"Check list" de los seláceos de la Formación Arenas de Huelva y de la Formación Esbarrondadoiro (Neógeno de las cuencas del Guadalquivir y Alvalade, 50 de la Península ibérica)

La Fm. Arenas de Huelva (Plioc. inferior), situada en el SO de la Cuenca dei Guadalquivir (Sur de Espana), se inicia con un nivel de glauconita de 2 a 4 m considerado como el marcador regional del tránsito Mioceno-Plioceno (5,33 Ma). Suprayacente a este nivel afloran arenas limosas con intercalaciones lumaquélicas de moluscos. La Fm. Esbarrondadoiro (Messiniense), localizada en la Cuenca de Alvalade (Sur de Portugal), está formada por conglomerados y arenas con abundancia de peces fósiles. Ellistado de seláceos de la Fm. Arenas de Huelva está constituido por 31 taxones, mientras que en la Fm. Esbarrondadoiro son 45. Comparando ambos listados, existe una coincidencia de 21 taxones: Notorynchus primigenius, Squalus sp., Carcharocles megalodon, Isurus desori, I. hasta/is, Megascy/iorhinus miocaenicus, Premontreia (Oxyscy/lium) cf. dachiardi, Mustelus sp., Paragaleus, Carcharhinus cf. plumbeus, C. cf. leucas, C. cf. perezii, Galeocerdo aduncus, Rhinobatos sp., Raia olisiponensis, Raia sp., Oasyatis pastinacalmarmorata, O. gr. centroura, O. gr. gigas, Oasyatis sp. Pteromylaeus y Rhinoptera. Los géneros presentes en la Fm. Esbarrondadoiro y que están ausentes en la Fm. Arenas de Huelva son: Pristiophorus, Squatina, Scy/iorhinus, Galeorhinus, Triakis, Rhizoprionodon, Sphyrna, Rhynchobatus, Anoxypristis, Torpedo, Taeniura, Gymnura, Aetobatus, My/iobatis y Mobula. Por otra parte, existen géneros presentes en la Fm. Arenas de Huelva que están ausentes en la Fm. Esbarrondadoiro: Hexanchus,'Alopias, Isurus escheri y Parotodus. Destaca en ambas formaciones la ausencia de géneros estenotérmicos de ámbitos tropicales, como Ginglymostoma, Hemipristis y Negaprion. Otro de estos géneros, Galeocerdo, aparece pero de forma muy escasa, con un diente en cada formación. EI registro contiene formas que habitaban aguas cálidas de zonas tropicales y subtropicales, si bien también aparecen géneros que frecuentan aguas tem piadas a moderadamente cálidas (Isurus, Mustelus), e incluso otros que lIegan a aguas relativamente frías (Squalus, Raia). Abundan y son variadas las especies de Oasyatis encontradas en ambas formaciones, siendo más raras las de Raia. Esto indica condiciones de aguas más cálidas en el pasado. La mayor parte de la fauna que existió en ambas formaciones frecuentaba la zona litoral nerítica; aunque otros géneros frecuentaban la zona pelágica y sólo unos pocos la zona batial. Palabras clave: seláceos, Mioceno, Plioceno, Espana, Portuga

Shark fossil diversity (Squalomorphii, Squatinomorphii, and Galeomorphii) from the Langhian of Brielas (Lower Tagus Basin, Portugal)

The fossiliferous marine Miocene sediments of the Lower Tagus Basin (Portugal) present a great diversity of Chondrichthyes forms. The current study focuses on the fossil sharks from the Langhian Vc unit of the Brielas section, located in the Setúbal Peninsula. A total of 384 isolated fossil teeth were analysed and ascribed to 17 species from the Orders Hexanchiformes, Squaliformes, Squatiniformes, Lamniformes, and Carcharhiniformes. Centrophorus granulosus and Iago angustidens are described for the first time in Portuguese sediments, whereas Pachyscyllium dachiardii and Rhizoprionodon ficheuri represent only their second reported occurrence. Galeorhinus goncalvesi was already known from the Portuguese uppermost Miocene (Alvalade Basin), but it is now recognized in older sediments. Furthermore, the new material seems to include the first reported occurrence of Hexanchus cf. agassizi in Miocene sediments. As a whole, these new findings support the previous palaeoenvironment characterization of a warm infralittoral setting gradually deepening to a circalittoral one, where seasonal upwelling phenomena could have occurred

Vaccine effectiveness against COVID-19 hospitalisation in adults (≥ 20 years) during Alpha- and Delta-dominant circulation: I-MOVE-COVID-19 and VEBIS SARI VE networks, Europe, 2021

Members of the I-MOVE-COVID-19 and VEBIS hospital study teams (in addition to the named authors): Svjetlana Karabuva, Petra Tomaš Petrić, Marija Marković, Sandra Ljubičić, Bojana Mahmutović, Irena Tabain, Petra Smoljo, Iva Pem Novosel, Tanya Melillo, John Paul Cauchi, Benédicte Lissoir, Xavier Holemans, Marc Hainaut, Nicolas Dauby, Benedicte Delaere, Marc Bourgeois, Evelyn Petit, Marijke Reynders, Door Jouck, Koen Magerman, Marieke Bleyen, Melissa Vermeulen, Sébastien Fierens, François Dufrasne, Siel Daelemans, Ala’a Al Kerwi, Francoise Berthet, Guy Fagherazzi, Myriam Alexandre, Charlene Bennett, Jim Christle, Jeff Connell, Peter Doran, Laura Feeney, Binita Maharjan, Sinead McDermott, Rosa McNamara, Nadra Nurdin, Salif Mamadou Cissé, Anne-Sophie L'Honneur, Xavier Duval, Yolande Costa, Fidouh Nadhira, Florence Galtier, Laura Crantelle, Vincent Foulongne, Phillipe Vanhems, Sélilah Amour, Bruno Lina, Fabrice Lainé, Laetitia Gallais, Gisèle Lagathu, Anna Maisa, Yacine Saidi, Christine Durier, Rebecca Bauer, Ana Paula Rodrigues, Adriana Silva, Raquel Guiomar, Margarida Tavares, Débora Pereira, Maria José Manata, Heidi Gruner, André Almeida, Paula Pinto, Cristina Bárbara, Itziar Casado, Ana Miqueleiz, Ana Navascués, Camino Trobajo-Sanmartín, Miguel Fernández-Huerta, María Eugenia Portillo, Carmen Ezpeleta, Nerea Egüés, Manuel García Cenoz, Eva Ardanaz, Marcela Guevara, Conchi Moreno-Iribas, Hana Orlíková, Carmen Mihaela Dorobat, Carmen Manciuc, Simin Aysel Florescu, Alexandru Marin, Sorin Dinu, Catalina Pascu, Alina Ivanciuc, Iulia Bistriceanu, Mihaela Oprea, Maria Elena Mihai, Silke Buda, Ute Preuss, Marianne Wedde, Auksė Mickienė, Giedrė Gefenaitė, Alain Moren, Anthony NardoneIntroduction: Two large multicentre European hospital networks have estimated vaccine effectiveness (VE) against COVID-19 since 2021. Aim: We aimed to measure VE against PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 in hospitalised severe acute respiratory illness (SARI) patients ≥ 20 years, combining data from these networks during Alpha (March–June)- and Delta (June–December)-dominant periods, 2021. Methods: Forty-six participating hospitals across 14 countries follow a similar generic protocol using the test-negative case–control design. We defined complete primary series vaccination (PSV) as two doses of a two-dose or one of a single-dose vaccine ≥ 14 days before onset. Results: We included 1,087 cases (538 controls) and 1,669 cases (1,442 controls) in the Alpha- and Delta-dominant periods, respectively. During the Alpha period, VE against hospitalisation with SARS-CoV2 for complete Comirnaty PSV was 85% (95% CI: 69–92) overall and 75% (95% CI: 42–90) in those aged ≥ 80 years. During the Delta period, among SARI patients ≥ 20 years with symptom onset ≥ 150 days from last PSV dose, VE for complete Comirnaty PSV was 54% (95% CI: 18–74). Among those receiving Comirnaty PSV and mRNA booster (any product) ≥ 150 days after last PSV dose, VE was 91% (95% CI: 57–98). In time-since-vaccination analysis, complete all-product PSV VE was > 90% in those with their last dose < 90 days before onset; ≥ 70% in those 90–179 days before onset. Conclusions: Our results from this EU multi-country hospital setting showed that VE for complete PSV alone was higher in the Alpha- than the Delta-dominant period, and addition of a first booster dose during the latter period increased VE to over 90%.Key public health message: - What did you want to address in this study? To understand how well the COVID-19 vaccine was performing in Europe against hospitalisation during SARS-CoV-2 Alpha and Delta variant periods, we present vaccine effectiveness results from a multi-country study of complete and booster dose COVID-19 vaccination among adults (aged 20 years and over). - What have we learnt from this study? Between March and June 2021 (Alpha period), vaccine effectiveness against hospitalisation with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 was 43% for partial vaccination and 86% for complete vaccination. For June to December 2021 (Delta period), vaccine effectiveness for complete vaccination was lower (52%) but with addition of an mRNA booster dose, effectiveness reached 91%, and remained > 90% up to 119 days after the booster dose. - What are the implications of your findings for public health? In Europe in 2021, COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness results for the Alpha period indicated an excellent benefit for preventing hospitalisation after complete vaccination. During Delta variant circulation, however, a booster dose was required to achieve this level of effectiveness, and this was maintained for up to 4 months post booster.info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

Vaccine effectiveness against COVID-19 hospitalisation in adults (≥ 20 years) during Omicron-dominant circulation: I-MOVE-COVID-19 and VEBIS SARI VE networks, Europe, 2021 to 2022

Introduction: The I-MOVE-COVID-19 and VEBIS hospital networks have been measuring COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness (VE) in participating European countries since early 2021. Aim: We aimed to measure VE against PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 in patients ≥ 20 years hospitalised with severe acute respiratory infection (SARI) from December 2021 to July 2022 (Omicron-dominant period). Methods: In both networks, 46 hospitals (13 countries) follow a similar test-negative case-control protocol. We defined complete primary series vaccination (PSV) and first booster dose vaccination as last dose of either vaccine received ≥ 14 days before symptom onset (stratifying first booster into received < 150 and ≥ 150 days after last PSV dose). We measured VE overall, by vaccine category/product, age group and time since first mRNA booster dose, adjusting by site as a fixed effect, and by swab date, age, sex, and presence/absence of at least one commonly collected chronic condition. Results: We included 2,779 cases and 2,362 controls. The VE of all vaccine products combined against hospitalisation for laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 was 43% (95% CI: 29-54) for complete PSV (with last dose received ≥ 150 days before onset), while it was 59% (95% CI: 51-66) after addition of one booster dose. The VE was 85% (95% CI: 78-89), 70% (95% CI: 61-77) and 36% (95% CI: 17-51) for those with onset 14-59 days, 60-119 days and 120-179 days after booster vaccination, respectively. Conclusions: Our results suggest that, during the Omicron period, observed VE against SARI hospitalisation improved with first mRNA booster dose, particularly for those having symptom onset < 120 days after first booster dose.Key public health message: 1. What did you want to address in this study? In order to understand how well the COVID-19 vaccine is performing in Europe against hospitalisation during the period when the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant was circulating, we investigated vaccine effectiveness using data from a multi-country study of complete and booster-dose COVID-19 vaccination among adults aged 20 years and over. 2. What have we learnt from this study? Between December 2021 and July 2022, vaccine effectiveness against hospitalisation with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 was 43% for complete vaccination. With addition of an mRNA booster dose, effectiveness was 59% overall. It was higher when onset of illness was close to the date of the last vaccination, at 85% when last booster dose was 14–59 days before onset, at 70% for 60–119 days, and falling below 40% for 120–179 days. 3. What are the implications of your findings for public health? In European hospital settings in 2022, during the Omicron period, COVID-19 mRNA booster vaccine provided an improved benefit for preventing hospitalisation, particularly if disease onset was within 4 months of receiving the booster dose.info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

Access flap and osseous resective surgery: indications and operative procedures|Chirurgia conservativa e ossea resettiva: indicazioni e step operativi

The aim of the narrative review pre-sented in this Module is to illustrate the indications and the operative steps of modern non regenerative periodontal surgical techniques with particular focus on osseous resective surgery. The authors made a selection of the available scientific literature from classic articles to the most current trends, in order to provide the scientific basis and to guide the clinician in choosing the correct surgical approach. The clinical practice guidelines (S3 lev-el) for treatment of stage I-III periodontitis published by the European Federation of Periodontology (EFP), in 2020, give an indication for osseous resective surgery in cases with deep residual pockets (PD ≥6 mm) in patients with stage III periodontitis after an adequate non-surgical therapy has been com-pleted, keeping in mind the potential risk of increase in gingival recession af-ter this type of procedure. In fact, osseous resective surgery modifies the bony support altered by periodontal disease through reshaping of the alveolar process without removing supporting bone or through the removal of part of the alveolar bone. The aim of this surgical technique is to obtain minimal probing depths and positive osseous and gingival architecture, that will allow and ease the patient in performing correct oral hygiene maneuvers. The present review describes the operative steps of the technique, starting from an accurate presurgical evalua-tion that will consider quality and quantity of the keratinized tissue, probing depth and anatomy. The incision and flap decision are carefully described, flap elevation is made, and through os-teoplasty and ostectomy maneuvers the profile of the hard tissues is re-shaped to obtain positive osseous ar-chitecture in a more apical position compared to the presurgical condition. Finally, the soft tissues are repositioned apically or at the bone crest. A modification to traditional osseous resective surgery is that of osseous surgery with fibre retention. This technique allows for a more conservative approach and can reduce post-surgi-cal recession and discomfort for the patient. It is based on the notion that supra crestal connective tissue fibres embedded into radicular cement are always present (even in diseased peri-odontium) on average about 1 to 2 mm coronally to the base of the defect. For this reason, through this ap-proach, the base of the defect is no longer made of mineralized tissue but it’s moved coronally at the level of the connective tissue attachment. The coronal shift of the most apical portion of the defect allows for a more conservative osseous resection. In conclusion, osseous resective surgery is a very effective surgical procedure in the elimination of periodontal pockets. Today it is used mostly to treat shallow intraosseous defects in non esthetic areas and in perio-prosthetic cases (such as clinical crown lengthening procedures). Having a good understanding of the rationale and of the operative steps of this surgical technique constitute the basis of every periodontal surgery

New perspectives in the use of biomaterials for periodontal regeneration

Periodontitis is a disease with a high prevalence among adults. If not treated, it can lead to loss of teeth. Periodontal therapy aims at maintaining patient's teeth through infection control and correction of non-maintainable anatomies including-when possible-regeneration of lost periodontal tissues. The biological regenerative potential of the periodontium is high, and several biomaterials can be utilized to improve the outcome of periodontal therapy. Use of different natural and synthetic materials in the periodontal field has been studied for many years. The main materials used today in periodontology analyzed in this review are: Resorbable and non-resorbable barrier membranes; autogenous, allogeneic, xenogeneic, and alloplastic bone substitutes; biological agents, such as amelogenins; platelet-derived growth factor; bone morphogenic proteins; rh fibroblast growth factor 2; teriparatide hormone; platelet concentrates; and 3D scaffolds. With the development of new surgical techniques some concepts on periodontal regeneration that were strictly applied in the past seem to be not so critical today. This can have an impact on the materials that are needed when attempting to regenerate lost periodontal structures. This review aims at presenting a rationale behind the use of biomaterials in modern periodontal regeneration

Consolidated principles and modern approaches for non surgical periodontal treatment|Principi consolidati e approcci moderni nella terapia parodontale non chirurgica della parodontite

Non-surgical periodontal therapy is the treatment that aims at removal of the etiological and risk factors of periodontitis, with the aim of preventing further damage to the periodontium and im­proving the clinical condition of the patient suffering from periodontitis. It consists of several phases, which include the plaque control, the professional removal of bacterial plaque and its retentive factors in the supragingival and subgingival areas. The purpose of this narrative review is to illustrate, in the light of the current guidelines for the treatment of periodontitis, the essential steps to obtain the preservation or restoration of a healthy periodontal condition. The patient’s plaque control is one of the fundamental aspects of periodontal therapy and strongly affects its short and long-term success. There are different ways to obtain the patient’s collaboration and his active participation in therapy, the so-called adherence. This process must be accompanied with personalized, effective and achievable oral hygiene measures. The main characteristics of the tools for plaque control are illustrated (manual or electric toothbrushes, dental floss or interproxi­mal brush etc.) and their indications to guide dental professionals in the choice of suggestions to the patient. For the removal of the supra and subgingival plaque, the principles are illus­trated according to a modern orienta­tion of mini-invasiveness. Manual or mechanical instruments, micro-powder jets, have precise characteristics that are illustrated to help understanding the advantages and disadvantages or limitations of each of them. Historically, the use of curettes was associated with the removal of large amounts of root cement, which was believed to be colonized by bacteria and toxins. The current orientation involves the removal of plaque and calculus (because it is re­tentive of plaque), without intentional removal of the root cement. The instruments, in the light of different objectives, take on other functions, with often integrated therapies performed with the different tools to optimize the advantages of each of them. Mechanical tools are efficient means for remov­ing supragingival calculus and can be used, with the right precautions for use, even in the subgingival area where they are effective, especially in areas that are difficult to access. Additional therapies are illustrated, in accordance with the literature, if they produce an effective advantage over non-surgical periodontal therapy alone, recommending the most appropriate conditions and timing. The objectives of non-surgical periodontal therapy are also illustrated, such as the reduction of plaque indexes, inflammation and the probing depth, necessary to achieve the stability of periodontal health. The objectives of the therapy also include an improvement in the quality of life perceived by the patient, who shortly after execution shows less discomfort and better masticatory function. Finally, the limits of non-surgical periodontal therapy are clarified which, while obtaining sub­stantial improvements in the patient’s clinical condition by itself, must be integrated into a broader program of periodontal therapy, sometimes including also surgical phases, and is always fol­lowed by periodontal support therapy that aims at long-term maintenance

Periodontal diagnosis and AAP-EFP 2017 CLASSIFICATION|Diagnosi parodontale e classificazione AAP-EFP 2017

ERIODONTAL DIAGNOSIS In the light of a recent opinion poll carried out on behalf of the Italian Society of Periodontology and Implantology (SIdP), the need to consolidate the inclusion of periodontal diagnosis, as a routine component, in the dental examination appears essential. The related diagnostic process is based on information obtained from medical and dental history, clinical, radiographic and laboratory tests. The purposes of this procedure are: to evaluate the presence of periodontal diseases, the related risk factors, and to quantify the severity and extent of the induced tissue damage. In periodontology the diagnostic process is indicated by the term “periodontal evaluation” and consists of three parts: clinical examination, radiographic exams and laboratory diagnostic tests; in turn, the clinical examination involves the collection of the anam nesis and the physical examination with the compilation of a special periodontal charting. In particular, during the visit, three types of anamnesis are collected: physiological, medical and dental/periodontal ones; then the execution of the physical examination involves the completion of: intraoral inspection, periodontal probing, registration of periodontal indices, periodontal phenotype evaluation, dental mobility, teeth migrations and occlusal analysis. Specifically, periodontal probing is an essential clinical procedure in the diagnostic path of periodontal diseases allowing evaluation of tissue destruction and the differential diagnosis between gingivitis and periodontitis, by means of periodontal biometric parameters. Periodontal evaluation implies, after the physical examination, the execution of radiographic exams; the rx techniques commonly used are three: intraoral radiographs, orthopantomography and computed tomography. The elective method is intraoral radiography which, in patients with suspected periodontitis with pathological probing depths and loss of clinical attachment in multiple dental sites, results in the execution of a complete systematic intraoral radiographic examination. The laboratory tests complete the periodontal evaluation; they are divided into two broad categories, generic and specific: the former assess the patient’s systemic conditions on the basis of anamnestic histories, the second, optional, is divided into microbiological, genetic, immune and biochemical. CLASSIFICATION OF PERIODONTAL DISEASES In the joint American Academy of Periodontology and European Federation of Periodontology World Workshop in 2017, a new classification was introduced to update the pre-existing one from 1999, adapting it to the evolution of scientific evidence and overcoming some unresolved issues. The main innovations include: the introduction of peri-implant diseases, a clear definition of gingival health at a histological and clinical level, the distinction of gingivitis into only two cat egories based on the presence or absence of bacterial biofilm, the abolition of a distinction between chronic and aggressive periodontitis and the adoption of a multilevel framework of staging and grading of periodontitis, the replacement of the terms occlusal trauma and biological width with those of traumatic occlusal force and supracrestal attached tissue respectively, a new classification of gingival recessions. In this Module we analyze in detail the World Workshop proceedings regarding biofilm-inducted gingivitis and periodontitis, from the definition of health and related clinical cases, to the staging and grading mode