Neuropeptide YY1 receptor in human dental pulp cells of noncarious and carious teeth

Aim To determine the distribution of the NPY Y1 receptor in carious and noncarious human dental pulp tissue using immunohistochemistry. A subsidiary aim was to confirm the presence of the NPY Y1 protein product in membrane fractions of dental pulp tissue from carious and noncarious teeth using western blotting. Methodology Twenty two dental pulp samples were collected from carious and noncarious extracted teeth. Ten samples were processed for immunohistochemistry using a specific antibody to the NPY Y1 receptor. Twelve samples were used to obtain membrane extracts which were electrophoresed, blotted onto nitrocellulose and probed with NPY Y1 receptor antibody. Kruskal-Wallis one-way analysis of variance was employed to test for overall statistical differences between NPY Y1 levels in noncarious, moderately carious and grossly carious teeth. Results Neuropeptide Y Y1 receptor immunoreactivity was detected on the walls of blood vessels in pulp tissue from noncarious teeth. In carious teeth NPY Y1 immunoreactvity was observed on nerve fibres, blood vessels and inflammatory cells. Western blotting indicated the presence and confirmed the variability of NPY Y1 receptor protein expression in solubilised membrane preparations of human dental pulp tissue from carious and noncarious teeth. Conclusions Neuropeptide Y Y1 is expressed in human dental pulp tissue with evidence of increased expression in carious compared with noncarious teeth, suggesting a role for NPY Y1 in modulation of caries induced pulpal inflammation. © 2008 International Endodontic Journal.

Neuropeptides Regulate Expression of Angiogenic Growth Factors in Human Dental Pulp Fibroblasts

Abstract
INTRODUCTION:
Neuropeptides play an important role in inflammation and repair and have been implicated in mediating angiogenesis. Pulp fibroblasts express neuropeptide receptors, and the aim of this research was to investigate whether neuropeptides could regulate angiogenic growth factor expression in vitro
METHODS:
An angiogenic array was used to determine the levels of 10 angiogenic growth factors expressed by human pulp fibroblasts.
RESULTS:
Pulp fibroblasts were shown to express angiogenin, angiopoietin-2, epidermal growth factor, basic fibroblast growth factor, heparin-binding epidermal growth factor, hepatocyte growth factor, leptin, platelet-derived growth factor, placental growth factor, and vascular endothelial growth factor. Furthermore, the neuropeptides substance P, calcitonin gene-related peptide, vasoactive intestinal polypeptide, and neuropeptide Y altered angiogenic growth factor expression in vitro.
CONCLUSIONS:
The regulation of angiogenic growth factor expression by neuropeptides suggests a novel role for neuropeptides in pulpal inflammation and repair.

PAR-2 Regulates Dental Pulp Inflammation Associated with Caries

Protease-activated receptors (PARs) are G-protein-coupled receptors that are activated enzymatically by proteolysis of an N-terminal domain. The cleavage and activation of PARs by serine proteases represent a novel mechanism by which such enzymes could influence the host inflammatory response. The aim of this study was to determine whether PAR-2 expression and activation were increased in dental caries. Using immunohistochemistry, we showed PAR-2 to be localized to pulp cells subjacent to caries lesions, but minimally expressed by healthy pulp tissue. Trypsin and the PAR-2 agonist (PAR2-AP) activated PAR-2 in an in vitro functional assay. Endogenous molecules present in pulp cell lysates from carious teeth specifically activated PAR-2, but those from healthy teeth failed to do so. The activation of PAR-2 in vitro was shown to increase the expression of the pro-inflammatory mediator cyclo-oxygenase-2 (COX-2), providing a mechanism whereby PAR-2 could modulate pulpal inflammation.

A systematic review of instruments related to family caregivers of palliative care patients

Support for family caregivers is a core function of palliative care. However, there is a lack of consistency in the way needs are assessed, few longitudinal studies to examine the impact of caregiving, and a dearth of evidence-based interventions. In order to help redress this situation, identification of suitable instruments to examine the caregiving experience and the effectiveness of interventions is required. A systematic literature review was undertaken incorporating representatives of the European Association for Palliative Care’s International Palliative Care Family Caregiver Research Collaboration and Family Carer Taskforce. The aim of the review was to identify articles that described the use of instruments administered to family caregivers of palliative care patients (pre and post-bereavement). Fourteen of the 62 instruments targeted satisfaction with service delivery and less than half were developed specifically for the palliative care context. In approximately 25% of articles psychometric data were not reported. Where psychometric results were reported, validity data were reported in less than half (42%) of these cases. While a considerable variety of instruments have been administered to family caregivers, the validity of some of these requires further consideration. We recommend that others be judicious before developing new instruments for this population.

A Framework for the Evaluation of Digital Musical Instruments

At the outset of a discussion of evaluating digital musical instruments, that is to say instruments whose sound generators are digital and separable though not necessarily separate from their control interfaces (Malloch, 2006), it is reasonable to ask what the term evaluation in this context really means. After all, there may be many perspectives from which to view the effectiveness or otherwise of the instruments we build. For most performers, performance on an instrument becomes a means of evaluating how well it functions in the context of live music making, and their measure of success is the response of the audience to their performance. Audiences evaluate performances on the basis of how engaged they feel they have been by what they have seen and heard. When questioned, they are likely to describe good performances as “exciting,” “skillful,” “musical.” Bad performances are “boring,” and those which are marred by technical malfunction are often dismissed out of hand. If performance is considered to be a valid means of evaluating a musical instrument, then it follows that, for the field of DMI design, a much broader definition of the term “evaluation” than that typically used in human-computer interaction (HCI) is required to reflect the fact that there are a number of stakeholders involved in the design and evaluation of DMIs. In addition to players and audiences, there are also composers, instrument builders, component manufacturers, and perhaps even customers, each of whom will have a different concept of what is meant by “evaluation.”