CRISPR-Cas9 Targeted Enrichment and Next-Generation Sequencing for Mutation Detection.

Despite the rapid application of next-generation sequencing (NGS) technologies, target sequencing in regions of the genome is often required to diagnose many genetic diseases. Target enrichment can be an effective factor in reducing the cost of sequencing and the duration of sequencing. Recently, several clustered system regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats (CRISPR)-based methods (amplification-free sequencing) have been developed to target enrichment in combination with one of the NGS platforms. CRISPR-based target enrichment strategies act as an auxiliary tool to improve NGS analytical performance, thereby indirectly facilitating nucleic acid detection. The direct DNA cleavage approach by CRISPR-CRISPR-associated (Cas) at genome-specific sites enhances the possibility of separating native large fragments from disease-related genomic regions. The CRISPR-Cas can isolate the target region without any amplification; subsequently, long-read sequencing technologies were also implemented. These methods, as promising tools, have the ability to assess genetic and epigenetic composition for clinical application and treatment responses in cancer precision medicine. By modifying CRISPR-based enrichment protocols, it is possible to identify different types of mutations, including structural variants, short tandem repeats, fusion genes, and mobile elements. The Cas9 can specifically eliminate wild-type sequences, and it also enables the enrichment and detection of small amounts of tumor DNA fragments among the highly heterogeneous fragments of wild-type DNA.

Alternative Medical Interventions Versus Conventional Treatment of Renal Colic: An Updated Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.

PURPOSE: To systematically review the recent alternative medical interventions on renal colic pain and compare their efficiency with conventional treatments. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) study, based on the PRISMA guidelines on online databases of PubMed, Scopus, and web of science. We quarried these databases with relevant keywords for clinical trial studies that aimed at reducing renal colic pain in patients refereeing to the ED from after January 2011 to February 2022. Randomized clinical trials that used the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) for assessment of renal colic pain before and after medical interventions in adult patients were included in this study. NMA was conducted based on the continuous values of the mean difference of the pain after 30 and 60 minutes of the medication administration. RESULTS: Twenty-four studies that were meeting the inclusion criteria were included in our review with 2724 adult participants who were mostly male. Study arms included conventional medications (NSAID, Opioid, paracetamol), ketamine, MgSo4, desmopressin, and lidocaine. Based on the qualitative synthesis, ten studies (41.7%) did not find significant differences between conventional and alternative treatments. Also, there is no agreement on some more recent medications like using ketamine or desmopressin while MgSO4 and lidocaine use are supported by most studies. NMA revealed that desmopressin is significantly having worse pain reduction properties. NMA did not show any difference between ketamine, lidocaine, and MgSo4, versus the conventional treatment. CONCLUSION: To conclude, lidocaine and MgSo4 might be good alternative treatments for renal colic when conventional treatments are contraindicated or pain is not responding to those. Ketamine might be indicated in patient-based circumstances. Desmopressin may be agreeably avoided in further research or clinics.

Challenges, limitations, and solutions for orthodontists during the coronavirus pandemic: A review.

INTRODUCTION: Orthodontic patients worldwide missed appointments during the early months of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. A significant problem with this virus is its high transmission power. Asymptomatic patients can transmit the virus. The aim of this review is to examine orthodontic emergencies and the necessary strategies and measures for emergency and nonemergency treatment during the coronavirus pandemic. METHODS: The following databases were comprehensively searched: PubMed, MEDLINE, Scopus, and Google Scholar. Up-to-date data released by major health organizations such as the World Health Organization and major orthodontic associations involved in the pandemic were also evaluated. RESULTS: Few studies were conducted on managing orthodontic offices or clinics during the pandemic, and most are not of high quality. Appropriate communication is the most important issue in managing orthodontic patients, particularly virtual counseling. Many orthodontic emergencies can be managed in this way by patients themselves. Most studies recommend using the filtering facepiece 2 masks, equivalent to N95 masks for non-COVID-19 patients undergoing aerosol-generating procedures and all suspected or confirmed COVID-19 patients in orthodontic visits. CONCLUSIONS: At this time, there are no definitive clinical protocols supported by robust evidence for orthodontic practice during the COVID-19 pandemic. Orthodontists should not rush to return to routine orthodontic work and should follow state guidelines. Nonemergency orthodontic visits should be suspended during the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 pandemic in high-risk areas. Resuming orthodontic procedures during the pandemic requires paying special attention to screening, performing maximum efforts to reduce aerosol generation, using appropriate personal protective equipment, having proper ventilation, and fully adhering to sterilization and disinfection principles.