Background: Shortage of organ donors in the Republic of Korea has become a major problem. To address this, it has been questioned whether heart transplant (HTx) allocation should be modified to reduce priority of older patients. We aimed to evaluate post-HTx outcomes according to recipient age and specific pre-HTx conditions using a nationwide prospective cohort. Methods: We analyzed clinical characteristics of 628 patients from the Korean Organ Transplant Registry who received HTx from January 2015 to December 2020. Enrolled recipients were divided into three groups according to age. We also included comorbidities including ambulatory status. Non-ambulatory status was defined as pre-HTx support with either extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, continuous renal replacement therapy, or mechanical ventilation. Results: Of the 628 patients, 195 were < 50 years, 322 were 50–64 years and 111 were ≥ 65years at transplant. Four hundred nine (65.1%) were ambulatory and 219 (34.9%) were nonambulatory. Older recipients tended to have more comorbidities, ischemic cardiomyopathy, and received older donors. Post-HTx survival was significantly lower in older recipients (P = 0.025) and recipients with non-ambulatory status (P < 0.001). However, in contrast to non-ambulatory recipients who showed significant survival differences according to the recipient’s age (P = 0.004), ambulatory recipients showed comparable outcomes (P = 0.465). Conclusion Our results do not support use of age alone as an allocation criterion. Transplant candidate age in combination with some comorbidities such as non-ambulatory status may identify patients at a sufficiently elevated risk at which suitability of HTx should be reconsidered.

Background: Shortage of organ donors in the Republic of Korea has become a major problem. To address this, it has been questioned whether heart transplant (HTx) allocation should be modified to reduce priority of older patients. We aimed to evaluate post-HTx outcomes according to recipient age and specific pre-HTx conditions using a nationwide prospective cohort. Methods: We analyzed clinical characteristics of 628 patients from the Korean Organ Transplant Registry who received HTx from January 2015 to December 2020. Enrolled recipients were divided into three groups according to age. We also included comorbidities including ambulatory status. Non-ambulatory status was defined as pre-HTx support with either extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, continuous renal replacement therapy, or mechanical ventilation. Results: Of the 628 patients, 195 were < 50 years, 322 were 50–64 years and 111 were ≥ 65years at transplant. Four hundred nine (65.1%) were ambulatory and 219 (34.9%) were nonambulatory. Older recipients tended to have more comorbidities, ischemic cardiomyopathy, and received older donors. Post-HTx survival was significantly lower in older recipients (P = 0.025) and recipients with non-ambulatory status (P < 0.001). However, in contrast to non-ambulatory recipients who showed significant survival differences according to the recipient’s age (P = 0.004), ambulatory recipients showed comparable outcomes (P = 0.465). Conclusion Our results do not support use of age alone as an allocation criterion. Transplant candidate age in combination with some comorbidities such as non-ambulatory status may identify patients at a sufficiently elevated risk at which suitability of HTx should be reconsidered.

Background: Shortage of organ donors in the Republic of Korea has become a major problem. To address this, it has been questioned whether heart transplant (HTx) allocation should be modified to reduce priority of older patients. We aimed to evaluate post-HTx outcomes according to recipient age and specific pre-HTx conditions using a nationwide prospective cohort. Methods: We analyzed clinical characteristics of 628 patients from the Korean Organ Transplant Registry who received HTx from January 2015 to December 2020. Enrolled recipients were divided into three groups according to age. We also included comorbidities including ambulatory status. Non-ambulatory status was defined as pre-HTx support with either extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, continuous renal replacement therapy, or mechanical ventilation. Results: Of the 628 patients, 195 were < 50 years, 322 were 50–64 years and 111 were ≥ 65years at transplant. Four hundred nine (65.1%) were ambulatory and 219 (34.9%) were nonambulatory. Older recipients tended to have more comorbidities, ischemic cardiomyopathy, and received older donors. Post-HTx survival was significantly lower in older recipients (P = 0.025) and recipients with non-ambulatory status (P < 0.001). However, in contrast to non-ambulatory recipients who showed significant survival differences according to the recipient’s age (P = 0.004), ambulatory recipients showed comparable outcomes (P = 0.465). Conclusion Our results do not support use of age alone as an allocation criterion. Transplant candidate age in combination with some comorbidities such as non-ambulatory status may identify patients at a sufficiently elevated risk at which suitability of HTx should be reconsidered.

Background: Shortage of organ donors in the Republic of Korea has become a major problem. To address this, it has been questioned whether heart transplant (HTx) allocation should be modified to reduce priority of older patients. We aimed to evaluate post-HTx outcomes according to recipient age and specific pre-HTx conditions using a nationwide prospective cohort. Methods: We analyzed clinical characteristics of 628 patients from the Korean Organ Transplant Registry who received HTx from January 2015 to December 2020. Enrolled recipients were divided into three groups according to age. We also included comorbidities including ambulatory status. Non-ambulatory status was defined as pre-HTx support with either extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, continuous renal replacement therapy, or mechanical ventilation. Results: Of the 628 patients, 195 were < 50 years, 322 were 50–64 years and 111 were ≥ 65years at transplant. Four hundred nine (65.1%) were ambulatory and 219 (34.9%) were nonambulatory. Older recipients tended to have more comorbidities, ischemic cardiomyopathy, and received older donors. Post-HTx survival was significantly lower in older recipients (P = 0.025) and recipients with non-ambulatory status (P < 0.001). However, in contrast to non-ambulatory recipients who showed significant survival differences according to the recipient’s age (P = 0.004), ambulatory recipients showed comparable outcomes (P = 0.465). Conclusion Our results do not support use of age alone as an allocation criterion. Transplant candidate age in combination with some comorbidities such as non-ambulatory status may identify patients at a sufficiently elevated risk at which suitability of HTx should be reconsidered.

Cytomegalovirus (CMV) is the most important opportunistic viral pathogen in solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients.The Korean guideline for the prevention of CMV infection in SOT recipients was developed jointly by the Korean Society for Infectious Diseases and the Korean Society of Transplantation. CMV serostatus of both donors and recipients should be screened before transplantation to best assess the risk of CMV infection after SOT. Seronegative recipients receiving organs from seropositive donors face the highest risk, followed by seropositive recipients. Either antiviral prophylaxis or preemptive therapy can be used to prevent CMV infection. While both strategies have been demonstrated to prevent CMV infection post-transplant, each has its own advantages and disadvantages. CMV serostatus, transplant organ, other risk factors, and practical issues should be considered for the selection of preventive measures. There is no universal viral load threshold to guide treatment in preemptive therapy. Each institution should define and validate its own threshold.Valganciclovir is the favored agent for both prophylaxis and preemptive therapy. The evaluation of CMV-specific cellmediated immunity and the monitoring of viral load kinetics are gaining interest, but there was insufficient evidence to issue recommendations. Specific considerations on pediatric transplant recipients are included.

Background/Aims: Prokinetic agents and neuromodulators are among the treatment options for functional dyspepsia (FD), but their comparative efficacy is unclear. We aimed to compare the efficacy of mosapride controlled-release (CR) and nortriptyline in patients with FD after 4 weeks of treatment. Methods: Participants with FD were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive mosapride CR (mosapride CR 15 mg and nortriptyline placebo) or nortriptyline (mosapride CR placebo and nortriptyline 10 mg) in double-placebo, double-blinded, randomized controlled, parallel clinical study. The primary endpoint was defined as the proportion of patients with overall dyspepsia improvement after 4 weeks treatment. The secondary endpoints were changes in individual symptom scores, anxiety, depression, and quality of life. Results: One hundred nine participants were recruited and assessed for eligibility, and 54 in the mosapride CR group and 50 in the nortriptyline group were included in the modified intention-to-treat protocol. The rate of overall dyspepsia improvement was similar between groups (53.7% vs 54.0%, P = 0.976). There was no difference in the efficacy of mosapride CR and nortriptyline in a subgroup analysis by FD subtype (59.3% vs 52.5% in postprandial distress syndrome, P = 0.615; 44.4% vs 40.0% in epigastric pain syndrome, P = > 0.999; 50.0% vs 59.1% in overlap, P = 0.565; respectively). Both treatments significantly improved anxiety, depression, and quality of life from baseline. Conclusion Mosapride CR and nortriptyline showed similar efficacy in patients with FD regardless of the subtype. Both treatments could be equally helpful for improving quality of life and psychological well-being while also relieving dyspepsia.

Purpose: This study aimed to investigate the quality of medical care in North Korea using data from North Korean medical research. Materials and Methods: This study included publications containing the keyword “medical” among North Korea’s consecutive publications and selected 415 papers related to heart disease, brain disease, and emergency medical care published at The North Korean Data Center of the Ministry of Unification (https://unibook.unikorea.go.kr). Among 40 research articles, we reviewed ten with representative epidemiological data for cardiovascular treatment, and the latest medical materials were selected and analyzed in detail. Results: Few studies reported the experience of large-scale medical facilities or verified professional performance. Proof of the efficacy of the latest drugs was rare, although the treatment results of interventional therapy and conventional heart surgery were reported. Efforts to improve emergency medical care and innovation of treatment materials using new technologies were being actively studied. However, careful interpretation is required due to the lack of objectivity in research data and some deviation in the composition of patients included in the data. Conclusion Research of cardiovascular disease in North Korea is conducted at a very limited scope, although treatment results appear to be recorded. The management of cardiovascular disease and the establishment of an emergency medical system warrant global attention and cooperation for further improvement.

Background/Aims: It remains unclear which maintenance treatment modality is most appropriate for mild gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD).We aimed to compare on-demand treatment with continuous treatment using a proton pump inhibitor (PPI) in the maintenance treatment for patients with non-erosive GERD or mild erosive esophagitis. Methods: Patients whose GERD symptoms improved after 4 weeks of standard dose PPI treatment were prospectively enrolled at 25 hospitals.Subsequently, the enrolled patients were randomly assigned to either an on-demand or a continuous maintenance treatment group, and followed in an 8-week interval for up to 24 weeks. Results: A total of 304 patients were randomized to maintenance treatment (continuous, n = 151 vs on-demand, n = 153). The primary outcome, the overall proportion of unwillingness to continue the assigned maintenance treatment modality, failed to confirm the noninferiority of on-demand treatment (45.9%) compared to continuous treatment (36.1%). Compared with the on-demand group, the GERD symptom and health-related quality of life scores significantly more improved and the overall satisfaction score was significantly higher in the continuous treatment group, particularly at week 8 and week 16 of maintenance treatment. Work impairment scores were not different in the 2 groups, but the prescription cost was less in the on-demand group. Serum gastrin levels significantly elevated in the continuous treatment group, but not in the on-demand group. Conclusions Continuous treatment seems to be more appropriate for the initial maintenance treatment of non-erosive GERD or mild erosive esophagitis than on-demand treatment. Stepping down to on-demand treatment needs to be considered after a sufficient period of continuous treatment.

Purpose: In this trial, we investigated the efficacy and safety of adjuvant letrozole for hormone receptor (HR)-positive breast cancer. Here, we report the clinical outcome in postmenopausal women with HR-positive breast cancer treated with adjuvant letrozole according to estrogen receptor (ER) expression levels. Methods: In this multi-institutional, open-label, observational study, postmenopausal patients with HR-positive breast cancer received adjuvant letrozole (2.5 mg/daily) for 5 years unless they experienced disease progression or unacceptable toxicity or withdrew their consent. The patients were stratified into the following 3 groups according to ER expression levels using a modified Allred score (AS): low, intermediate, and high (AS 3–4, 5–6, and 7–8, respectively). ER expression was centrally reviewed. The primary objective was the 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) rate. Results: Between April 25, 2010, and February 5, 2014, 440 patients were enrolled. With a median follow-up of 62.0 months, the 5-year DFS rate in all patients was 94.2% (95% confidence interval [CI], 91.8–96.6). The 5-year DFS and recurrence-free survival (RFS) rates did not differ according to ER expression; the 5-year DFS rates were 94.3% and 94.1%in the low-to-intermediate and high expression groups, respectively (p = 0.6), and the corresponding 5-year RFS rates were 95.7% and 95.4%, respectively (p = 0.7). Furthermore, 25 patients discontinued letrozole because of drug toxicity. Conclusion Treatment with adjuvant letrozole showed very favorable treatment outcomes and good tolerability among Korean postmenopausal women with ER-positive breast cancer, independent of ER expression.

Background and Objectives: Smoking is well-established as a risk factor for coronary artery disease. However, recent studies demonstrated favorable results, including reduced mortality, among smokers, which are referred to as the “smoker's paradox”. This study examined the impact of smoking on clinical outcomes in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Methods: Patients with AMI undergoing PCI between 2004 and 2014 were enrolled and classified according to smoking status. The primary endpoint was a composite of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) including cardiac death, myocardial infarction, stroke, and revascularization. Results: Among the 10,683 patients, 4,352 (40.7%) were current smokers. Smokers were 10.7 years younger and less likely to have comorbidities such as hypertension, diabetes mellitus, chronic kidney disease, stroke, and prior PCI. Smokers had less MACE (hazard ratio [HR], 0.644; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.594–0.698; p<0.001) and cardiac death (HR, 0.494; 95% CI, 0.443–0.551; p<0.001) compared to nonsmokers during the 5 years in an unadjusted model. However, after propensity-score matching, smokers showed higher risk of MACE (HR, 1.125; 95% CI, 1.009–1.254; p=0.034) and cardiac death (HR, 1.190; 95% CI, 1.026–1.381; p=0.022). Smoking was a strong independent predictor of lung cancer (propensityscore matched HR, 2.749; 95% CI, 1.416–5.338; p=0.003). Conclusions In contrast to the unadjusted model, smoking is associated with worse cardiovascular outcome and higher incidence of lung cancer after adjustment of various confounding factors. This result can be explained by the characteristics of smokers, which were young and had fewer comorbidities.