Objective:To investigate the expression of osteoprotegerin (OPG) and receptor activator of nuclear factor-κB ligand (RANKL) in type 2 diabetic rats with periodontitis.Methods:46 male Wistar rats were randomly divided into the healthy group(n =10),the periodontitis group(n =12),the type 2 diabetes mellitus group(n =12) and the type 2 diabetic periodontitis group(n =12).Animal models were prepared respectively.The expression of OPG and RANKL protein in alveolar bone was detected by immunohistochemistry(IHC).Results:Compared with the healthy group,the expression of OPG in the type 2 diabetes mellitus group,the periodontitis group,the type 2 diabetes mellitus with periodontitis group decreased in turn,however the expression of RANKL increased in turn.The expression of OPG and RANKL had no significant difference between periodontitis group and type 2 diabetes periodontitis group,while there was statistically significant difference among the other groups (P ＜ 0.05).Conclusion:Inflammation may lcad to upregulation of RANKL in osteoclasts and immune cells,and downregulation of OPG in osteoblasts.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to develop a comprehensive instrument for evaluating and ranking clinical practice guidelines, named Scientific, Transparent and Applicable Rankings tool (STAR), and test its reliability, validity, and usability. METHODS: This study set up a multidisciplinary working group including guideline methodologists, statisticians, journal editors, clinicians, and other experts. Scoping review, Delphi methods, and hierarchical analysis were used to develop the STAR tool. We evaluated the instrument's intrinsic and interrater reliability, content and criterion validity, and usability. RESULTS: STAR contained 39 items grouped into 11 domains. The mean intrinsic reliability of the domains, indicated by Cronbach's α coefficient, was 0.588 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.414, 0.762). Interrater reliability as assessed with Cohen's kappa coefficient was 0.774 (95% CI: 0.740, 0.807) for methodological evaluators and 0.618 (95% CI: 0.587, 0.648) for clinical evaluators. The overall content validity index was 0.905. Pearson's r correlation for criterion validity was 0.885 (95% CI: 0.804, 0.932). The mean usability score of the items was 4.6 and the median time spent to evaluate each guideline was 20 min. CONCLUSION The instrument performed well in terms of reliability, validity, and efficiency, and can be used for comprehensively evaluating and ranking guidelines.
Reproducibility of Results ; Surveys and Questionnaires ; Practice Guidelines as Topic ; Humans