Effects of the coronary artery disease associated LPA and 9p21 loci on risk of aortic valve stenosis

Background: Aortic valve stenosis (AVS) and coronary artery disease (CAD) have a significant genetic contribution and commonly co-exist. To compare and contrast genetic determinants of the two diseases, we investigated associations of the LPA and 9p21 loci, i.e. the two strongest CAD risk loci, with risk of AVS. Methods: We genotyped the CAD-associated variants at the LPA (rs10455872) and 9p21 loci (rs1333049) in the GeneCAST (Genetics of Calcific Aortic STenosis) Consortium and conducted a meta-analysis for their association with AVS. Cases and controls were stratified by CAD status. External validation of findings was undertaken in five cohorts including 7880 cases and 851,152 controls. Results: In the meta-analysis including 4651 cases and 8231 controls the CAD-associated allele at the LPA locus was associated with increased risk of AVS (OR 1.37; 95%CI 1.24–1.52, p = 6.9 × 10−10) with a larger effect size in those without CAD (OR 1.53; 95%CI 1.31–1.79) compared to those with CAD (OR 1.27; 95%CI 1.12–1.45). The CAD-associated allele at 9p21 was associated with a trend towards lower risk of AVS (OR 0.93; 95%CI 0.88–0.99, p = 0.014). External validation confirmed the association of the LPA risk allele with risk of AVS (OR 1.37; 95%CI 1.27–1.47), again with a higher effect size in those without CAD. The small protective effect of the 9p21 CAD risk allele could not be replicated (OR 0.98; 95%CI 0.95–1.02). Conclusions: Our study confirms the association of the LPA locus with risk of AVS, with a higher effect in those without concomitant CAD. Overall, 9p21 was not associated with AVS

Records needed for orthodontic diagnosis and treatment planning: a systematic review

Contains fulltext : 125812.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)BACKGROUND: Traditionally, dental models, facial and intra-oral photographs and a set of two-dimensional radiographs are used for orthodontic diagnosis and treatment planning. As evidence is lacking, the discussion is ongoing which specific records are needed for the process of making an orthodontic treatment plan. OBJECTIVE: To estimate the contribution and importance of different diagnostic records for making an orthodontic diagnosis and treatment plan. DATA SOURCES: An electronic search in PubMed (1948-July 2012), EMBASE Excerpta Medica (1980-July 2012), CINAHL (1982-July 2012), Web of Science (1945-July 2012), Scopus (1996-July 2012), and Cochrane Library (1993-July 2012) was performed. Additionally, a hand search of the reference lists of included studies was performed to identify potentially eligible studies. There was no language restriction. STUDY SELECTION: THE PATIENT, INTERVENTION, COMPARATOR, OUTCOME (PICO) QUESTION FORMULATED FOR THIS STUDY WAS AS FOLLOWS: for patients who need orthodontic treatment (P), will the use of record set X (I) compared with record set Y (C) change the treatment plan (O)? Only primary publications were included. DATA EXTRACTION: Independent extraction of data and quality assessment was performed by two observers. RESULTS: Of the 1041 publications retrieved, 17 met the inclusion criteria. Of these, 4 studies were of high quality. Because of the limited number of high quality studies and the differences in study designs, patient characteristics, and reference standard or index test, a meta-analysis was not possible. CONCLUSION: Cephalograms are not routinely needed for orthodontic treatment planning in Class II malocclusions, digital models can be used to replace plaster casts, and cone-beam computed tomography radiographs can be indicated for impacted canines. Based on the findings of this review, the minimum record set required for orthodontic diagnosis and treatment planning could not be defined. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42012002365

Asymmetric extractions in orthodontics

INTRODUCTION: Extraction decisions are extremely important in during treatment planning. In addition to the extraction decision orthodontists have to choose what tooth should be extracted for the best solution of the problem and the esthetic/functional benefit of the patient. OBJECTIVE: This article aims at reviewing the literature relating the advantages, disadvantages and clinical implications of asymmetric extractions to orthodontics. METHODS: Keywords were selected in English and Portuguese and the EndNote 9 program was used for data base search in PubMed, Web of Science (WSc) and LILACS. The selected articles were case reports, original articles and prospective or retrospective case-control studies concerning asymmetrical extractions of permanent teeth for the treatment of malocclusions. CONCLUSION: According to the literature reviewed asymmetric extractions can make some specific treatment mechanics easier. Cases finished with first permanent molars in Class II or III relationship in one or both sides seem not to cause esthetic or functional problems. However, diagnosis knowledge and mechanics control are essential for treatment success