Search

Dietary-induced changes in tissue levels of polyunsaturated fatty acids modify inflammatory reactions through changes in the synthesis of lipid and peptide mediators of inflammation. Four semipurified 20% fat diets, based on beef tallow (BT), safflower oil (SFO), docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) and eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) were provided. The DHA and EPA ratios of the (n-3) fatty acid-based diets were 1.1 and 3.4, respectively. The effect of prefeeding diets differing in EPA to DHA ratios prior to the induction of streptococcal cell wall (SCW) arthritis in female Lew/SSN rats was examined. Weanling rats were fed diets for 5 wk before arthritis induction and 5 wk post-arthritis induction. Footpad thickness, hock circumference, plasma and macrophage fatty acids and histological assessment were compared. There were no differences in food intake and final body weights among the groups. Footpad inflammation, reported as percentage change (adjusted for growth) was greatest for rats fed the BT-based diet, intermediate in those fed the SFO-based diet and least for the rats fed the EPA- and DHA-based diets (P < 0.05). Macrophage phospholipids revealed cellular incorporation of EPA and DHA from the fish-oil based diets which modified lipid and peptide mediators of inflammation. Histological sections of rat hocks ranked by severity of arthritis-related changes suggested that the SFO- and EPA-based diets were more successful in ameliorating the destructive arthritic phase in hock joints than the BT- and DHA-based diets (P = 0.09) in this model of arthritis. The course of SCW-induced arthritis can be altered by diet-induced changes in macrophage fatty acid composition. The EPA-based diet is more effective in suppression of inflammation than the DHA-based diet. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The split mouth study design in trials of Fissure sealants and restorative materials neatly controls for confounding by many of the variables associated with poor retention of sealants and occurrence of dental caries. Traditionally, the out- come measures used in split mouth trials have been material retention, (per cent) effectiveness and net gain. A survey of the literature revealed that a large proportion of split mouth studies report no statistical evaluation of outcome measures. In those studies in which statistical evaluation had been conducted, McNemar's χ[SUP2] was the test most frequently used. This statistic is appropriate for comparing differences between "success" and "failure" tooth pairs (or "positives" and "negatives" in split mouth terminology) but it cannot evaluate directly effectiveness and net gain. The distributions of effectiveness and net gain are different and it would be desirable to estimate confidence intervals for them. In this paper, we consider these statistics, suggest methods by which confidence intervals may be calculated, and provide examples of the calculations. We demonstrate the close relationship between effectiveness (as used in split mouth trials) and relative effect and relative risk (as used in general epidemiological analysis) and recommend that relative risk should be the preferred outcome measure for split mouth trials. Whatever outcome measure is chosen in split mouth trials should always he subjected to statistical evaluation. preferably by the calculation of confidence intervals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article emphasize on the need of having a valid format of statistical analysis of split mouth caries trials. Most of the case control studies are summarized in 2 by 2 tables, but the layout of 2 by 2 tables depends on weather the statistical analysis is based on paired data or otherwise. Authors of the article have clarified some of the technical problems in their original article. The thrust of the article, which recommends that relative risk be used as an outcome measure in split mouth caries trials, remain unchanged.