Guidelines on spontaneous pneumothorax are contradictory as to intervention between needle aspiration (NA) and chest tube drainage (CTD). Studies show poor adherence to guidelines.Three Norwegian hospitals included patients with primary (PSP) and secondary (SSP) spontaneous pneumothorax. Patients underwent NA or CTD as the primary intervention. The main outcome was duration of hospital stay. Secondary outcomes were immediate- and 1-week success rates and complications.127 patients were included, including 48 patients with SSP. 65 patients underwent NA, 63 patients CTD. Median (interquartile range) hospital stay was significantly shorter for NA: 2.4 days (1.2-4.7 days), compared with CTD: 4.6 days (2.3-7.8 days) (p<0.001). The corresponding figures for the SSP subgroup were 2.54 days (1.17-7.79 days) compared with 5.53 days (3.65-9.21 days) (p=0.049) for NA and CTD, respectively. Immediate success rates were 69% for NA compared with 32% for CTD (p<0.001). The positive effect of NA remained significant in sub-analyses for SSP. There was no significant difference in 1-week success rates. Complications occurred only during the CTD-treatment.Our study shows shorter hospital stay and higher immediate success rates for NA compared with CTD. Subgroup analyses also show clear benefits for NA for both PSP and SSP.
Prior genome-wide association studies for oral clefts have focused on clinic-based samples with unclear generalizability. Prior samples were also small for investigating effects by cleft type and exclusively studied isolated clefts (those occurring without other birth defects). We estimated the Reprints and permissions: sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav Corresponding Author: L.M. Moreno Uribe, Orthodontics-Dows Institute, University of Iowa, 401 DSB, Iowa City, IA 52242, USA. lina-moreno@uiowa.edu. * Authors contributing equally as senior authors. Author ContributionsL.M. Moreno Uribe, G.L. Wehby, contributed to conception, design, data acquisition, analysis, and interpretation, drafted and critically revised the manuscript; T. Fomina, H.K. Gjessing, M. Gjerdevik, contributed to data analysis, critically revised the manuscript; R.G. Munger, P.A. Romitti, M.M. Jenkins, K. Christensen, contributed to data acquisition, critically revised the manuscript; A.J. Wilcox, J.C. Murray, contributed to data acquisition and interpretation, critically revised the manuscript; R.T. Lie, contributed to conception, design, data acquisition, analysis, and interpretation, critically revised the manuscript. All authors gave final approval and agree to be accountable for all aspects of the work.A supplemental appendix to this article is available online. HHS Public AccessAuthor manuscript J Dent Res. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2017 October 01. Author Manuscript Author ManuscriptAuthor ManuscriptAuthor Manuscript effects of 17 top loci on cleft types in both isolated and nonisolated cases in the largest consortium to date of European-descent population-based studies. Our analytic approach focused on a motherchild dyad case-control design, but it also allowed analyzing mother-only or child-only genotypes to maximize power. Our total sample included 1,875 cases with isolated clefts, 459 cases with nonisolated clefts, and 3,749 controls. After correcting for multiple testing, we observed significant associations between fetal single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) at IRF6, PAX7, 8q21.3, 8q24, KIAA1598-VAX1, and MAFB and isolated cleft lip only (CLO) and cleft lip and palate (CLP). Significant associations were observed between isolated CLO and fetal SNPs near TPM1 and NOG1 and between CLP and fetal SNPs at ABCA4-ARHGAP29, THADA, FOXE1, and SPRY2. Overall, effects were similar for isolated CLO and CLP, except for ABCA4-ARHGAP29. A protective effect was observed for the fetal NOG1 SNP on cleft palate only, opposite in direction to the effect on CLO. For most fetal SNPs, a dose-response allelic effect was observed. No evidence of parent-of-origin or maternal genome effects was observed. Overall, effect direction and magnitude were similar between isolated and nonisolated clefts, suggesting that several loci are modifiers of cleft risk in both isolated and nonisolated forms. Our results provide reliable estimates of the effects of top loci on risks of oral clefts in a population of European descent.
With case–parent triad data, one can frequently deduce parent of origin of the child's alleles. This allows a parent‐of‐origin (PoO) effect to be estimated as the ratio of relative risks associated with the alleles inherited from the mother and the father, respectively. A possible cause of PoO effects is DNA methylation, leading to genomic imprinting. Because environmental exposures may influence methylation patterns, gene–environment interaction studies should be extended to allow for interactions between PoO effects and environmental exposures (i.e., PoOxE). One should thus search for loci where the environmental exposure modifies the PoO effect.We have developed an extensive framework to analyze PoOxE effects in genome‐wide association studies (GWAS), based on complete or incomplete case–parent triads with or without independent control triads. The interaction approach is based on analyzing triads in each exposure stratum using maximum likelihood estimation in a log‐linear model. Interactions are then tested applying a Wald‐based posttest of parameters across strata. Our framework includes a complete setup for power calculations. We have implemented the models in the R software package Haplin.To illustrate our PoOxE test, we applied the new methodology to top hits from our previous GWAS, assessing whether smoking during the periconceptional period modifies PoO effects on cleft palate only.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2025 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.