METHODS: Sodium nitrite (50mg/L) was given to angiotensin II-infused hypertensive C57BL/6J (eight to ten weeks old) mice for two weeks in the drinking water. Arterial systolic blood pressure was measured using the tail-cuff method. Vascular responsiveness of isolated aortae and renal arteries was studied in wire myographs. The level of nitrite in the plasma and the cyclic guanosine monophosphate (cGMP) content in the arterial wall were determined using commercially available kits. The production of reactive oxygen species (ROS) and the presence of proteins (nitrotyrosine, NOx-2 and NOx-4) involved in ROS generation were evaluated with dihydroethidium (DHE) fluorescence and by Western blotting, respectively.
RESULTS: Chronic administration of sodium nitrite for two weeks to mice with angiotensin II-induced hypertension decreased systolic arterial blood pressure, reversed endothelial dysfunction, increased plasma nitrite level as well as vascular cGMP content. In addition, sodium nitrite treatment also decreased the elevated nitrotyrosine and NOx-4 protein level in angiotensin II-infused hypertensive mice.
CONCLUSIONS: The present study demonstrates that chronic treatment of hypertensive mice with sodium nitrite improves impaired endothelium function in conduit and resistance vessels in addition to its antihypertensive effect, partly through inhibition of ROS production.
METHODOLOGY: A literature search was performed in Elsevier's Scopus database to locate all the publications of the International Endodontic Journal. Various bibliometric software packages including the open-source visualization software Gephi and Biblioshiny (version 2.0) were employed for data visualization and analysis.
RESULTS: A total of 3739 records with citation and bibliographic details were selected and retrieved to allow a bibliometric analysis to be performed. The bibliometric analysis indicates that the IEJ has grown both in terms of productivity and influence. Over time, the journal has been associated with an increase in the number of manuscripts published and the citations they have attracted, but with minor downward fluctuations in citations in the last few years. Bibliographic coupling of the IEJ articles revealed that the major research themes published in the journal include 'endodontics', 'root canal treatment', 'calcium hydroxide', 'apical periodontitis', 'mineral trioxide aggregate', 'microbiology', 'cyclic fatigue', 'cone-beam computed tomography' and 'micro-computed tomography'. Authors affiliated to institutions in the UK were the major contributors to the journal and were linked with other countries such as Brazil, USA and Malaysia. The largest number of publications were from the University of São Paulo, Brazil.
CONCLUSION: The IEJ is one of the leading journals in Endodontology and has been providing a platform for innovative research and clinical reports for more than 50 years. Publications have been associated with a wide range of authors, institutions and countries around the world.
BACKGROUND: Data are conflicting on the optimal strategy to reduce CAAKI and related complications after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).
METHODS: The PRESERVE (Prevention of Serious Adverse Events Following Angiography) trial used a 2 × 2 factorial design to randomize 5,177 patients with stage III or IV chronic kidney disease undergoing angiography to IV 1.26% sodium bicarbonate or IV 0.9% sodium chloride and 5 days of oral acetylcysteine or placebo. A subgroup analysis was conducted of the efficacy of these interventions in patients who underwent PCI during the study angiographic examination. The primary endpoint was a composite of death, need for dialysis, or persistent kidney impairment at 90 days; CAAKI was a secondary endpoint.
RESULTS: A total of 1,161 PRESERVE patients (mean age 69 ± 8 years) underwent PCI. The median estimated glomerular filtration rate was 50.7 ml/min/1.73 m2 (interquartile range: 41.7 to 60.1 ml/min/1.73 m2), and 952 patients (82%) had diabetes mellitus. The primary endpoint occurred in 15 of 568 patients (2.6%) in the IV sodium bicarbonate group and 24 of 593 patients (4.0%) in the IV sodium chloride group (odds ratio: 0.64; 95% confidence interval: 0.33 to 1.24; p for interaction = 0.41) and in 23 of 598 patients (3.8%) in the acetylcysteine group and 16 of 563 patients (2.8%) in the placebo group (odds ratio: 1.37; 95% confidence interval: 0.71 to 2.62; p for interaction = 0.29). There were no significant between-group differences in the rates of CAAKI.
CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with CKD undergoing PCI, there was no benefit of IV sodium bicarbonate over IV sodium chloride or of acetylcysteine over placebo for the prevention of CAAKI or intermediate-term adverse outcomes.
METHODOLOGY: Systematic reviews with NMAs within the specialty of Endodontics published in English were identified from the PubMed, EbBSCOhost and SCOPUS databases from inception to July 2021. Two reviewers were involved independently in the selection of the reviews, data extraction, methodological quality assessment and overall confidence rating. Disagreements were resolved by discussion between the reviewers to achieve consensus; if disagreements persisted, a third reviewer made the final decision. The methodological quality of the included NMAs was appraised using the AMSTAR 2 checklist, which contains 16 items. The reviewers scored each item - 'Yes' - when the item was fully addressed, 'Partial Yes' - when the item was not fully addressed, or 'No' - when the item was not addressed. The overall confidence in the results of each review was classified as 'High', 'Moderate', 'Low' or 'Critically low' based on the criteria reported by the AMSTAR 2 developers.
RESULTS: Twelve systematic reviews with NMAs were included. All the NMAs adequately reported Item 1 ("Did the research questions and inclusion criteria for the review include the components of PICO?"), Item 8 ("Did the review authors describe the included studies in adequate detail?"), Item 9 ("Did the review authors use a satisfactory technique for assessing the risk of bias (RoB) in individual studies that were included in the review?") and Item 16 ("Did the review authors report any potential sources of conflict of interest, including any funding they received for conducting the review?") , whereas only one NMA reported Item 10 adequately ("Did the review authors report on the sources of funding for the studies included in the review?"). The overall confidence in the results of eight reviews was categorised as "Critically low", one review was "Low", two reviews were "Moderate" and one review was "High".
CONCLUSION: The overall confidence in the results for the majority of systematic reviews with NMAs in Endodontics was judged to be 'Critically low' as their methodological quality was below the necessary standard. AMSTAR 2 and PRISMA for NMA guidelines are available to guide authors to produce high quality systematic reviews with NMAs and for Editors and peer-reviewers when assessing submissions to journals.
METHODS: The current investigation extends a recently published study in the International Endodontic Journal (Nagendrababu V, Faggion Jr CM, Pulikkotil SJ, Alatta A, Dummer PM Methodological assessment and overall confidence in the results of systematic reviews with network meta-analyses in Endodontics. International Endodontic Journal 2022;55:393-404) that assessed the methodological quality of systematic reviews with NMAs in Endodontics using the A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews (AMSTAR 2) tool. In the present study, the PRISMA for NMA checklist with 32 items was used to assess the reporting quality of the systematic reviews with NMAs (n = 12). Two independent assessors assigned '1' when an item was completely addressed, '0.5' when it was partially addressed, and '0' when it was not addressed. Disagreements were resolved through reviewer discussion until consensus was reached. If conflicts persisted, a third reviewer made the final decision. The PRISMA for NMA scores were shared with the relevant authors of the individual reviews to reduce the likelihood of misinterpretation and verify the scores assigned. The results for each individual item of the PRISMA-NMA items were calculated by summing the individual scores awarded; the maximum score for each item was 12.
RESULTS: All the systematic reviews with NMAs adequately reported the following items: Title, Introduction section (Objectives), Methods section (Eligibility criteria and Information sources), Results section (Study selection, Study characteristics and Risk of bias within studies), and Discussion section (Summary of evidence). The items that were reported least often were the "geometry of the network" and "the summary of network geometry" with only 2 manuscripts (17%) including these items.
CONCLUSION: A number of the items in the PRISMA-NMA checklist were adequately addressed in the NMAs; however, none adequately reported all the PRISMA-NMA items. The inadequacies of published NMAs that have been identified should be taken into consideration by authors of NMAs in Endodontics and by editors when managing the peer review process. In future, researchers who are writing systematic reviews with NMAs should comply with the PRISMA-NMA checklist.
CLINICAL RELEVANCE: None of the included systematic reviews with NMA adequately reported all the PRISMA-NMA items. Inadequate reporting of a systematic review with NMA increases the possibility that it will provide invalid results. Therefore, authors should follow the PRISMA-NMA guidelines when reporting systematic reviews with NMA in Endodontics.