Background: Oral health impacts systemic health, individual well-being, and quality of life. It is important to identify conditions that may exacerbate oral disease to aid public health and policy development and promote targeted patient treatment strategies. Developmental defects can increase an individual's risk of dental caries, hypersensitivity, premature tooth wear, erosion, and poor aesthetics. As part of an ongoing study assessing oral health in adults with cystic fibrosis at Cork University Dental School and Hospital, a systematic review of available literature was conducted to assess the prevalence of enamel defects in people with cystic fibrosis. Aims: To critically evaluate the literature to determine if the prevalence of developmental defects of enamel is higher in people with cystic fibrosis (PwCF). Methods: Data Sources: Three online databases were searched Embase, Scopus, and Web of Science Core Collection. Studies that examined an association between cystic fibrosis and developmental defects of enamel were included in this systematic review. Results: The initial search identified 116 publications from the following databases Embase, Web of Science Core Collection, and Scopus. Eleven studies were included for qualitative analysis. Nine studies concluded that PwCF had a higher prevalence of enamel defects than control people and one study found no difference in cystic fibrosis (CF) status. All studies had a risk of bias that may influence study results and their interpretation. Conclusions: The results of the systematic review show a consistent pattern that PwCF have a higher prevalence of DDE than people without CF. Genetic dysfunction, chronic systemic infections, and long-term antibiotic use are possible aetiological causes. This review highlights the need for future studies to investigate if DDEs are caused by the underlying CFTR mutation or as a consequence of disease manifestations and/or management.

Background: Hyperemesis gravidarum is a serious pregnancy complication that affects approximately 1% of pregnancies worldwide. Objective: To determine whether the use of ondansetron during pregnancy is associated with abnormal pregnancy outcomes. Search strategy: PubMed, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, Embase, CNKI, CBM, WANFANG, and were searched for citations published in any language from inception to 15 December 2021. Selection criteria: Eligible studies included any observational study. Data collection and analysis: Odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were used as indicators to examine the association between ondansetron and abnormal pregnancy outcomes. Main results: Twenty articles from 1,558 citations were included. Our preliminary analysis showed that compared with the unexposed group, the use of ondansetron during pregnancy may be associated with an increased incidence of cardiac defects (OR = 1.06, 95% CI: 1.01-1.10), neural tube defects (OR = 1.12, 95% CI: 1.05-1.18), and chest cleft (OR = 1.21, 95% CI: 1.07-1.37). Further sensitivity analysis showed no significant association between ondansetron and cardiac defects (OR = 1.15,95% CI: 0.94-1.40) or neural tube defects (OR = 0.87,95% CI: 0.46-1.66). When controversial studies were eliminated, the results for the chest defects disappeared. Simultaneously, we found that the use of ondansetron was associated with a reduced incidence of miscarriage (OR = 0.53, 95% CI: 0.31-0.89). Ondansetron was not associated with orofacial clefts (OR = 1.09,95% CI: 0.95-1.25), spinal limb defects (OR = 1.14,95% CI: 0.89-1.46), urinary tract deformities (OR = 1.06,95% CI: 0.97-1.15), any congenital malformations (OR = 1.03,95% CI: 0.98-1.09), stillbirth (OR = 0.97,95% CI: 0.83-1.15), preterm birth (OR = 1.22,95% CI: 0.80-1.85), neonatal asphyxia (OR = 1.05,95% CI: 0.72-1.54), or neonatal development (OR = 1.18,95% CI: 0.96-1.44) in our primary analysis. Conclusion: In our analysis, using ondansetron during pregnancy was not associated with abnormal pregnancy outcomes. Although our study did not find sufficient evidence of ondansetron and adverse pregnancy outcomes, future studies including the exposure period and dose of ondansetron, as well as controlling for disease status, may be useful to truly elucidate the potential risks and benefits of ondansetron.