Materials and Methods: Isolated strains were identified by Gram staining, catalase assay, and 3 molecular identification methods; namely, (GTG) 5-PCR fingerprinting, ARDRA, and 16S rDNA gene sequencing.
Results: A total of 19 LAB strains belonging to 4 genera (Lactococcus, Leuconostoc, Lactobacillus and Enterococcus) were identified.
Conclusion: The experiments revealed that L. plantarum 15HN, L. lactis subsp. cremoris 44L and E. mundtii 50H strains, which were isolated from shiraz, cheese and shiraz, respectively, displayed a desirable tolerance to low pH and high bile salts, favorable anti-pathogen activity, and acceptable antibiotic susceptibility; hence, they could be considered as novel probiotic candidates and applied in the food industry.
METHODS AND RESULTS: The effects of unfractionated CTs (F0) and CT fractions of different MWs (F1 > F2 > F3 > F4 > F5) on protozoal population and community were evaluated in vitro using rumen microbes and ground guinea grass as the substrate. Higher-MW CT fractions F1 and F2 significantly (P
METHODS: The method involved clinical examination of 8000 school children with an equal number of males and females (age range 12-15 years) to identify students only affected by bilateral or unilateral congenital absence of maxillary lateral incisors. Agenesis was determined based on radiological evidence.
RESULTS: The results of this study showed that the prevalence of isolated maxillary lateral incisors agenesis was 1.15%. In the sample studied, 66.3% of the patients were female and 33.7% were male (p
PARTICIPANTS AND METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted involving physicians and newly diagnosed breast cancer patients from three public/teaching hospitals in Malaysia. The Control Preference Scale (CPS) was administered to patients and physicians, and the Krantz Health Opinion Survey (KHOS) was completed by the patients alone. Binary logistic regression was used to determine the association between sociodemographic characteristics, the patients' involvement in treatment decision-making, and patients' preference for behavioral involvement and information related to their disease.
RESULTS: The majority of patients preferred to share decision-making with their physicians (47.5%), while the second largest group preferred being passive (42.6%) and a small number preferred being active (9.8%). However, the physicians perceived that the majority of patients preferred active decision-making (56.9%), followed by those who desired shared decision-making (32.8%), and those who preferred passive decision-making (10.3%). The overall concordance was 26.5% (54 of 204 patient-physician dyads). The median of preference for information score and behavioral involvement score was 4 (interquartile range [IQR] =3-5) and 2 (IQR =2-3), respectively. In univariate analysis, the ethnicity and educational qualification of patients were significantly associated with the patients' preferred role in the process of treatment decision-making and the patients' preference for information seeking (p>0.05). However, only educational qualification (p=0.004) was significantly associated with patients' preference for information seeking in multivariate analysis.
CONCLUSION: Physicians failed to understand patients' perspectives and preferences in treatment decision-making. The concordance between physicians' perception and patients' perception was quite low as the physicians perceived that more than half of the patients were active in treatment decision-making. In actuality, more than half of patients perceived that they shared decision-making with their physicians.
METHOD: Literature search was performed within the PubMed, ScienceDirect.com and Google Scholar.
RESULTS: The presence of proline at the C-terminal tripeptide of ACE inhibitor can competitively inhibit the ACE activity. The effects of other amino acids are less studied leading to difficulties in predicting potent peptide sequences. The broad specificity of the enzyme may be due to the dual active sites observed on the somatic ACE. The inhibitors may not necessarily competitively inhibit the enzyme which explains why some reported inhibitors do not have the common ACE inhibitor characteristics. Finally, the in vivo assay has to be carried out before the peptides as the antihypertensive agents can be claimed. The peptides must be absorbed into circulation without being degraded, which will affect their bioavailability and potency. Thus, peptides with strong in vitro IC50 values do not necessarily have the same effect in vivo and vice versa.
CONCLUSION: The relationship between peptide amino acid sequence and inhibitory activity, in vivo studies of the active peptides and bioavailability must be studied before the peptides as antihypertensive agents can be claimed.
PATIENT AND METHODS: This was a prospective, double blinded randomized study conducted in a tertiary hospital in Malaysia. Patients (n = 64) were randomly allocated to receive 2 Hertz EA and compared to a control group. EA was started intraoperatively till the end of the surgery (mean duration of surgery was 149.06 ± 42.64 minutes) under general anaesthesia. Postoperative numerical rating scale (NRS), the incidence of nausea, vomiting and usage of rescue antiemetics were recorded at 30 minutes, 2, 4, and 24 hours, respectively. The total morphine demand and usage from the patient-controlled analgesia Morphine (PCAM) were also recorded in the first 24 hours postoperatively.
RESULTS: The mean NRS was 2.75 (SD = 2.34) at 30 minutes and 2.25 (SD = 1.80) at 2 hours postoperatively in the EA group that was significantly lower than the mean NRS in the control group as 4.50 (SD = 2.37) at 30 minutes and 3.88 (SD = 2.21) at 2 hours. The mean PCA morphine demand was 27.28 (SD = 21.61) times pressed in the EA group and 55.25 (SD = 46.85) times pressed in the control group within 24 hours postoperatively, which showed a significant reduction in the EA group than the control group. Similarly, total morphine requirement was significantly lower in the EA group with the value of 21.38 (SD = 14.38) mg compared to the control group with the value of 33.94 (SD = 20.24) mg within 24 hours postoperatively. Incidence of postoperative nausea also significantly reduced in the EA group at 30 minutes (15.6%) compared to the control group (46.9%).
CONCLUSIONS: It can be concluded that subjects receiving EA intraoperatively experienced less pain and PONV. Hence, it is plausible that EA has an opioid-sparing effect and can reduce PONV.