ค€์— ํ•ด๋‹น๋˜์ง€ ์•Š๋Š” 296๋ช…์˜ ์ง€์—ญ์‚ฌํšŒ ๊ฑฐ์ฃผ ์œ ๋ ฅ ์•Œ์ธ ํ•˜์ด๋จธ๋ณ‘ ํ™˜์ž๋ฅผ ๋Œ€์ƒ์œผ๋กœ ์ง„ํ–‰ํ•˜์˜€๋‹ค. ์•Œ์ธ ํ•˜์ด๋จธ๋ณ‘ ํ™˜์ž ์ค‘ 93๋ช…์ด 18F-Florbetaben ์•„๋ฐ€๋กœ์ด๋“œ ์–‘์ „์ž๋‹จ์ธต์ดฌ์˜์„ ํ†ตํ•ด ๋ฒ ํƒ€์•„๋ฐ€๋กœ์ด๋“œ ์–‘์„ฑ์†Œ๊ฒฌ์„ ๋ณด์˜€๋‹ค. RBD ์ฆ์ƒ์€ ๋ ˜์ˆ˜๋ฉดํ–‰๋™์žฅ์•  ์„ ๋ณ„๊ฒ€์‚ฌ ์„ค๋ฌธ์ง€ (RBDSQ)๋ฅผ ์‚ฌ์šฉํ•˜์—ฌ ์ธก์ •ํ•˜์˜€๊ณ , RBDSQ ์ ์ˆ˜ 5์  ์ด์ƒ์„ ์œ ๋ ฅ ๋ ˜์ˆ˜๋ฉดํ–‰๋™์žฅ์•  (probable RBD, pRBD)๋กœ ์ •์˜ํ•˜์˜€๋‹ค. ์†ก๊ณผ์ฒด๋ฅผ T1-๊ฐ•์กฐ ๋‡Œ ์ž๊ธฐ๊ณต๋ช…์˜์ƒ์—์„œ ์ˆ˜๋™์œผ๋กœ ๊ตฌํšํ™”ํ•˜์—ฌ ์šฉ์ ์„ ์ธก์ •ํ•˜์˜€๋‹ค. ์—ฐ๊ตฌ๊ฒฐ๊ณผ: ์ธ์ง€์ •์ƒ ๋…ธ์ธ๊ตฐ (p < 0.001)๊ณผ ์•Œ์ธ ํ•˜์ด๋จธ๋ณ‘ ํ™˜์ž๊ตฐ (p < 0.001) ์—์„œ ์†ก๊ณผ์ฒด ์‹ค์งˆ ์šฉ์ ์ด ์ž‘์•„์งˆ์ˆ˜๋ก ๋” ์‹ฌํ•œ RBD ์ฆ์ƒ์„ ๋‚˜ํƒ€๋ƒˆ๋‹ค. ์ธ์ง€์ •์ƒ ๋…ธ์ธ๊ตฐ (p < 0.001)๊ณผ ์•Œ์ธ ํ•˜์ด๋จธ๋ณ‘ ํ™˜์ž๊ตฐ (p < 0.001) ์—์„œ pRBD ํ™˜์ž๋Š” ๋น„ํ™˜์ž๊ตฐ์— ๋น„ํ•ด ๋” ์ž‘์€ ์†ก๊ณผ์ฒด ์‹ค์งˆ ์šฉ์ ์„ ๊ฐ€์ง€๊ณ  ์žˆ์—ˆ๋‹ค. ์ธ์ง€์ •์ƒ ๋…ธ์ธ๊ตฐ (OR = 0.939, 95% CI = 0.912 โ€“ 0.966, p < 0.001)๊ณผ ์•Œ์ธ ํ•˜์ด๋จธ๋ณ‘ ํ™˜์ž๊ตฐ (OR = 0.909, 95% CI = 0.878 โ€“ 0.942, p < 0.001) ์—์„œ ์†ก๊ณผ์ฒด ์‹ค์งˆ ์šฉ์ ์ด ํด์ˆ˜๋ก pRBD ์œ ๋ณ‘ ์œ„ํ—˜์ด ๊ฐ์†Œํ•˜์˜€๋‹ค. ์ธ์ง€์ •์ƒ ๋…ธ์ธ๊ตฐ (AUC = 0.82, 95% CI = 0.762 โ€“ 0.863, p < 0.0001)๊ณผ ์•Œ์ธ ํ•˜์ด๋จธ๋ณ‘ ํ™˜์ž๊ตฐ (AUC = 0.80, 95% CI = 0.750 โ€“ 0.844, p < 0.0001) ์—์„œ ์†ก๊ณผ์ฒด ์‹ค์งˆ ์šฉ์ ์€ pRBD ์œ ๋ณ‘ ์œ„ํ—˜์— ๋Œ€ํ•ด ์šฐ์ˆ˜ํ•œ ์ง„๋‹จ ์ •ํ™•๋„๋ฅผ ๋ณด์—ฌ์ฃผ์—ˆ๋‹ค. ์ด๋Ÿฌํ•œ ๊ฒฐ๊ณผ๋Š” ์•„๋ฐ€๋กœ์ด๋“œ ์–‘์„ฑ์†Œ๊ฒฌ์„ ๋ณด์ธ 93๋ช…์˜ AD ํ™˜์ž๋ฅผ ๋ณ„๋„๋กœ ๋ถ„์„ํ•œ ๊ฒฝ์šฐ์—๋„ ๋ณ€ํ•˜์ง€ ์•Š์•˜๋‹ค. ๊ฒฐ๋ก : ๋ณธ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ๋Š” ์ธ์ง€์ •์ƒ ๋…ธ์ธ๊ณผ AD ํ™˜์ž์—์„œ ์ž‘์€ ์†ก๊ณผ์ฒด ์‹ค์งˆ ์šฉ์ ์ด ๋” ์‹ฌํ•œ RBD ์ฆ์ƒ๊ณผ ๋” ๋†’์€ pRBD ์œ ๋ณ‘ ์œ„ํ—˜์„ฑ๊ณผ ์—ฐ๊ด€๋˜์–ด ์žˆ์Œ์„ ์ œ์‹œํ•œ๋‹ค.1. Introduction 1 1.1. Study Background 1 1.2. Purpose of Research 3 2. Methods 4 2.1. Study participants 4 2.1.1.Participants with normal cognition 4 2.1.2. Participants with Alzheimers disease 5 2.2. Diagnostic assessments 5 2.3. Assessment of RBD symptoms 6 2.4. Assessment of pineal gland volume 7 2.5. Assessment of brain amyloid deposition 8 2.6. Statistical analyses 9 2.6.1. Pineal gland volume and RBD in CN 9 2.6.2. Pineal gland volume and RBD in AD 10 3. Results 12 4. Discussion 14 5. Conclusion 20 Bibliography 28 ๊ตญ๋ฌธ์ดˆ๋ก 37Docto

    Temporomandibular Disorders during or after Dental Implant Treatment

    Get PDF
    Purpose: Temporomandibular disorders (TMD) may occur during or after regular dental treatment. The aim of this study is to suggest management of TMD involved in dental implant treatment. Materials and Methods: We investgated the etiology, site of implantation, symptoms, treatments and improvements with a focus on TMD among patients who complained of TMD symptoms during or after dental implant treatment. Results: A total of 19 patients complained of TMD associated with implant treatment. Thirteen patients complained of masticatory muscle pain, 13 patients complained of temporomandibular joint (TMJ) pain, and 8 patients complained of both masticatory muscle pain and TMJ pain. The patients were treated primarily with counselling, medication and physical therapy, and secondarily with occlusal splint therapy. Six patients received only primary treatment, and their average recovery time was 4.2 months. Four patients received secondary treatment, and their average recovery time was 8.5 months. None of the patients underwent surgical intervention of the TMJ. Conclusion: Patients who have a risk of developing TMD may experience TMD symptoms during or after implant treatment, such as facial pain, masticatory myalgia, TMJ pain and mouth opening limitation. To mitigate these symptoms, we suggest the application of the usual treatment protocols for TMD.ope

    ๋‹จ์ผ๋ถ„์ž FRET ๋ฐฉ๋ฒ•์„ ์ด์šฉํ•œ Mph1 ๋‹จ๋ฐฑ์งˆ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ

    No full text
    ํ•™์œ„๋…ผ๋ฌธ (์„์‚ฌ)-- ์„œ์šธ๋Œ€ํ•™๊ต ๋Œ€ํ•™์› : ๋ฌผ๋ฆฌยท์ฒœ๋ฌธํ•™๋ถ€(๋ฌผ๋ฆฌํ•™์ „๊ณต), 2014. 2. ํ™์„ฑ์ฒ .Saccharomyces cerevisiae ์—์„œ ๋ฐœ๊ฒฌ๋˜๋Š” ๋‹จ๋ฐฑ์งˆ Mph1์€ ATP๋ฅผ ์†Œ๋ชจํ•˜๋ฉฐ DNA ๊ฐ€๋‹ฅ์„ ํ‘ธ๋Š” helicase๋กœ 3-5์˜ ๋ฐฉํ–ฅ์„ฑ์„ ์ง€๋‹Œ๋‹ค. ์ด ๋‹จ๋ฐฑ์งˆ์€ ์ธ๊ฐ„์—์„œ ๋ฐœ๊ฒฌ๋˜๋Š” FANCM๊ณผ ๋น„์Šทํ•˜๊ฒŒ, DNA ๊ฐ€๋‹ฅ ๊ฐ„ ๊ณต์œ ๊ฒฐํ•ฉ(ICL)์œผ๋กœ ์ธํ•ด DNA๊ฐ€ ํ’€๋ฆฌ์ง€ ๋ชปํ•˜์—ฌ ๋ณต์ œ๊ฐ€ ์ค‘๋‹จ๋œ DNA ๋ณต์ œ ํฌํฌ๋ฅผ ๋ณต์›ํ•˜๋Š”๋ฐ ํ•œ ์—ญํ• ์„ ํ•˜๋Š” ๊ฒƒ์œผ๋กœ ์•Œ๋ ค์ ธ ์žˆ๋‹ค. ๋ณธ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ์—์„œ๋Š” ์ด๋Ÿฌํ•œ ๋ณต๊ตฌ๊ณผ์ •์ด ์–ด๋–ป๊ฒŒ ์ผ์–ด๋‚˜๋Š”์ง€ ์•Œ์•„๋ณด๊ธฐ ์œ„ํ•˜์—ฌ, ๋‹จ๋ถ„์ž FRET๋ฒ•์œผ๋กœ ์ค‘๋‹จ๋œ ๋ณต์ œ ํฌํฌ๋ฅผ ๋˜๋Œ๋ฆฌ๋Š” Fork Regression ๊ณผ์ •์„ ๊ด€์ฐฐํ•˜์˜€๋‹ค. ๋ณธ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ๋ฅผ ํ†ตํ•ด Chicken-foot ๊ตฌ์กฐ์˜ ํ˜•์„ฑ๊ณผ ์ง€์—ฐ ๊ฐ€๋‹ฅ์ด ํ’€๋ฆฌ๋Š” ๊ณผ์ •๊ฐ„ ํฐ ์—ฐ๊ด€์„ฑ์ด ์žˆ๋Š” ๊ฒƒ์„ ๋ฐœ๊ฒฌํ•˜์˜€๋‹ค. ๋˜ํ•œ DNA ๊ฐ€๋‹ฅ์ด ์„œ๋กœ ์ผ์น˜ํ•˜์ง€ ์•Š์•„ Fork Regression์ด ์ผ์–ด๋‚˜์ง€ ๋ชปํ•˜๋Š” ์ƒํ™ฉ์— ์ฒ˜ํ•œ ๊ฒฝ์šฐ, Mph1์ด ์•ž ๋’ค๋กœ ์™•๋ณตํ•˜์—ฌ ์›€์ง์ธ๋‹ค๋Š” ๊ฒƒ ๋˜ํ•œ ๋ฐœ๊ฒฌํ•˜์˜€๋‹ค.Mph1 from Saccharomyces cerevisiae is an ATP-dependent 3-5 DNA helicase involved in DNA damage bypass. Similar to its human homologue FANCM (Fanconi anemia, complementation group M), the protein is involved in repairing DNA at stalled replication forks by inter-strand crosslinks (ICLs). Here, we studied the fork regression activity of Mph1 on replication forks by single-molecule FRET (Fluorescence resonance energy transfer). We found that formation of the chicken-foot structure, which indicates initiation of the fork regression, was closely correlated to unwinding of lagging strand. In addition to that, surprisingly, we observed that Mph1 moves back and forth when it meets non-homologous pair between the leading and lagging strands.Maste
    corecore