746 research outputs found

    EFFECT OF VARIOUS ROOT CANAL DISINFECTION PROCEDURES ON EXPRESSION OF ENTEROCOCCUS FAECALIS VIRULENCE FACTOR – A PCR STUDY

    Get PDF
    Abstract Objective: To compare and evaluate antimicrobial effects of 2% Chlorhexidine (CHX) versus 0.1% Octenidine Dihydrochloride (OCT) as root canal irrigant with and without Laser activation against Enterococcus faecalis virulence factor - E. faecalis endocarditis antigen (efaA) using real time polymerase chain reaction. Aim: To evaluate the effect of various root canal disinfection procedures on expression of Enterococcus faecalis virulence factor (efaA) using real time PCR. Methods and Materials: Forty single rooted premolars were taken and decoronated to standardize the root length as 14 mm. The canals were instrumented up to F3 Protaper Gold and teeth were autoclaved at 121°C for 20 minutes at 15 psi. 0.1 mL of the bacterial suspension was injected into the root canals, and the samples were incubated at 37°C and 100% humidity for 21 days. The samples were randomly divided into four groups: Group I – 2% Chlorhexidine, Group - II 2% Chlorhexidine with Laser, Group III – 0.1% Octenidine dihydrochloride, Group IV- 0.1% Octenidine dihydrochloride with Laser. After the irrigation protocol, Paper points were used to transfer the contents of the canal. PCR was performed to detect the presence of Enterococcus faecalis virulence factor (efaA). Results:Octenidine (0.1%) was more effective than 2% Chlorhexidine against E. faecalis. Group II and IV showed significant difference compared to Group I and III with statistically significant difference (p˂0.001). Laser activation enhanced the antimicrobial action of the irrigants. Conclusion: Octenidine (0.1%) was more effective than 2% Chlorhexidine against E. faecalis. Laser activated irrigation proved to enhance the antimicrobial action of the irrigants

    Parvovirus 4 Infection and Clinical Outcome in High-Risk Populations

    Get PDF
    Parvovirus 4 (PARV4) is a DNA virus frequently associated with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and hepatitis C virus (HCV) infections, but its clinical significance is unknown. We studied the prevalence of PARV4 antibodies in 2 cohorts of HIV- and HCV-infected individuals (n = 469) and the correlations with disease status. We found that PARV4 infection frequently occurred in individuals exposed to bloodborne viruses (95% in HCV-HIV coinfected intravenous drug users [IDUs]). There were no correlations between PARV4 serostatus and HCV outcomes. There was, however, a significant association with early HIV-related symptoms, although because this was tightly linked to both HCV status and clinical group (IDU), the specific role of PARV4 is not yet clear

    Velocity independent constraints on spin-dependent DM-nucleon interactions from IceCube and PICO

    Full text link
    [EN] Adopting the Standard Halo Model (SHM) of an isotropic Maxwellian velocity distribution for dark matter (DM) particles in the Galaxy, the most stringent current constraints on their spin-dependent scattering cross-section with nucleons come from the IceCube neutrino observatory and the PICO-60 C3F8 superheated bubble chamber experiments. The former is sensitive to high energy neutrinos from the self-annihilation of DM particles captured in the Sun, while the latter looks for nuclear recoil events from DM scattering off nucleons. Although slower DM particles are more likely to be captured by the Sun, the faster ones are more likely to be detected by PICO. Recent N-body simulations suggest significant deviations from the SHM for the smooth halo component of the DM, while observations hint at a dominant fraction of the local DM being in substructures. We use the method of Ferrer et al. (JCAP 1509: 052, 2015) to exploit the complementarity between the two approaches and derive conservative constraints on DM-nucleon scattering. Our results constrain sigma SD less than or similar to 3x10-39cm2 (6x10-38cm2) at greater than or similar to 90% C.L. for a DM particle of mass 1 TeV annihilating into tau+tau- (bb) with a local density of rho DM=0.3GeV/cm3. The constraints scale inversely with rho DM and are independent of the DM velocity distribution.Aartsen, MG.; Ackermann, M.; Adams, J.; Aguilar, JA.; Ahlers, M.; Ahrens, M.; Alispach, C.... (2020). Velocity independent constraints on spin-dependent DM-nucleon interactions from IceCube and PICO. The European Physical Journal C. 80(9):1-8. https://doi.org/10.1140/epjc/s10052-020-8069-5S18809F. Ferrer, A. Ibarra, S. Wild, JCAP 1509(09), 052 (2015). arXiv:1506.03386 [hep-ph]S. van den Bergh, Publ. Astron. Soc. Pac. 111, 657 (1999). arXiv:astro-ph/9904251G. Bertone, D. Hooper, J. Silk, Phys. Rept. 405, 279 (2005). arXiv:hep-ph/0404175A.K. Drukier, K. Freese, D.N. Spergel, Phys. Rev. D 33, 3495 (1986)M. Kuhlen, N. Weiner, J. Diemand, P. Madau, B. Moore, D. Potter, J. Stadel, M. Zemp, JCAP 1002, 030 (2010). arXiv:0912.2358 [astro-ph.GA]M. Lisanti, L.E. Strigari, J.G. Wacker, R.H. Wechsler, Phys. Rev. D 83, 023519 (2011). arXiv:1010.4300 [astro-ph.CO]Y.Y. Mao, L.E. Strigari, R.H. Wechsler, H.Y. Wu, O. Hahn, Astrophys. J. 764, 35 (2013). arXiv:1210.2721 [astro-ph.CO]L. Necib, M. Lisanti, V. Belokurov, arXiv:1807.02519 [astro-ph.GA]N.W. Evans, C.A.J. O’Hare, C. McCabe, Phys. Rev. D 99(2), 023012 (2019). arXiv:1810.11468 [astro-ph.GA]M.G. Aartsen et al. [IceCube Collaboration], Eur. Phys. J. C 77, no. 3, 146 (2017) arXiv:1612.05949 [astro-ph.HE]C. Amole et al., [PICO Collaboration]. Phys. Rev. Lett. 118(25), 251301 (2017). arXiv:1702.07666 [astro-ph.CO]M.T. Frandsen, F. Kahlhoefer, C. McCabe, S. Sarkar, K. Schmidt-Hoberg, JCAP 1201, 024 (2012). arXiv:1111.0292 [hep-ph]K. Choi, C. Rott, Y. Itow, JCAP 1405, 049 (2014). arXiv:1312.0273 [astro-ph.HE]A. Achterberg et al., [IceCube Collaboration]. Astropart. Phys. 26, 155 (2006). arXiv:astro-ph/0604450R. Abbasi et al. [IceCube Collaboration], Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A 601, 294 (2009) arXiv:0810.4930 [physics.ins-det]M.G. Aartsen et al. [IceCube Collaboration], JINST 12, no. 03, P03012 (2017) arXiv:1612.05093 [astro-ph.IM]R. Abbasi et al., [IceCube Collaboration]. Astropart. Phys. 35, 615 (2012). arXiv:1109.6096 [astro-ph.IM]G.J. Feldman, R.D. Cousins, Phys. Rev. D 57, 3873 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.57.3873. arXiv:physics/9711021 [physics.data-an]M. Tanabashi et al. [Particle Data Group], Phys. Rev. D 98, no. 3, 030001 (2018)C. Amole et al. [PICO Collaboration], arXiv:1905.12522 [physics.ins-det]C. Amole et al. [PICO Collaboration], Phys. Rev. D 93, no. 5, 052014 (2016) arXiv:1510.07754 [hep-ex]E. Tollerud et al. [ERFA] Computational Science and Discovery, no 8, 1 (2015) https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1021149J.N. Bahcall, R.K. Ulrich, Rev. Mod. Phys. 60, 297 (1988)T. Mumford et al. [SunPy Community] Computational Science and Discovery, no 8, 1 (2015) arXiv:1505.02563 [astro-ph]V. Gluscevic, M.I. Gresham, S.D. McDermott, A.H.G. Peter, K.M. Zurek, JCAP 1512(12), 057 (2015). arXiv:1506.04454 [hep-ph]A.L. Fitzpatrick, W. Haxton, E. Katz, N. Lubbers, Y. Xu, ‘, JCAP 1302, 004 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1088/1475-7516/2013/02/004. arXiv:1203.3542 [hep-ph]A. Ibarra, A. Rappelt, JCAP 1708(08), 039 (2017). arXiv:1703.09168 [hep-ph
    corecore