Background: Atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) is a major health concern, and lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) is an independent risk factor. However, there is limited evidence regarding Lp(a) and the risk of ASCVD in Asian populations. This study aimed to assess the predictive value of changes in coronary artery calcification (CAC) for ASCVD risk associated with Lp(a) level. Methods: Participants (n=2,750) were grouped according to their Lp(a) levels, and the association between Lp(a) and CAC progression was examined. CAC progression was defined as the occurrence of incident CAC or a difference ≥2.5 between the square root (√) of baseline and follow-up coronary artery calcium scores (CACSs) (Δ√transformed CACS). To adjust for differences in follow-up periods, Δ√transformed CACS was divided by the follow- up period (in years). Results: Over an average follow-up of 3.07 years, 18.98% of participants experienced CAC progression. Those with disease progression had notably higher Lp(a) levels. Higher Lp(a) tertiles correlated with increased baseline and follow-up CACS, CAC progression (%), and Δ√transformed CACS. Even after adjustment, higher Lp(a) levels were associated with CAC progression. However, annualized Δ√transformed CACS analysis yielded no significant results. Conclusion This study demonstrated an association between elevated Lp(a) levels and CAC progression in a general population without ASCVD. However, longer-term follow-up studies are needed to obtain meaningful results regarding CAC progression. Further research is necessary to utilize Lp(a) level as a predictor of cardiovascular disease and to establish clinically relevant thresholds specific to the Korean population.

Background: Atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) is a major health concern, and lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) is an independent risk factor. However, there is limited evidence regarding Lp(a) and the risk of ASCVD in Asian populations. This study aimed to assess the predictive value of changes in coronary artery calcification (CAC) for ASCVD risk associated with Lp(a) level. Methods: Participants (n=2,750) were grouped according to their Lp(a) levels, and the association between Lp(a) and CAC progression was examined. CAC progression was defined as the occurrence of incident CAC or a difference ≥2.5 between the square root (√) of baseline and follow-up coronary artery calcium scores (CACSs) (Δ√transformed CACS). To adjust for differences in follow-up periods, Δ√transformed CACS was divided by the follow- up period (in years). Results: Over an average follow-up of 3.07 years, 18.98% of participants experienced CAC progression. Those with disease progression had notably higher Lp(a) levels. Higher Lp(a) tertiles correlated with increased baseline and follow-up CACS, CAC progression (%), and Δ√transformed CACS. Even after adjustment, higher Lp(a) levels were associated with CAC progression. However, annualized Δ√transformed CACS analysis yielded no significant results. Conclusion This study demonstrated an association between elevated Lp(a) levels and CAC progression in a general population without ASCVD. However, longer-term follow-up studies are needed to obtain meaningful results regarding CAC progression. Further research is necessary to utilize Lp(a) level as a predictor of cardiovascular disease and to establish clinically relevant thresholds specific to the Korean population.

Background: Atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) is a major health concern, and lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) is an independent risk factor. However, there is limited evidence regarding Lp(a) and the risk of ASCVD in Asian populations. This study aimed to assess the predictive value of changes in coronary artery calcification (CAC) for ASCVD risk associated with Lp(a) level. Methods: Participants (n=2,750) were grouped according to their Lp(a) levels, and the association between Lp(a) and CAC progression was examined. CAC progression was defined as the occurrence of incident CAC or a difference ≥2.5 between the square root (√) of baseline and follow-up coronary artery calcium scores (CACSs) (Δ√transformed CACS). To adjust for differences in follow-up periods, Δ√transformed CACS was divided by the follow- up period (in years). Results: Over an average follow-up of 3.07 years, 18.98% of participants experienced CAC progression. Those with disease progression had notably higher Lp(a) levels. Higher Lp(a) tertiles correlated with increased baseline and follow-up CACS, CAC progression (%), and Δ√transformed CACS. Even after adjustment, higher Lp(a) levels were associated with CAC progression. However, annualized Δ√transformed CACS analysis yielded no significant results. Conclusion This study demonstrated an association between elevated Lp(a) levels and CAC progression in a general population without ASCVD. However, longer-term follow-up studies are needed to obtain meaningful results regarding CAC progression. Further research is necessary to utilize Lp(a) level as a predictor of cardiovascular disease and to establish clinically relevant thresholds specific to the Korean population.

Background: Atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) is a major health concern, and lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) is an independent risk factor. However, there is limited evidence regarding Lp(a) and the risk of ASCVD in Asian populations. This study aimed to assess the predictive value of changes in coronary artery calcification (CAC) for ASCVD risk associated with Lp(a) level. Methods: Participants (n=2,750) were grouped according to their Lp(a) levels, and the association between Lp(a) and CAC progression was examined. CAC progression was defined as the occurrence of incident CAC or a difference ≥2.5 between the square root (√) of baseline and follow-up coronary artery calcium scores (CACSs) (Δ√transformed CACS). To adjust for differences in follow-up periods, Δ√transformed CACS was divided by the follow- up period (in years). Results: Over an average follow-up of 3.07 years, 18.98% of participants experienced CAC progression. Those with disease progression had notably higher Lp(a) levels. Higher Lp(a) tertiles correlated with increased baseline and follow-up CACS, CAC progression (%), and Δ√transformed CACS. Even after adjustment, higher Lp(a) levels were associated with CAC progression. However, annualized Δ√transformed CACS analysis yielded no significant results. Conclusion This study demonstrated an association between elevated Lp(a) levels and CAC progression in a general population without ASCVD. However, longer-term follow-up studies are needed to obtain meaningful results regarding CAC progression. Further research is necessary to utilize Lp(a) level as a predictor of cardiovascular disease and to establish clinically relevant thresholds specific to the Korean population.

Background: The Xpert MTB/RIF Ultra (Xpert Ultra) was introduced to enhance the sensitivity of tuberculosis detection, particularly in smear-negative cases, compared with its predecessor, Xpert MTB/RIF (Xpert). However, its performance in high-resource, intermediateburden settings remains unassessed. We prospectively compared the diagnostic accuracy of Xpert Ultra and Xpert for detecting Mycobacterium tuberculosis (MTB) and rifampin resistance in Korea. Methods: In total, 309 respiratory specimens were analyzed using both assays. We used two reference standards: mycobacterial culture and a composite reference standard based on clinical diagnosis and treatment decisions. Diagnostic performance, including sensitivity, specificity, and agreement between the two assays, was assessed. Spiking experiments using 13 MTB isolates with known rpoB mutations were performed to evaluate rifampin resistance detection. Results: Xpert Ultra showed increased, albeit not significantly, sensitivity (73.7% vs. 65.8% with culture; 63.8% vs. 53.2% with the composite reference standard) over Xpert. Its specificity was comparable to that of Xpert; however, a few false-positive results were observed among trace- and very low-positives. Among six culture-negative but Xpert Ultra-positive cases, two were clinically diagnosed as tuberculosis. Of the 13 rpoB mutant strains, Xpert correctly detected all mutations in the rifampin resistance-determining region, whereas Xpert Ultra yielded indeterminate results for Q432P and Q429H/L430P/H445Q. Conclusions Xpert Ultra tends to have increased sensitivity; however, it shows potential diagnostic ambiguity associated with trace- or very low-positive results. These findings highlight the importance of clinical correlation, particularly in culture-negative cases. Indeterminate results in certain rpoB mutations require cautious interpretation.

Background: The growing burden of nontuberculous mycobacteria (NTM) raises concerns regarding cross-reactivity in molecular tuberculosis (TB) diagnostics. In the current study, we evaluated whether high NTM loads affect Mycobacterium tuberculosis (MTB) detection or rifampin (RIF) resistance calls using Xpert MTB/RIF (Xpert) and Xpert MTB/RIF Ultra (Xpert Ultra). Methods: In vitro spiking experiments were performed by mixing eight NTM species (1 × 10 6 colony-forming unit [CFU]/mL) with heat-inactivated MTB (RIF-susceptible H37Rv; RIFresistant S450L) at 5 × 103 CFU/mL in pooled smear-negative sputum, before testing them in parallel using Xpert and Xpert Ultra. We also retrospectively analyzed 334 results from lower respiratory specimens, including 32 NTM-positive specimens tested using both assays, and assessed the presence of probe amplification in the NTM-confirmed specimens. Results: In spiking experiments, both assays showed no NTM-related cross-reactivity: RIFsusceptible mixes were “RIF resistance not detected,” S450L mixes were correctly resistant with preserved mutant melt peaks, and MTB-specific cycle threshold and melting peak temperature profiles were unchanged by NTM. Of the 334 clinical specimens, NTM was isolated from 32. Xpert classified all 32 as MTB-negative, and Xpert Ultra classified 31 of 32 as MTB-negative and one as “very low” positive in a patient with prior TB, consistent with residual nonviable DNA. In NTM-positive, Xpert/Xpert Ultra-negative specimens, neither assay showed probe amplification. Conclusion High-burden NTM did not compromise MTB detection or RIF-resistance determination using Xpert or Xpert Ultra. The assays demonstrated robust analytical specificity in mixed MTB–NTM contexts, supporting their use where NTM carriage is common.

Objective: Endovascular coil embolization is the primary treatment modality for intracranial aneurysms. However, its long-term durability remains of concern, with a considerable proportion of cases requiring aneurysm reopening and retreatment. Therefore, establishing optimal follow-up imaging protocols is necessary to ensure a durable occlusion. This study aimed to develop guidelines for follow-up imaging strategies after endovascular treatment of intracranial aneurysms. Methods: A committee comprising members of the Korean Neuroendovascular Society and other relevant societies was formed. A literature review and analyses of the major published guidelines were conducted to gather evidence. A panel of 40 experts convened to achieve a consensus on the recommendations using the modified Delphi method. Results: The panel members reached the following consensus: 1. Schedule the initial follow-up imaging within 3-6 months of treatment. 2. Noninvasive imaging modalities, such as three-dimensional time-of-flight magnetic resonance angiography (MRA) or contrast-enhanced MRA, are alternatives to digital subtraction angiography (DSA) during the first follow-up. 3. Schedule mid-term follow-up imaging at 1, 2, 4, and 6 years after the initial treatment. 4. If noninvasive imaging reveals unstable changes in the treated aneurysms, DSA should be considered. 5. Consider late-term follow-up imaging every 3–5 years for lifelong monitoring of patients with unstable changes or at high risk of recurrence. Conclusions The guidelines aim to provide physicians with the information to make informed decisions and provide patients with high-quality care. However, owing to a lack of specific recommendations and scientific data, these guidelines are based on expert consensus and should be considered in conjunction with individual patient characteristics and circumstances.