1.Radiofrequency Ablation for Recurrent Thyroid Cancers:2025 Korean Society of Thyroid Radiology Guideline
Eun Ju HA ; Min Kyoung LEE ; Jung Hwan BAEK ; Hyun Kyung LIM ; Hye Shin AHN ; Seon Mi BAEK ; Yoon Jung CHOI ; Sae Rom CHUNG ; Ji-hoon KIM ; Jae Ho SHIN ; Ji Ye LEE ; Min Ji HONG ; Hyun Jin KIM ; Leehi JOO ; Soo Yeon HAHN ; So Lyung JUNG ; Chang Yoon LEE ; Jeong Hyun LEE ; Young Hen LEE ; Jeong Seon PARK ; Jung Hee SHIN ; Jin Yong SUNG ; Miyoung CHOI ; Dong Gyu NA ;
Korean Journal of Radiology 2025;26(1):10-28
Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) is a minimally invasive treatment modality used as an alternative to surgery in patients with benign thyroid nodules, recurrent thyroid cancers (RTCs), and primary thyroid microcarcinomas. The Korean Society of Thyroid Radiology (KSThR) initially developed recommendations for the optimal use of RFA for thyroid tumors in 2009 and revised them in 2012 and 2017. As new meaningful evidence has accumulated since 2017 and in response to a growing global interest in the use of RFA for treating malignant thyroid lesions, the task force committee members of the KSThR decided to update the guidelines on the use of RFA for the management of RTCs based on a comprehensive analysis of current literature and expert consensus.
2.Comparative Analysis of Romosozumab Versus Vertebroplasty With Denosumab: Efficacy, Safety, and Secondary Bone Mineral Density Outcomes
Hyun Woong MUN ; Jong Joo LEE ; Hyun Chul SHIN ; Tae-Hwan KIM ; Seok Woo KIM ; Jae Keun OH
Neurospine 2025;22(1):69-77
Objective:
This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of romosozumab, a bone anabolic agent, versus vertebroplasty, a conventional surgical intervention, in treating osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures (OVCFs).
Methods:
A retrospective analysis included 86 thoracic/lumbar compression fracture patients from 2014 to 2022 at a medical center. Forty-two patients received romosozumab (monthly injections for 1 year) followed by 1 year of denosumab, while 44 underwent vertebroplasty followed by denosumab injections biannually for 2 years. Outcomes were assessed using the Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) for pain, bone mineral density (BMD), vertebral compression ratio, and Cobb angle over 12 months.
Results:
At 12 months, the romosozumab group showed a greater reduction in NRS scores (4.90 ± 1.01 vs. 4.27 ± 1.34, p = 0.015) and a higher increase in lumbar BMD (0.8 ± 0.5 vs. 0.5 ± 0.3, p = 0.000) compared to the vertebroplasty group. There were no significant differences in changes in hip total BMD and femur neck BMD (p = 0.190, p = 0.167, respectively). Radiographic assessments showed no significant differences in vertebral compression ratio (14.7% vs. 14.8%; p = 0.960) or Cobb angle (4.2° vs. 4.9°; p = 0.302). The incidence of major osteoporotic fractures was lower in the romosozumab group (7.1% vs. 25.0%, p = 0.051), with similar rates of cardiovascular events in both groups (4.8% vs. 9.1%, p = 0.716).
Conclusion
Romosozumab has demonstrated superior pain reduction and lumbar BMD improvement compared to vertebroplasty at 12 months, with no significant differences in radiographic outcomes or adverse events, suggesting it as an alternative to vertebroplasty for OVCF.
3.Environmental disease monitoring by regional Environmental Health Centers in Korea: a narrative review
Myung-Sook PARK ; Hwan-Cheol KIM ; Woo Jin KIM ; Yun-Chul HONG ; Won-Jun CHOI ; Seock-Yeon HWANG ; Jiho LEE ; Young-Seoub HONG ; Yong-Dae KIM ; Seong-Chul HONG ; Joo Hyun SUNG ; Inchul JEONG ; Kwan LEE ; Won-Ju PARK ; Hyun-Joo BAE ; Seong-Yong YOON ; Cheolmin LEE ; Kyoung Sook JEONG ; Sanghyuk BAE ; Jinhee CHOI ; Ho-Hyun KIM
The Ewha Medical Journal 2025;48(1):e3-
This study explores the development, roles, and key initiatives of the Regional Environmental Health Centers in Korea, detailing their evolution through four distinct phases and their impact on environmental health policy and local governance. It chronicles the establishment and transformation of these centers from their inception in May 2007, through four developmental stages. Originally named Environmental Disease Research Centers, they were subsequently renamed Environmental Health Centers following legislative changes. The analysis includes the expansion in the number of centers, the transfer of responsibilities to local governments, and the launch of significant projects such as the Korean Children’s Environmental Health Study (Ko-CHENS ). During the initial phase (May 2007–February 2009), the 10 centers concentrated on research-driven activities, shifting from a media-centered to a receptor-centered approach. In the second phase, prompted by the enactment of the Environmental Health Act, six additional centers were established, broadening their scope to address national environmental health issues. The third phase introduced Ko-CHENS, a 20-year national cohort project designed to influence environmental health policy by integrating research findings into policy frameworks. The fourth phase marked a decentralization of authority, empowering local governments and redefining the centers' roles to focus on regional environmental health challenges. The Regional Environmental Health Centers have significantly evolved and now play a crucial role in addressing local environmental health issues and supporting local government policies. Their capacity to adapt and respond to region-specific challenges is essential for the effective implementation of environmental health policies, reflecting geographical, socioeconomic, and demographic differences.
4.Environmental disease monitoring by regional Environmental Health Centers in Korea: a narrative review
Myung-Sook PARK ; Hwan-Cheol KIM ; Woo Jin KIM ; Yun-Chul HONG ; Won-Jun CHOI ; Seock-Yeon HWANG ; Jiho LEE ; Young-Seoub HONG ; Yong-Dae KIM ; Seong-Chul HONG ; Joo Hyun SUNG ; Inchul JEONG ; Kwan LEE ; Won-Ju PARK ; Hyun-Joo BAE ; Seong-Yong YOON ; Cheolmin LEE ; Kyoung Sook JEONG ; Sanghyuk BAE ; Jinhee CHOI ; Ho-Hyun KIM
The Ewha Medical Journal 2025;48(1):e3-
This study explores the development, roles, and key initiatives of the Regional Environmental Health Centers in Korea, detailing their evolution through four distinct phases and their impact on environmental health policy and local governance. It chronicles the establishment and transformation of these centers from their inception in May 2007, through four developmental stages. Originally named Environmental Disease Research Centers, they were subsequently renamed Environmental Health Centers following legislative changes. The analysis includes the expansion in the number of centers, the transfer of responsibilities to local governments, and the launch of significant projects such as the Korean Children’s Environmental Health Study (Ko-CHENS ). During the initial phase (May 2007–February 2009), the 10 centers concentrated on research-driven activities, shifting from a media-centered to a receptor-centered approach. In the second phase, prompted by the enactment of the Environmental Health Act, six additional centers were established, broadening their scope to address national environmental health issues. The third phase introduced Ko-CHENS, a 20-year national cohort project designed to influence environmental health policy by integrating research findings into policy frameworks. The fourth phase marked a decentralization of authority, empowering local governments and redefining the centers' roles to focus on regional environmental health challenges. The Regional Environmental Health Centers have significantly evolved and now play a crucial role in addressing local environmental health issues and supporting local government policies. Their capacity to adapt and respond to region-specific challenges is essential for the effective implementation of environmental health policies, reflecting geographical, socioeconomic, and demographic differences.
5.Environmental disease monitoring by regional Environmental Health Centers in Korea: a narrative review
Myung-Sook PARK ; Hwan-Cheol KIM ; Woo Jin KIM ; Yun-Chul HONG ; Won-Jun CHOI ; Seock-Yeon HWANG ; Jiho LEE ; Young-Seoub HONG ; Yong-Dae KIM ; Seong-Chul HONG ; Joo Hyun SUNG ; Inchul JEONG ; Kwan LEE ; Won-Ju PARK ; Hyun-Joo BAE ; Seong-Yong YOON ; Cheolmin LEE ; Kyoung Sook JEONG ; Sanghyuk BAE ; Jinhee CHOI ; Ho-Hyun KIM
The Ewha Medical Journal 2025;48(1):e3-
This study explores the development, roles, and key initiatives of the Regional Environmental Health Centers in Korea, detailing their evolution through four distinct phases and their impact on environmental health policy and local governance. It chronicles the establishment and transformation of these centers from their inception in May 2007, through four developmental stages. Originally named Environmental Disease Research Centers, they were subsequently renamed Environmental Health Centers following legislative changes. The analysis includes the expansion in the number of centers, the transfer of responsibilities to local governments, and the launch of significant projects such as the Korean Children’s Environmental Health Study (Ko-CHENS ). During the initial phase (May 2007–February 2009), the 10 centers concentrated on research-driven activities, shifting from a media-centered to a receptor-centered approach. In the second phase, prompted by the enactment of the Environmental Health Act, six additional centers were established, broadening their scope to address national environmental health issues. The third phase introduced Ko-CHENS, a 20-year national cohort project designed to influence environmental health policy by integrating research findings into policy frameworks. The fourth phase marked a decentralization of authority, empowering local governments and redefining the centers' roles to focus on regional environmental health challenges. The Regional Environmental Health Centers have significantly evolved and now play a crucial role in addressing local environmental health issues and supporting local government policies. Their capacity to adapt and respond to region-specific challenges is essential for the effective implementation of environmental health policies, reflecting geographical, socioeconomic, and demographic differences.
6.Safety and Efficacy of Pivot-Balloon for Severe Tricuspid Regurgitation:The First-in-Man Experiences
Eun Kyoung KIM ; Min-Ku CHON ; Hyun-Sook KIM ; Yong-Hyun PARK ; Sang-Hyun LEE ; Ki Seok CHOO ; Hyung Gon JE ; Dae-Hee KIM ; Tae Oh KIM ; Yoon Seok KOH ; Jae-Hyeong PARK ; Jae-Hwan LEE ; Young Jin CHOI ; Eun Seok SHIN ; Hyuck-Jun YOON ; Seung-Whan LEE ; Joo-Yong HAHN
Korean Circulation Journal 2025;55(1):20-31
Background and Objectives:
Among various emerging catheter-based treatments for severe tricuspid regurgitation (TR), the spacer device can reduce the regurgitation orifice without manipulating the valve leaflet. However, its clinical application has been hampered by traumatic anchoring to the myocardium and the coaxial alignment of the balloon resulting in insufficient TR reduction. This study aimed to evaluate the early-stage safety, technical feasibility, and preliminary efficacy of the novel atraumatic vertical spacer in patients with isolated severe TR.
Methods:
All procedures were guided by fluoroscopy and transthoracic echocardiography.The maximum device placement time with an inflated balloon was 24 hours. Changes in the amount of TR, right ventricular function, and patient hemodynamics were measured during balloon deployment.
Results:
A total of 7 patients (median age 74), underwent successful device implantation without procedure-related complications. During balloon inflation (median 25 minutes), there were no symptoms or signs indicative of TR intolerance. TR was reduced by 1 grade or greater in all patients, with 2 patients exhibiting a reduction of 3 grades, from torrential TR to a moderate degree. Mild TR after balloon inflation was achieved in 3 patients with baseline severe TR. The TR reduction observed during initial balloon deployment was sustained during the subsequent balloon maintenance period.
Conclusions
The Pivot-balloon procedure was safe, technically feasible, and effective in reducing TR in patients with severe TR. No periprocedural complications or adverse cardiovascular events were reported during device placement with TR reduction observed in all patients. However, longer-term follow-up is needed to confirm safety and treatment effect.
7.Outcomes of Deferring Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Without Physiologic Assessment for Intermediate Coronary Lesions
Jihoon KIM ; Seong-Hoon LIM ; Joo-Yong HAHN ; Jin-Ok JEONG ; Yong Hwan PARK ; Woo Jung CHUN ; Ju Hyeon OH ; Dae Kyoung CHO ; Yu Jeong CHOI ; Eul-Soon IM ; Kyung-Heon WON ; Sung Yun LEE ; Sang-Wook KIM ; Ki Hong CHOI ; Joo Myung LEE ; Taek Kyu PARK ; Jeong Hoon YANG ; Young Bin SONG ; Seung-Hyuk CHOI ; Hyeon-Cheol GWON
Korean Circulation Journal 2025;55(3):185-195
Background and Objectives:
Outcomes of deferring percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) without invasive physiologic assessment for intermediate coronary lesions is uncertain.We sought to compare long-term outcomes between medical treatment and PCI of intermediate lesions without invasive physiologic assessment.
Methods:
A total of 899 patients with intermediate coronary lesions between 50% and 70% diameter-stenosis were randomized to the conservative group (n=449) or the aggressive group (n=450). For intermediate lesions, PCI was performed in the aggressive group, but was deferred in the conservative group. The primary endpoint was major adverse cardiac events (MACE, a composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction [MI], or ischemia-driven any revascularization) at 3 years.
Results:
The number of treated lesions per patient was 0.8±0.9 in the conservative group and 1.7±0.9 in the aggressive group (p=0.001). At 3 years, the conservative group had a significantly higher incidence of MACE than the aggressive group (13.8% vs. 9.3%; hazard ratio [HR], 1.49; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.00–2.21; p=0.049), mainly driven by revascularization of target intermediate lesion (6.5% vs. 1.1%; HR, 5.69; 95% CI, 2.20–14.73;p<0.001). Between 1 and 3 years after the index procedure, compared to the aggressive group, the conservative group had significantly higher incidence of cardiac death or MI (3.2% vs.0.7%; HR, 4.34; 95% CI, 1.24–15.22; p=0.022) and ischemia-driven any revascularization.
Conclusions
For intermediate lesions, medical therapy alone, guided only by angiography, was associated with a higher risk of MACE at 3 years compared with performing PCI, mainly due to increased revascularization.
8.Safety and efficacy of HK-660S in patients with primary sclerosing cholangitis: A randomized double-blind phase 2a trial
Woo Hyun PAIK ; Joo Kyung PARK ; Moon Jae CHUNG ; Gunn HUH ; Ce Hwan PARK ; Sang Hyub LEE ; Heon Se JEONG ; Hee Jin KIM ; Do Hyun PARK
Clinical and Molecular Hepatology 2025;31(1):119-130
Background/Aims:
A clinical unmet need persists for medications capable of modulating the progression of primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC). This study aimed to assess the clinical feasibility of HK-660S (beta-lapachone) in PSC.
Methods:
In this multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group phase 2 trial, participants were assigned in a 2:1 ratio to receive either 100 mg of HK-660S or a placebo twice daily for 12 weeks. The primary outcomes were the reduction in serum alkaline phosphatase (ALP) levels and the percentage of participants showing improvements in PSC severity, as determined by magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography with the Anali score. Secondary endpoints included changes in liver stiffness and adverse events.
Results:
The analysis included 21 patients, 15 receiving HK-660S, and six receiving a placebo. Improvements in the Anali score were observed in 13.3% of the HK-660S group, with no improvements in the placebo group. HK-660S treatment resulted in a 15.2% reduction in mean ALP levels, compared to a 6.6% reduction in the placebo group. A stratified ad-hoc analysis based on baseline ALP levels showed a statistically significant response in the HK-660S group among those with ALP levels greater than twice the upper limit of normal, with a 50% responder rate (p=0.05). Additionally, 26.7% of the HK-660S group showed improvements in the enhanced liver fibrosis score, with no improvements in the placebo group. HK-660S was generally well tolerated.
Conclusions
HK-660S is well tolerated among patients with PSC and may improve bile duct strictures, decrease serum ALP levels, and reduce liver fibrosis (cris.nih.go.kr, Number KCT0006590).
9.The comparative study of Stretta radiofrequency and anti-reflux mucosectomy in the management of intractable gastroesophageal reflux disease: a single-center retrospective study from Korea
Ah Young LEE ; Ji Woo CHOI ; Jeong Haeng HEO ; Jun Young CHUNG ; Seong Hwan KIM ; Joo Young CHO
Clinical Endoscopy 2025;58(3):409-417
Background/Aims:
Chronic gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) requires symptom relief and treatment of associated conditions. In this study, we aimed to compare anti-reflux mucosectomy (ARMS) and Stretta radiofrequency (SRF) for treating patients with chronic GERD who are unresponsive to proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) and to identify the indications for each procedure.
Methods:
Data of patients who underwent ARMS or SRF between March 2021 and April 2023 were analyzed. Changes in GERD questionnaire (GERDQ) scores, endoscopic Los Angeles (LA) grade, flap valve grade (FVG) based on Hill’s type, EndoFLIP distensibility index (DI), endoscopic Barrett’s epithelium (BE) resolution rate, and PPI withdrawal rate were compared between the two groups.
Results:
Improvements in the GERDQ scores and PPI withdrawal rates were similar between the groups. The ARMS group showed significantly better changes in endoscopic LA grade, FVG, and EndoFLIP DI than the SRF group. The complications were more prevalent in the ARMS group than in the SRF group.
Conclusions
The change in endoscopic LA grade before and after the procedure was significantly higher in the ARMS group than in the SRF group. Significant improvements in endoscopic FVG, BE resolution, and EndoFLIP DI were observed only with the ARMS group.
10.Clinical Impact of Meniscal Scaffold Implantation in Patients with Meniscal Tears: A Systematic Review
Joo Hyung HAN ; Min JUNG ; Kwangho CHUNG ; Se-Han JUNG ; Hyunjun LEE ; Chong-Hyuk CHOI ; Sung-Hwan KIM
Clinics in Orthopedic Surgery 2025;17(1):112-122
Background:
Meniscal scaffold implantation has been introduced as a treatment for meniscal injuries, but there is still no clear consensus on its clinical impact, including its chondroprotective effect. This review aimed to assess the chondroprotective effects, clinical outcomes, and survivorship of meniscal scaffold implantation compared to meniscectomy, as well as among different types of scaffolds.
Methods:
A comprehensive search strategy was performed on the databases of PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar, encompassing articles published until June 1, 2024. Randomized controlled trials (RCT) and comparative studies published in English that reported results using collagen meniscal implant (CMI) and polyurethane meniscal scaffold for meniscal tear were included.
Results:
A total of 421 studies were initially identified across databases, and a systematic review was conducted on 8 studies involving 596 patients. Among the 5 studies that addressed the chondroprotective effect, none found that meniscal scaffolds had a higher chondroprotective effect compared to meniscectomy. In studies comparing CMI and meniscectomy, the Lysholm score results showed a mean difference (MD) range between –5.90 and –4.40. In the case of visual analog scale score, the MD ranged from –1.0 to 1.0. In studies comparing polyurethane meniscal scaffolds and CMI, the Tegner score results showed an MD range of –2.0 to 0.4.
Conclusions
There was no superiority in chondroprotective effects for both CMI and polyurethane meniscal scaffolds compared to meniscectomy. Although meniscal scaffolds may provide improvements in clinical outcomes, no clinically relevant differences were observed in comparison to meniscectomy. There are no discernible differences between the 2 types of scaffolds.

Result Analysis
Print
Save
E-mail