As compared with Hfx RT alone, Hfx RT and concurrent low-dose daily CDDP offered a survival advantage, as well as improved LRPFS and DMFS.

The addition of ACC HFX RT to the treatment of the most favorable subset of patients led to improved survival over that obtained with CHT alone.

No abstract

Several findings suggest lower levels of serum uric acid in multiple sclerosis (MS) patients. The aim of this study is to investigate relationships of uric acid serum levels in relapse-remitting (RR) MS patients with clinical activity of disease and blood-brain barrier (BBB) condition. Sixty-three definite RRMS patients and 40 controls divided into two groups: 20 healthy donors and 20 patients with other inflammatory neurological diseases (OINDs) were analysed. By using a quantitative enzymatic assay according to the manufacture's protocol and a commercial uric acid standard solution, serum uric acid levels were measured and the results were standardized. To investigate BBB function, magnetic resonance imaging after administration of gadolinium was used. MS patients were found to have significantly lower serum uric acid levels (193.89 +/- 49.05 micromol/l; mean value +/-SD) in comparison with healthy donors (292.7 +/- 58.65 micromol/l; P=0.000) and OIND patients (242.7 +/- 46.66 micromol/l; P=0.001). We found that MS patients with relapse had significantly lower serum uric acid levels (161.49 +/- 23.61 micromol/l) than MS patients with remission (234.39 +/- 41.96 micromol/l; P=0.000) and more over, MS patients with BBB disruption had significantly lower serum uric acid levels (163.95 +/- 26.07 micromol/l) than those with normal BBB (252.48 +/- 25.94 micromol/l; P=0.000). Further, we also found that serum uric acid level independently correlated with disease activity, BBB disruption, and gender. These results indicate that lower uric acid levels in MS patients are associated with relapse and suggest that uric acid might be beneficial in the treatment of MS.

This is a PDF file of an article that has undergone enhancements after acceptance, such as the addition of a cover page and metadata, and formatting for readability, but it is not yet the definitive version of record. This version will undergo additional copyediting, typesetting and review before it is published in its final form, but we are providing this version to give early visibility of the article. Please note that, during the production process, errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.

No abstract

BackgroundPsychological discomfort, physical disability and functional limitations of the orofacial system have a major impact on everyday life of patients with temporomandibular disorders (TMDs). In this study we sought to determine short and long term effects of stabilization splint (SS) in treatment of TMDs, and to identify factors influencing its efficacy.MethodsMEDLINE, Web of Science and EMBASE were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing SS to: non-occluding splint, occlusal oral appliances, physiotherapy, behavioral therapy, counseling and no treatment. Random effects method was used to summarize outcomes. The effect estimates were expressed as odds ratio (OR) or standardized mean difference (SMD) with 95% confidence interval. Subgroup analyses were carried out according to the use of Research Diagnostic Criteria (RDC/TMD) and TMDs origin. Strength of evidence was assessed by GRADE. Meta-regression was applied.ResultsThirty three eligible RCTs were included in meta-analysis. In short term, SS presented positive overall effect on pain reduction (OR 2.08; p = 0.01) and pain intensity (SMD -0.33; p = 0.02). Subgroup analyses confirmed SS effect in studies used RDC/TMD and revealed its effect in patients with TMDs of muscular origin. Important decrease of muscle tenderness (OR 1.97; p = 0.03) and improvement of mouth opening (SMD -0.30; p = 0.04) were found. SS in comparison to oral appliances showed no difference (OR 0.74; p = 0.24). Meta-regression identified continuous use of SS during the day as a factor influencing efficacy (p = 0.01). Long term results showed no difference in observed outcomes between groups. Low quality of evidence was found for primary outcomes.ConclusionSS presented short term benefit for patients with TMDs. In long term follow up, the effect is equalized with other therapeutic modalities. Further studies based on appropriate use of standardized criteria for patient recruitment and outcomes under assessment are needed to better define SS effect persistence in long term.

The risk factors for MS pain and their impact on dental work should widely be disseminated among dentists. Importantly, proper implementation in everyday life of adequate preventive measures is essential for preventing MS pain and development of WMSDs.