-
European Journal of Dentistry Jul 2023This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of conventional occlusal analysis in contrast with digital occlusal analysis in natural dentition. Occlusal analysis...
This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of conventional occlusal analysis in contrast with digital occlusal analysis in natural dentition. Occlusal analysis allows the identification of normal and abnormal occlusal contact points that alter the craniomandibular cervical system. We searched for articles with keywords [[dental occlusion]], [[natural dentition]], [[occlusal adjustment]], [[Immediate Complete Anterior Guidance Development]] [[mastication]], [[bite force]], [[premature contact]], [[occlusal balance]] [[articulating paper]]], [[spray]], [[Occlusal contacts]], and [[bite strength]]. They were considered observational , odds ratio and case control studies. We found 189 items. After evaluating the abstracts and full texts of the articles, 10 papers met the inclusion criteria. It was found that occlusal analysis allows the identification of the relationship between poor occlusion and the sensitivity of the teeth due to occlusal trauma, which is also related to temporomandibular joint pain in dynamic occlusion. The contacts of greater strength were observed in nonfunctional cusps, 48%, without ruling out the functional cusps, 24%. Despite being the universal method of occlusal control to date, the use of joint paper, remains subjective compared to the digital occlusal control device. Posture is considered directly related to occlusal trauma and temporomandibular disorders; without proper occlusal analysis, a clear diagnosis of the patient's joint condition cannot be obtained. Digital occlusal analysis is more objective than traditional occlusal analysis.
PubMed: 36252609
DOI: 10.1055/s-0042-1755626 -
Allergologie Select 2023Hymenoptera venom (HV) is injected into the skin during a sting by Hymenoptera such as bees or wasps. Some components of HV are potential allergens and can cause large...
Diagnosis and treatment of Hymenoptera venom allergy: S2k Guideline of the German Society of Allergology and Clinical Immunology (DGAKI) in collaboration with the Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Berufs- und Umweltdermatologie e.V. (ABD), the Medical Association of German Allergologists (AeDA), the German...
Hymenoptera venom (HV) is injected into the skin during a sting by Hymenoptera such as bees or wasps. Some components of HV are potential allergens and can cause large local and/or systemic allergic reactions (SAR) in sensitized individuals. During their lifetime, ~ 3% of the general population will develop SAR following a Hymenoptera sting. This guideline presents the diagnostic and therapeutic approach to SAR following Hymenoptera stings. Symptomatic therapy is usually required after a severe local reaction, but specific diagnosis or allergen immunotherapy (AIT) with HV (VIT) is not necessary. When taking a patient's medical history after SAR, clinicians should discuss possible risk factors for more frequent stings and more severe anaphylactic reactions. The most important risk factors for more severe SAR are mast cell disease and, especially in children, uncontrolled asthma. Therefore, if the SAR extends beyond the skin (according to the Ring and Messmer classification: grade > I), the baseline serum tryptase concentration shall be measured and the skin shall be examined for possible mastocytosis. The medical history should also include questions specific to asthma symptoms. To demonstrate sensitization to HV, allergists shall determine concentrations of specific IgE antibodies (sIgE) to bee and/or vespid venoms, their constituents and other venoms as appropriate. If the results are negative less than 2 weeks after the sting, the tests shall be repeated (at least 4 - 6 weeks after the sting). If only sIgE to the total venom extracts have been determined, if there is double sensitization, or if the results are implausible, allergists shall determine sIgE to the different venom components. Skin testing may be omitted if in-vitro methods have provided a definitive diagnosis. If neither laboratory diagnosis nor skin testing has led to conclusive results, additional cellular testing can be performed. Therapy for HV allergy includes prophylaxis of reexposure, patient self treatment measures (including use of rescue medication) in the event of re-stings, and VIT. Following a grade I SAR and in the absence of other risk factors for repeated sting exposure or more severe anaphylaxis, it is not necessary to prescribe an adrenaline auto-injector (AAI) or to administer VIT. Under certain conditions, VIT can be administered even in the presence of previous grade I anaphylaxis, e.g., if there are additional risk factors or if quality of life would be reduced without VIT. Physicians should be aware of the contraindications to VIT, although they can be overridden in justified individual cases after weighing benefits and risks. The use of β-blockers and ACE inhibitors is not a contraindication to VIT. Patients should be informed about possible interactions. For VIT, the venom extract shall be used that, according to the patient's history and the results of the allergy diagnostics, was the trigger of the disease. If, in the case of double sensitization and an unclear history regarding the trigger, it is not possible to determine the culprit venom even with additional diagnostic procedures, VIT shall be performed with both venom extracts. The standard maintenance dose of VIT is 100 µg HV. In adult patients with bee venom allergy and an increased risk of sting exposure or particularly severe anaphylaxis, a maintenance dose of 200 µg can be considered from the start of VIT. Administration of a non-sedating H1-blocking antihistamine can be considered to reduce side effects. The maintenance dose should be given at 4-weekly intervals during the first year and, following the manufacturer's instructions, every 5 - 6 weeks from the second year, depending on the preparation used; if a depot preparation is used, the interval can be extended to 8 weeks from the third year onwards. If significant recurrent systemic reactions occur during VIT, clinicians shall identify and as possible eliminate co-factors that promote these reactions. If this is not possible or if there are no such co-factors, if prophylactic administration of an H1-blocking antihistamine is not effective, and if a higher dose of VIT has not led to tolerability of VIT, physicians should should consider additional treatment with an anti IgE antibody such as omalizumab as off lable use. For practical reasons, only a small number of patients are able to undergo sting challenge tests to check the success of the therapy, which requires in-hospital monitoring and emergency standby. To perform such a provocation test, patients must have tolerated VIT at the planned maintenance dose. In the event of treatment failure while on treatment with an ACE inhibitor, physicians should consider discontinuing the ACE inhibitor. In the absence of tolerance induction, physicians shall increase the maintenance dose (200 µg to a maximum of 400 µg in adults, maximum of 200 µg HV in children). If increasing the maintenance dose does not provide adequate protection and there are risk factors for a severe anaphylactic reaction, physicians should consider a co-medication based on an anti-IgE antibody (omalizumab; off-label use) during the insect flight season. In patients without specific risk factors, VIT can be discontinued after 3 - 5 years if maintenance therapy has been tolerated without recurrent anaphylactic events. Prolonged or permanent VIT can be considered in patients with mastocytosis, a history of cardiovascular or respiratory arrest due to Hymenoptera sting (severity grade IV), or other specific constellations associated with an increased individual risk of recurrent and/or severe SAR (e.g., hereditary α-tryptasemia). In cases of strongly increased, unavoidable insect exposure, adults may receive VIT until the end of intense contact. The prescription of an AAI can be omitted in patients with a history of SAR grade I and II when the maintenance dose of VIT has been reached and tolerated, provided that there are no additional risk factors. The same holds true once the VIT has been terminated after the regular treatment period. Patients with a history of SAR grade ≥ III reaction, or grade II reaction combined with additional factors that increase the risk of non response or repeated severe sting reactions, should carry an emergency kit, including an AAI, during VIT and after regular termination of the VIT.
PubMed: 37854067
DOI: 10.5414/ALX02430E -
Annals of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology... Aug 2023The current standard of first-line emergency treatment of anaphylaxis is intramuscular (IM) epinephrine, mostly administered through epinephrine autoinjector (EAI) in... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE OF REVIEW
The current standard of first-line emergency treatment of anaphylaxis is intramuscular (IM) epinephrine, mostly administered through epinephrine autoinjector (EAI) in the outpatient setting. However, undercarriage and underuse of EAIs are common, and delayed epinephrine use is associated with increased morbidity and mortality. Patients, caregivers, and healthcare professionals have expressed a strong desire for small, needle-free devices and products that would offer improved carriage, ease of use, and more convenient, less invasive routes of epinephrine administration. Novel mechanisms of epinephrine administration are under investigation to help address several recognized EAI limitations. This review explores innovative nasal and oral products under investigation for the outpatient emergency treatment of anaphylaxis.
FINDINGS
Human studies of epinephrine administered through nasal epinephrine spray, a nasal powder spray, and a sublingual film have been conducted. Data from these studies indicate promising pharmacokinetic results comparable to those of the standard of outpatient emergency care (0.3-mg EAI) and syringe and needle IM epinephrine administration. Several products have shown maximum plasma concentration values higher than those of the 0.3-mg EAI and manual IM injection, although it remains unclear whether this has clinical relevancy in patient outcomes. Generally, these modalities show comparable time to maximum concentrations. Pharmacodynamic changes observed with these products are comparable to or more robust than those seen with EAI and manual IM injection.
SUMMARY
Given comparable or superior pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic results and safety of innovative epinephrine therapies to those of current standards of care, US Food and Drug Administration approval of these products may help address numerous barriers that EAIs present. The ease of use and carriage and favorable safety profiles of needle-free treatments may make them an attractive alternative to patients and caregivers, potentially addressing injection fears, needle-based safety risks, and other reasons for lack of or delayed use.
Topics: Humans; Anaphylaxis; Epinephrine; Injections, Intramuscular; Emergency Medical Services; Outpatients
PubMed: 37279803
DOI: 10.1016/j.anai.2023.05.033 -
Neuropsychopharmacology : Official... Jul 2023Patients with treatment-resistant depression (TRD) have higher rates of relapse and pronounced decreases in daily functioning and health-related quality of life compared...
Patients with treatment-resistant depression (TRD) have higher rates of relapse and pronounced decreases in daily functioning and health-related quality of life compared to patients with major depressive disorder who are not treatment-resistant, underscoring the need for treatment choices with sustained efficacy and long-term tolerability. Adults with TRD who participated in ≥1 of 6 phase 3 "parent" studies could continue esketamine treatment, combined with an oral antidepressant, by enrolling in phase 3, open-label, long-term extension study, SUSTAIN-3. Based on their status at parent-study end, eligible participants entered a 4-week induction phase followed by an optimization/maintenance phase, or directly entered the optimization/maintenance phase of SUSTAIN-3. Intranasal esketamine dosing was flexible, twice-weekly during induction and individualized to depression severity during optimization/maintenance. At the interim data cutoff (01 December 2020), 1148 participants were enrolled, 458 at induction and 690 at optimization/maintenance. Mean (median) cumulative duration of maintenance esketamine treatment was 31.5 (37.7) months (totaling 2769 cumulative patient-years). Common treatment-emergent adverse events (≥20%) were headache, dizziness, nausea, dissociation, somnolence, and nasopharyngitis. Mean Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score decreased during induction, and this reduction persisted during optimization/maintenance (mean [SD] change from the baseline to the endpoint of each phase: induction -12.8 [9.73]; optimization/maintenance +1.1 [9.93]), with 35.6% and 46.1% of participants in remission (MADRS total score ≤12) at induction and optimization/maintenance endpoints, respectively. Improvement in depression ratings generally persisted among participants who remained in maintenance treatment, and no new safety signal was identified during long-term treatment (up to 4.5 years) using intermittent-dosed esketamine in conjunction with daily antidepressant.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Antidepressive Agents; Depression; Depressive Disorder, Major; Depressive Disorder, Treatment-Resistant; Double-Blind Method; Nasal Sprays; Quality of Life; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 37173512
DOI: 10.1038/s41386-023-01577-5 -
European Journal of Pharmaceutical... Nov 2023The oral delivery of biologics such as therapeutic proteins, peptides and oligonucleotides for the treatment of colon related diseases has been the focus of increasing... (Review)
Review
The oral delivery of biologics such as therapeutic proteins, peptides and oligonucleotides for the treatment of colon related diseases has been the focus of increasing attention over the last years. However, the major disadvantage of these macromolecules is their degradation propensity in liquid state which can lead to the undesirable and complete loss of function. Therefore, to increase the stability of the biologic and reduce their degradation propensity, formulation techniques such as solidification can be performed to obtain a stable solid dosage form for oral administration. Due to their fragility, stress exerted on the biologic during solidification has to be reduced with the incorporation of stabilizing excipients into the formulation. This review focuses on the state-of-the-art solidification techniques required to obtain a solid dosage form for the oral delivery of biologics to the colon and the use of suitable excipients for adequate stabilization upon solidification. The solidifying processes discussed within this review are spray drying, freeze drying, bead coating and also other techniques such as spray freeze drying, electro spraying, vacuum- and supercritical fluid drying. Further, the colon as site of absorption in both healthy and diseased state is critically reviewed and possible oral delivery systems for biologics are discussed.
Topics: Excipients; Desiccation; Freeze Drying; Biological Products; Colon
PubMed: 37429482
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejps.2023.106523