OBJECTIVES: To determine and compare the fracture resistance of endodontically treated maxillary central incisors restored with different posts and cores. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty-eight upper central incisors were randomly divided into four groups: cast post and core (group 1), fiber-reinforced composite (FRC) post and composite core (group 2), composite post and core (group 3), and controls (group 4). Mesio-distal and bucco-lingual dimensions at 7 and 14 mm from the apex were compared to ensure standardization among the groups. Twelve teeth were prepared for crown restoration (group 4). Teeth in other groups were endodontically treated, decoronated at 14 mm from the apex, and prepared for posts and cores. Resin-based materials were used for cementation in groups 1 and 2. In group 3, composite was used directly to fill the post space and for core build-up. All samples were restored by standard metal crowns using glass ionomer cement, mounted at 135degrees vertical angle, subjected to thermomechanical aging, and then fractured using a universal testing machine. Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney U tests were used to analyze the data. RESULTS: Fracture resistance of the groups was as follows: Control (group 4) > cast post and core (group 1) > fiber post and composite core (group 2) > composite post and core (group 3). All samples in groups 2 and 3 fractured in restorable patterns, whereas most (58%) in group 1 were non-restorable. CONCLUSIONS: Within the limitations of this study, FRC posts showed acceptable fracture resistance with favorable fracture patterns for reconstruction of upper central incisors.
Aging ; Cementation ; Crowns ; Glass Ionomer Cements ; Incisor* ; Tooth

Background: The present study was conducted to determine the differential profile of social anxiety disorder (SAD) and avoidant personality disorder (APD) based on dimensional diagnosis in criterion B of the DSM-5 Alternative Model for Personality Disorders (DSM-5-AMPD) in a college sample. Methods: Samples of this cross-sectional study included 320 (23.08 ± 2.66 years; 57% female) college students in western Iran during February 2015 to December 2017. Liebowitz-social anxiety scale, PID-5, SCID-II, SCID-II-SQ and diagnostic interview for SAD were the tools. The data were analysed using Pearson correlation and multiple linear regression analysis. Results: Forty-three and 38 participants met criteria for SAD alone and APD, respectively. Five main domains of PID-5 could explain 29% and 54% of the variance of SAD and APD, respectively. Facets of negative affect, detachment, antagonism, disinhibition, and psychoticism could explain 25% versus 43%, 26% versus 54%, 7% versus 27%, 21% versus 41%, 13% versus 30% of the variance of SAD and APD, respectively. Conclusion: SAD and APD probably refer to two distinct mental states having prominent anxiety, emotional instability, and interpersonal pattern of avoidance and detachment of challenge. SAD is a simple form of mental disturbances with anxiety in its core features; although, APD is possibly referring to more complicated psychopathology.

Objectives: This study investigated preventive behaviors toward coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and related factors in a Kurdish Iranian sample. Methods: This online survey was conducted among the population aged 18 and above in Kermanshah Province, in western Iran, in April 2020. Samples were invited and recruited through social media. Data were collected using a questionnaire consisting of 4 sections (questions on demographic variables, risk perception, risk communication, and COVID-19 preventive behaviors) and analyzed using Stata ver. 8. Results: The Pearson correlation test showed that risk communication was significantly correlated with COVID-19 preventive behaviors (r = 0.320, p < 0.01). In the final model, where the explanatory power increased with the entry of the risk communication variable, the variables explained a total of 14% of variance in COVID-19 preventive behaviors. Sex (β = −0.482), risk perception (β = 0.047), and risk communication (β = 0.662) were significant determinants. Conclusion Risk communication and risk perception related to COVID-19, as well as being a woman, were determinants of COVID-19 preventive behaviors.

Purpose: Treatment outcomes of locally advanced rectal cancer have improved significantly in recent decades. This retrospective study aimed to assess the efficacy of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) followed by surgery in patients with T4 rectal cancer and the different outcomes between T4a and T4b patients. Materials and Methods: A total of 60 clinically T4 rectal cancer patients who underwent nCRT were included in the analysis. Patient characteristics, treatment regimens, down-staging rates, pathological response, and overall survival (OS) were evaluated. Results: Both T4a and T4b patients experienced down-staging following nCRT (36.6% and 6.2% respectively; p = 0.021). T4a patients exhibited a higher rate of pathological complete response (pCR) than T4b patients (13.3% in T4a vs. 0% in T4b; p = 0.122). After a median follow-up of 36 months, the OS and recurrence-free survival (RFS) of T4a patients were significantly higher compared to T4b patients (hazard ratio [HR] = 2.52, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.05–6.05, p = 0.038 for OS; HR = 2.32, 95% CI 1.09–4.92, p = 0.025 for RFS). Conclusion This study provides valuable insights into the effectiveness of nCRT in T4 rectal cancer patients. Although down-staging was observed in both T4a and T4b subgroups, achieving a pCR remains a challenge, particularly in T4b patients. Further research is needed to optimize treatment strategies and enhance pCR rates in T4 rectal cancer patients to improve oncologic outcomes.

Purpose: Treatment outcomes of locally advanced rectal cancer have improved significantly in recent decades. This retrospective study aimed to assess the efficacy of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) followed by surgery in patients with T4 rectal cancer and the different outcomes between T4a and T4b patients. Materials and Methods: A total of 60 clinically T4 rectal cancer patients who underwent nCRT were included in the analysis. Patient characteristics, treatment regimens, down-staging rates, pathological response, and overall survival (OS) were evaluated. Results: Both T4a and T4b patients experienced down-staging following nCRT (36.6% and 6.2% respectively; p = 0.021). T4a patients exhibited a higher rate of pathological complete response (pCR) than T4b patients (13.3% in T4a vs. 0% in T4b; p = 0.122). After a median follow-up of 36 months, the OS and recurrence-free survival (RFS) of T4a patients were significantly higher compared to T4b patients (hazard ratio [HR] = 2.52, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.05–6.05, p = 0.038 for OS; HR = 2.32, 95% CI 1.09–4.92, p = 0.025 for RFS). Conclusion This study provides valuable insights into the effectiveness of nCRT in T4 rectal cancer patients. Although down-staging was observed in both T4a and T4b subgroups, achieving a pCR remains a challenge, particularly in T4b patients. Further research is needed to optimize treatment strategies and enhance pCR rates in T4 rectal cancer patients to improve oncologic outcomes.

Purpose: Treatment outcomes of locally advanced rectal cancer have improved significantly in recent decades. This retrospective study aimed to assess the efficacy of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) followed by surgery in patients with T4 rectal cancer and the different outcomes between T4a and T4b patients. Materials and Methods: A total of 60 clinically T4 rectal cancer patients who underwent nCRT were included in the analysis. Patient characteristics, treatment regimens, down-staging rates, pathological response, and overall survival (OS) were evaluated. Results: Both T4a and T4b patients experienced down-staging following nCRT (36.6% and 6.2% respectively; p = 0.021). T4a patients exhibited a higher rate of pathological complete response (pCR) than T4b patients (13.3% in T4a vs. 0% in T4b; p = 0.122). After a median follow-up of 36 months, the OS and recurrence-free survival (RFS) of T4a patients were significantly higher compared to T4b patients (hazard ratio [HR] = 2.52, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.05–6.05, p = 0.038 for OS; HR = 2.32, 95% CI 1.09–4.92, p = 0.025 for RFS). Conclusion This study provides valuable insights into the effectiveness of nCRT in T4 rectal cancer patients. Although down-staging was observed in both T4a and T4b subgroups, achieving a pCR remains a challenge, particularly in T4b patients. Further research is needed to optimize treatment strategies and enhance pCR rates in T4 rectal cancer patients to improve oncologic outcomes.

Purpose: Treatment outcomes of locally advanced rectal cancer have improved significantly in recent decades. This retrospective study aimed to assess the efficacy of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) followed by surgery in patients with T4 rectal cancer and the different outcomes between T4a and T4b patients. Materials and Methods: A total of 60 clinically T4 rectal cancer patients who underwent nCRT were included in the analysis. Patient characteristics, treatment regimens, down-staging rates, pathological response, and overall survival (OS) were evaluated. Results: Both T4a and T4b patients experienced down-staging following nCRT (36.6% and 6.2% respectively; p = 0.021). T4a patients exhibited a higher rate of pathological complete response (pCR) than T4b patients (13.3% in T4a vs. 0% in T4b; p = 0.122). After a median follow-up of 36 months, the OS and recurrence-free survival (RFS) of T4a patients were significantly higher compared to T4b patients (hazard ratio [HR] = 2.52, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.05–6.05, p = 0.038 for OS; HR = 2.32, 95% CI 1.09–4.92, p = 0.025 for RFS). Conclusion This study provides valuable insights into the effectiveness of nCRT in T4 rectal cancer patients. Although down-staging was observed in both T4a and T4b subgroups, achieving a pCR remains a challenge, particularly in T4b patients. Further research is needed to optimize treatment strategies and enhance pCR rates in T4 rectal cancer patients to improve oncologic outcomes.

Purpose: Treatment outcomes of locally advanced rectal cancer have improved significantly in recent decades. This retrospective study aimed to assess the efficacy of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) followed by surgery in patients with T4 rectal cancer and the different outcomes between T4a and T4b patients. Materials and Methods: A total of 60 clinically T4 rectal cancer patients who underwent nCRT were included in the analysis. Patient characteristics, treatment regimens, down-staging rates, pathological response, and overall survival (OS) were evaluated. Results: Both T4a and T4b patients experienced down-staging following nCRT (36.6% and 6.2% respectively; p = 0.021). T4a patients exhibited a higher rate of pathological complete response (pCR) than T4b patients (13.3% in T4a vs. 0% in T4b; p = 0.122). After a median follow-up of 36 months, the OS and recurrence-free survival (RFS) of T4a patients were significantly higher compared to T4b patients (hazard ratio [HR] = 2.52, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.05–6.05, p = 0.038 for OS; HR = 2.32, 95% CI 1.09–4.92, p = 0.025 for RFS). Conclusion This study provides valuable insights into the effectiveness of nCRT in T4 rectal cancer patients. Although down-staging was observed in both T4a and T4b subgroups, achieving a pCR remains a challenge, particularly in T4b patients. Further research is needed to optimize treatment strategies and enhance pCR rates in T4 rectal cancer patients to improve oncologic outcomes.

Alpha-Ketoglutarate-Dependent Dioxygenase FTO ; genetics ; Body Mass Index ; Body Weight ; genetics ; physiology ; Female ; Genotype ; Homeodomain Proteins ; genetics ; Humans ; Male ; Obesity ; genetics ; metabolism ; Transcription Factors ; genetics