Differences in genotype and virulence among four multidrug-resistant <i>Streptococcus pneumoniae</i> isolates belonging to the PMEN1 clone

We report on the comparative genomics and characterization of the virulence phenotypes of four &lt;i&gt;S. pneumoniae&lt;/i&gt; strains that belong to the multidrug resistant clone PMEN1 (Spain&lt;sup&gt;23F&lt;/sup&gt; ST81). Strains SV35-T23 and SV36-T3 were recovered in 1996 from the nasopharynx of patients at an AIDS hospice in New York. Strain SV36-T3 expressed capsule type 3 which is unusual for this clone and represents the product of an in vivo capsular switch event. A third PMEN1 isolate - PN4595-T23 - was recovered in 1996 from the nasopharynx of a child attending day care in Portugal, and a fourth strain - ATCC700669 - was originally isolated from a patient with pneumococcal disease in Spain in 1984. We compared the genomes among four PMEN1 strains and 47 previously sequenced pneumococcal isolates for gene possession differences and allelic variations within core genes. In contrast to the 47 strains - representing a variety of clonal types - the four PMEN1 strains grouped closely together, demonstrating high genomic conservation within this lineage relative to the rest of the species. In the four PMEN1 strains allelic and gene possession differences were clustered into 18 genomic regions including the capsule, the blp bacteriocins, erythromycin resistance, the MM1-2008 prophage and multiple cell wall anchored proteins. In spite of their genomic similarity, the high resolution chinchilla model was able to detect variations in virulence properties of the PMEN1 strains highlighting how small genic or allelic variation can lead to significant changes in pathogenicity and making this set of strains ideal for the identification of novel virulence determinant

How useful are systematic reviews for informing palliative care practice? Survey of 25 Cochrane systematic reviews

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>In contemporary medical research, randomised controlled trials are seen as the gold standard for establishing treatment effects where it is ethical and practical to conduct them. In palliative care such trials are often impractical, unethical, or extremely difficult, with multiple methodological problems. We review the utility of Cochrane reviews in informing palliative care practice.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Published reviews in palliative care registered with the Cochrane Pain, Palliative and Supportive Care Group as of December 2007 were obtained from the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, issue 1, 2008. We reviewed the quality and quantity of primary studies available for each review, assessed the quality of the review process, and judged the strength of the evidence presented. There was no prior intention to perform any statistical analyses.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>25 published systematic reviews were identified. Numbers of included trials ranged from none to 54. Within each review, included trials were heterogeneous with respect to patients, interventions, and outcomes, and the number of patients contributing to any single analysis was generally much lower than the total included in the review. A variety of tools were used to assess trial quality; seven reviews did not use this information to exclude low quality studies, weight analyses, or perform sensitivity analysis for effect of low quality. Authors indicated that there were frequently major problems with the primary studies, individually or in aggregate. Our judgment was that the reviewing process was generally good in these reviews, and that conclusions were limited by the number, size, quality and validity of the primary studies.</p> <p>We judged the evidence about 23 of the 25 interventions to be weak. Two reviews had stronger evidence, but with limitations due to methodological heterogeneity or definition of outcomes. No review provided strong evidence of no effect.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Cochrane reviews in palliative care are well performed, but fail to provide good evidence for clinical practice because the primary studies are few in number, small, clinically heterogeneous, and of poor quality and external validity. They are useful in highlighting the weakness of the evidence base and problems in performing trials in palliative care.</p

Benzyl Isothiocyanate, a Major Component from the Roots of Salvadora Persica Is Highly Active against Gram-Negative Bacteria

Plants produce a number of antimicrobial substances and the roots of the shrub Salvadora persica have been demonstrated to possess antimicrobial activity. Sticks from the roots of S. persica, Miswak sticks, have been used for centuries as a traditional method of cleaning teeth. Diverging reports on the chemical nature and antimicrobial repertoire of the chewing sticks from S. persica led us to explore its antibacterial properties against a panel of pathogenic or commensal bacteria and to identify the antibacterial component/s by methodical chemical characterization. S. persica root essential oil was prepared by steam distillation and solid-phase microextraction was used to sample volatiles released from fresh root. The active compound was identified by gas chromatography-mass spectrometry and antibacterial assays. The antibacterial compound was isolated using medium-pressure liquid chromatography. Transmission electron microscopy was used to visualize the effect on bacterial cells. The main antibacterial component of both S. persica root extracts and volatiles was benzyl isothiocyanate. Root extracts as well as commercial synthetic benzyl isothiocyanate exhibited rapid and strong bactericidal effect against oral pathogens involved in periodontal disease as well as against other Gram-negative bacteria, while Gram-positive bacteria mainly displayed growth inhibition or remained unaffected. The short exposure needed to obtain bactericidal effect implies that the chewing sticks and the essential oil may have a specific role in treatment of periodontal disease in reducing Gram-negative periodontal pathogens. Our results indicate the need for further investigation into the mechanism of the specific killing of Gram-negative bacteria by S. persica root stick extracts and its active component benzyl isothiocyanate

Periodontal Tissue Regeneration Using Fibroblast Growth Factor -2: Randomized Controlled Phase II Clinical Trial

Background: The options for medical use of signaling molecules as stimulators of tissue regeneration are currently limited. Preclinical evidence suggests that fibroblast growth factor (FGF)-2 can promote periodontal regeneration. This study aimed to clarify the activity of FGF-2 in stimulating regeneration of periodontal tissue lost by periodontitis and to evaluate the safety of such stimulation. Methodology/Principal Findings: We used recombinant human FGF-2 with 3% hydroxypropylcellulose (HPC) as vehicle and conducted a randomized double-blinded controlled trial involving 13 facilities. Subjects comprised 74 patients displaying a 2- or 3-walled vertical bone defect as measured ?3 mm apical to the bone crest. Patients were randomly assigned to 4 groups: Group P, given HPC with no FGF-2; Group L, given HPC containing 0.03% FGF-2; Group M, given HPC cotaining 0.1% FGF-2; and Group H, given HPC Containing 0.3% FGF-2. Each patient underwent flap operation during which we administered 200 μL of the appropriate investigational drug to the bone defect. Before and for 36 weeks following administration, patients underwent periodontal tissue inspections and standardized radiography of the region under investigation. As a result, a significant difference (p = 0.021) in rate of increase in alveolar bone height was identified between Group P (23.92%) and Group H (58.62%) at 36 weeks. The linear increase in alveolar bone height at 36 weeks in Group P and H was 0.95 mm and 1.85 mm, respectively (p = 0.132). No serious adverse events attribute to the investigational drug were identified. Conclusions: Although no statistically significant differences were noted for gains in clinical attachment level and alveolar bone gain for FGF-2 groups versus Group P, the significant difference in rate of increase in alveolar bone height (p = 0.021) between Groups P and H at 36 weeks suggests that some efficacy could be expected from FGF-2 in stimulating regeneration of periodontal tissue in patients with periodontitis

Effectiveness of manual therapies: the UK evidence report

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The purpose of this report is to provide a succinct but comprehensive summary of the scientific evidence regarding the effectiveness of manual treatment for the management of a variety of musculoskeletal and non-musculoskeletal conditions.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>The conclusions are based on the results of systematic reviews of randomized clinical trials (RCTs), widely accepted and primarily UK and United States evidence-based clinical guidelines, plus the results of all RCTs not yet included in the first three categories. The strength/quality of the evidence regarding effectiveness was based on an adapted version of the grading system developed by the US Preventive Services Task Force and a study risk of bias assessment tool for the recent RCTs.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>By September 2009, 26 categories of conditions were located containing RCT evidence for the use of manual therapy: 13 musculoskeletal conditions, four types of chronic headache and nine non-musculoskeletal conditions. We identified 49 recent relevant systematic reviews and 16 evidence-based clinical guidelines plus an additional 46 RCTs not yet included in systematic reviews and guidelines.</p> <p>Additionally, brief references are made to other effective non-pharmacological, non-invasive physical treatments.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Spinal manipulation/mobilization is effective in adults for: acute, subacute, and chronic low back pain; migraine and cervicogenic headache; cervicogenic dizziness; manipulation/mobilization is effective for several extremity joint conditions; and thoracic manipulation/mobilization is effective for acute/subacute neck pain. The evidence is inconclusive for cervical manipulation/mobilization alone for neck pain of any duration, and for manipulation/mobilization for mid back pain, sciatica, tension-type headache, coccydynia, temporomandibular joint disorders, fibromyalgia, premenstrual syndrome, and pneumonia in older adults. Spinal manipulation is not effective for asthma and dysmenorrhea when compared to sham manipulation, or for Stage 1 hypertension when added to an antihypertensive diet. In children, the evidence is inconclusive regarding the effectiveness for otitis media and enuresis, and it is not effective for infantile colic and asthma when compared to sham manipulation.</p> <p>Massage is effective in adults for chronic low back pain and chronic neck pain. The evidence is inconclusive for knee osteoarthritis, fibromyalgia, myofascial pain syndrome, migraine headache, and premenstrual syndrome. In children, the evidence is inconclusive for asthma and infantile colic.</p