Background: Malnutrition exacerbates the prognosis of numerous diseases; however, its specific impact on severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outcomes remains insufficiently explored. Methods: This multicenter study in Korea evaluated the nutritional status of 1,088 adults with severe COVID-19 using the Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index (GNRI) based on serum albumin levels and body weight. The patients were categorized into two groups: GNRI >98 (no-risk) and GNRI ≤98 (risk). Propensity score matching, adjusted for demographic and clinical variables, was conducted. Results: Of the 1,088 patients, 642 (59%) were classified as at risk of malnutrition. Propensity score matching revealed significant disparities in hospital (34.3% vs. 19.4%, p<0.001) and intensive care unit (ICU) mortality (31.5% vs. 18.9%, p<0.001) between the groups. The risk group was associated with a higher hospital mortality rate in the multivariate Cox regression analyses following propensity score adjustment (hazard ratio [HR], 1.64; p=0.001). Among the 670 elderly patients, 450 were at risk of malnutrition. Furthermore, the risk group demonstrated significantly higher hospital (52.1% vs. 29.5%, p<0.001) and ICU mortality rates (47.2% vs. 29.1%, p<0.001). The risk group was significantly associated with increased hospital mortality rates in the multivariate analyses following propensity score adjustment (HR, 1.66; p=0.001). Conclusion Malnutrition, as indicated by a low GNRI, was associated with increased mortality in patients with severe COVID-19. This effect was also observed in the elderly population. These findings underscore the critical importance of nutritional assessment and effective interventions for patients with severe COVID-19.

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.

Background/Aims: We investigated the clinical practice patterns of Korean endoscopists for the endoscopic resection of colorectal polyps. Methods: From September to November 2021, an online survey was conducted regarding the preferred resection methods for colorectal polyps, and responses were compared with the international guidelines. Results: Among 246 respondents, those with <4 years, 4–9 years, and ≥10 years of experiencein colonoscopy practices accounted for 25.6%, 34.1%, and 40.2% of endoscopists, respectively. The most preferred resection methods for non-pedunculated lesions were cold forceps polypectomy for ≤3 mm lesions (81.7%), cold snare polypectomy for 4–5 mm (61.0%) and 6–9 mm (43.5%) lesions, hot endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) for 10–19 mm lesions (72.0%), precut EMR for 20–25 mm lesions (22.0%), and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for ≥26 mm lesions (29.3%). Hot EMR was favored for pedunculated lesions with a head size <20 mm and stalk size <10 mm (75.6%) and for those with a head size ≥20 mm or stalk size ≥10 mm (58.5%). For suspected superficial and deep submucosal lesions measuring 10–19 mm and ≥20 mm, ESD (26.0% and 38.6%) and surgery (36.6% and 46.3%) were preferred, respectively. The adherence rate to the guidelines ranged from 11.2% to 96.9%, depending on the size, shape, and histology of the lesions. Conclusions Adherence to the guidelines for endoscopic resection techniques varied depend-ing on the characteristics of colorectal polyps. Thus, an individualized approach is required to increase adherence to the guidelines.

Background: Malnutrition exacerbates the prognosis of numerous diseases; however, its specific impact on severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outcomes remains insufficiently explored. Methods: This multicenter study in Korea evaluated the nutritional status of 1,088 adults with severe COVID-19 using the Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index (GNRI) based on serum albumin levels and body weight. The patients were categorized into two groups: GNRI >98 (no-risk) and GNRI ≤98 (risk). Propensity score matching, adjusted for demographic and clinical variables, was conducted. Results: Of the 1,088 patients, 642 (59%) were classified as at risk of malnutrition. Propensity score matching revealed significant disparities in hospital (34.3% vs. 19.4%, p<0.001) and intensive care unit (ICU) mortality (31.5% vs. 18.9%, p<0.001) between the groups. The risk group was associated with a higher hospital mortality rate in the multivariate Cox regression analyses following propensity score adjustment (hazard ratio [HR], 1.64; p=0.001). Among the 670 elderly patients, 450 were at risk of malnutrition. Furthermore, the risk group demonstrated significantly higher hospital (52.1% vs. 29.5%, p<0.001) and ICU mortality rates (47.2% vs. 29.1%, p<0.001). The risk group was significantly associated with increased hospital mortality rates in the multivariate analyses following propensity score adjustment (HR, 1.66; p=0.001). Conclusion Malnutrition, as indicated by a low GNRI, was associated with increased mortality in patients with severe COVID-19. This effect was also observed in the elderly population. These findings underscore the critical importance of nutritional assessment and effective interventions for patients with severe COVID-19.

Background: Malnutrition exacerbates the prognosis of numerous diseases; however, its specific impact on severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outcomes remains insufficiently explored. Methods: This multicenter study in Korea evaluated the nutritional status of 1,088 adults with severe COVID-19 using the Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index (GNRI) based on serum albumin levels and body weight. The patients were categorized into two groups: GNRI >98 (no-risk) and GNRI ≤98 (risk). Propensity score matching, adjusted for demographic and clinical variables, was conducted. Results: Of the 1,088 patients, 642 (59%) were classified as at risk of malnutrition. Propensity score matching revealed significant disparities in hospital (34.3% vs. 19.4%, p<0.001) and intensive care unit (ICU) mortality (31.5% vs. 18.9%, p<0.001) between the groups. The risk group was associated with a higher hospital mortality rate in the multivariate Cox regression analyses following propensity score adjustment (hazard ratio [HR], 1.64; p=0.001). Among the 670 elderly patients, 450 were at risk of malnutrition. Furthermore, the risk group demonstrated significantly higher hospital (52.1% vs. 29.5%, p<0.001) and ICU mortality rates (47.2% vs. 29.1%, p<0.001). The risk group was significantly associated with increased hospital mortality rates in the multivariate analyses following propensity score adjustment (HR, 1.66; p=0.001). Conclusion Malnutrition, as indicated by a low GNRI, was associated with increased mortality in patients with severe COVID-19. This effect was also observed in the elderly population. These findings underscore the critical importance of nutritional assessment and effective interventions for patients with severe COVID-19.

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.

Background/Aims: We investigated the clinical practice patterns of Korean endoscopists for the endoscopic resection of colorectal polyps. Methods: From September to November 2021, an online survey was conducted regarding the preferred resection methods for colorectal polyps, and responses were compared with the international guidelines. Results: Among 246 respondents, those with <4 years, 4–9 years, and ≥10 years of experiencein colonoscopy practices accounted for 25.6%, 34.1%, and 40.2% of endoscopists, respectively. The most preferred resection methods for non-pedunculated lesions were cold forceps polypectomy for ≤3 mm lesions (81.7%), cold snare polypectomy for 4–5 mm (61.0%) and 6–9 mm (43.5%) lesions, hot endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) for 10–19 mm lesions (72.0%), precut EMR for 20–25 mm lesions (22.0%), and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for ≥26 mm lesions (29.3%). Hot EMR was favored for pedunculated lesions with a head size <20 mm and stalk size <10 mm (75.6%) and for those with a head size ≥20 mm or stalk size ≥10 mm (58.5%). For suspected superficial and deep submucosal lesions measuring 10–19 mm and ≥20 mm, ESD (26.0% and 38.6%) and surgery (36.6% and 46.3%) were preferred, respectively. The adherence rate to the guidelines ranged from 11.2% to 96.9%, depending on the size, shape, and histology of the lesions. Conclusions Adherence to the guidelines for endoscopic resection techniques varied depend-ing on the characteristics of colorectal polyps. Thus, an individualized approach is required to increase adherence to the guidelines.

Background/Aims: We investigated the clinical practice patterns of Korean endoscopists for the endoscopic resection of colorectal polyps. Methods: From September to November 2021, an online survey was conducted regarding the preferred resection methods for colorectal polyps, and responses were compared with the international guidelines. Results: Among 246 respondents, those with <4 years, 4–9 years, and ≥10 years of experiencein colonoscopy practices accounted for 25.6%, 34.1%, and 40.2% of endoscopists, respectively. The most preferred resection methods for non-pedunculated lesions were cold forceps polypectomy for ≤3 mm lesions (81.7%), cold snare polypectomy for 4–5 mm (61.0%) and 6–9 mm (43.5%) lesions, hot endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) for 10–19 mm lesions (72.0%), precut EMR for 20–25 mm lesions (22.0%), and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for ≥26 mm lesions (29.3%). Hot EMR was favored for pedunculated lesions with a head size <20 mm and stalk size <10 mm (75.6%) and for those with a head size ≥20 mm or stalk size ≥10 mm (58.5%). For suspected superficial and deep submucosal lesions measuring 10–19 mm and ≥20 mm, ESD (26.0% and 38.6%) and surgery (36.6% and 46.3%) were preferred, respectively. The adherence rate to the guidelines ranged from 11.2% to 96.9%, depending on the size, shape, and histology of the lesions. Conclusions Adherence to the guidelines for endoscopic resection techniques varied depend-ing on the characteristics of colorectal polyps. Thus, an individualized approach is required to increase adherence to the guidelines.

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.

Background: Malnutrition exacerbates the prognosis of numerous diseases; however, its specific impact on severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outcomes remains insufficiently explored. Methods: This multicenter study in Korea evaluated the nutritional status of 1,088 adults with severe COVID-19 using the Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index (GNRI) based on serum albumin levels and body weight. The patients were categorized into two groups: GNRI >98 (no-risk) and GNRI ≤98 (risk). Propensity score matching, adjusted for demographic and clinical variables, was conducted. Results: Of the 1,088 patients, 642 (59%) were classified as at risk of malnutrition. Propensity score matching revealed significant disparities in hospital (34.3% vs. 19.4%, p<0.001) and intensive care unit (ICU) mortality (31.5% vs. 18.9%, p<0.001) between the groups. The risk group was associated with a higher hospital mortality rate in the multivariate Cox regression analyses following propensity score adjustment (hazard ratio [HR], 1.64; p=0.001). Among the 670 elderly patients, 450 were at risk of malnutrition. Furthermore, the risk group demonstrated significantly higher hospital (52.1% vs. 29.5%, p<0.001) and ICU mortality rates (47.2% vs. 29.1%, p<0.001). The risk group was significantly associated with increased hospital mortality rates in the multivariate analyses following propensity score adjustment (HR, 1.66; p=0.001). Conclusion Malnutrition, as indicated by a low GNRI, was associated with increased mortality in patients with severe COVID-19. This effect was also observed in the elderly population. These findings underscore the critical importance of nutritional assessment and effective interventions for patients with severe COVID-19.