Background/Aims: Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) play a crucial role in managing laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR), but the optimal dosing regimen remains unclear. We aim to compare the effectiveness of the same total PPI dose administered twice daily versus once daily in LPR patients. Methods: We conducted a prospective randomized controlled trial at a tertiary referral hospital, enrolling a total of 132 patients aged 19 to 79 with LPR. These patients were randomly assigned to receive either a 10 mg twice daily (BID) or a 20 mg once daily (QD) dose of ilaprazole for 12 weeks. The Reflux Symptom Index (RSI) and Reflux Finding Score (RFS) were assessed at 8 weeks and 16 weeks. The primary endpoint was the RSI response, defined as a reduction of 50% or more in the total RSI score from baseline. We also analyzed the efficacy of the dosing regimens and the impact of dosing and duration on treatment outcomes. Results: The BID group did not display a higher response rate for RSI than the QD group. The changes in total RSI scores at the 8-week and 16-week visits showed no significant differences between the 2 groups. Total RFS alterations were also comparable between both groups.Each dosing regimen demonstrated significant decreases in RSI and RFS. Conclusions Both BID and QD PPI dosing regimens improved subjective symptom scores and objective laryngoscopic findings. There was no significant difference in RSI improvement between the 2 dosing regimens, indicating that either dosing regimen could be considered a viable treatment option.

Background/Aims: Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) play a crucial role in managing laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR), but the optimal dosing regimen remains unclear. We aim to compare the effectiveness of the same total PPI dose administered twice daily versus once daily in LPR patients. Methods: We conducted a prospective randomized controlled trial at a tertiary referral hospital, enrolling a total of 132 patients aged 19 to 79 with LPR. These patients were randomly assigned to receive either a 10 mg twice daily (BID) or a 20 mg once daily (QD) dose of ilaprazole for 12 weeks. The Reflux Symptom Index (RSI) and Reflux Finding Score (RFS) were assessed at 8 weeks and 16 weeks. The primary endpoint was the RSI response, defined as a reduction of 50% or more in the total RSI score from baseline. We also analyzed the efficacy of the dosing regimens and the impact of dosing and duration on treatment outcomes. Results: The BID group did not display a higher response rate for RSI than the QD group. The changes in total RSI scores at the 8-week and 16-week visits showed no significant differences between the 2 groups. Total RFS alterations were also comparable between both groups.Each dosing regimen demonstrated significant decreases in RSI and RFS. Conclusions Both BID and QD PPI dosing regimens improved subjective symptom scores and objective laryngoscopic findings. There was no significant difference in RSI improvement between the 2 dosing regimens, indicating that either dosing regimen could be considered a viable treatment option.

Background/Aims: Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) play a crucial role in managing laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR), but the optimal dosing regimen remains unclear. We aim to compare the effectiveness of the same total PPI dose administered twice daily versus once daily in LPR patients. Methods: We conducted a prospective randomized controlled trial at a tertiary referral hospital, enrolling a total of 132 patients aged 19 to 79 with LPR. These patients were randomly assigned to receive either a 10 mg twice daily (BID) or a 20 mg once daily (QD) dose of ilaprazole for 12 weeks. The Reflux Symptom Index (RSI) and Reflux Finding Score (RFS) were assessed at 8 weeks and 16 weeks. The primary endpoint was the RSI response, defined as a reduction of 50% or more in the total RSI score from baseline. We also analyzed the efficacy of the dosing regimens and the impact of dosing and duration on treatment outcomes. Results: The BID group did not display a higher response rate for RSI than the QD group. The changes in total RSI scores at the 8-week and 16-week visits showed no significant differences between the 2 groups. Total RFS alterations were also comparable between both groups.Each dosing regimen demonstrated significant decreases in RSI and RFS. Conclusions Both BID and QD PPI dosing regimens improved subjective symptom scores and objective laryngoscopic findings. There was no significant difference in RSI improvement between the 2 dosing regimens, indicating that either dosing regimen could be considered a viable treatment option.

Background: Atherogenic dyslipidemia, which is frequently associated with type 2 diabetes (T2D) and insulin resistance, contributes to the development of vascular complications. Statin therapy is the primary approach to dyslipidemia management in T2D, however, the role of non-statin therapy remains unclear. Ezetimibe reduces cholesterol burden by inhibiting intestinal cholesterol absorption. Fibrates lower triglyceride levels and increase high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) levels via peroxisome proliferator- activated receptor alpha agonism. Therefore, when combined, these drugs effectively lower non-HDL-C levels. Despite this, few clinical trials have specifically targeted non-HDL-C, and the efficacy of triple combination therapies, including statins, ezetimibe, and fibrates, has yet to be determined. Methods: This is a multicenter, prospective, randomized, open-label, active-comparator controlled trial involving 3,958 eligible participants with T2D, cardiovascular risk factors, and elevated non-HDL-C (≥100 mg/dL). Participants, already on moderate-intensity statins, will be randomly assigned to either Ezefeno (ezetimibe/fenofibrate) addition or statin dose-escalation. The primary end point is the development of a composite of major adverse cardiovascular and diabetic microvascular events over 48 months. Conclusion This trial aims to assess whether combining statins, ezetimibe, and fenofibrate is as effective as, or possibly superior to, statin monotherapy intensification in lowering cardiovascular and microvascular disease risk for patients with T2D. This could propose a novel therapeutic approach for managing dyslipidemia in T2D.

Background: Psoriasis imposes a significant treatment burden on patients, particularly impacting well-being and quality of life (QoL). The psychosocial impact of psoriasis treatments remains unexplored in most patient populations. Objective: To assess the impact of adalimumab on health-related QoL (HRQoL) in Korean patients with psoriasis. Methods: This 24-week, multicenter, observational study, assessed HRQoL in Korean patients treated with adalimumab in a real-world setting. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) including European Quality of Life-5 Dimension scale (EQ-5D), EQ-5D VAS, SF-36, and DLQI were evaluated at week 16 and 24, versus baseline. Patient satisfaction was assessed using TSQM. Results: Among 97 enrolled patients, 77 were assessed for treatment effectiveness. Most patients were male (52, 67.5%) and mean age was 45.4 years. Median baseline body surface area and Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) scores were 15.00 (range 4.00~80.00) and 12.40 (range 2.70~39.40), respectively. Statistically significant improvements in all PROs were observed between baseline and week 24. Mean EQ-5D score improved from 0.88 (standard deviation [SD], 0.14) at baseline to 0.91 (SD, 0.17) at week 24 (p=0.0067). The number of patients with changes in PASI 75, 90, or 100 from baseline to week 16 and 24 were 65 (84.4%), 17 (22.1%), and 1 (1.3%); and 64 (83.1%), 21 (27.3%), and 2 (2.6%), respectively. Overall treatment satisfaction was reported, including effectiveness and convenience. No unexpected safety findings were noted. Conclusion Adalimumab improved QoL and was well-tolerated in Korean patients with moderate to severe psoriasis, as demonstrated in a real-world setting. Clinical trial registration number (clinicaltrials.gov: NCT03099083).

Background: Dermatophyte infection is one of the most common skin diseases affecting the skin, hair, and nails. Despite widespread recognition of the disease, missing details and misperceptions are commonplace in the general population. Objective: This study aimed to investigate the public perception and behavior regarding dermatophytosis of the hands and feet. Methods: This results from an online survey conducted between July 2022 and August 2022. The survey included 1,000 Korean participants aged 20 to 69 years, of whom 60% experienced symptoms of tinea pedis or onychomycosis. The questionnaire focused on the awareness and personal experience of tinea pedis and perception of the treatment of dermatophytosis. Results: Of the 1,000 participants, nearly 80% regarded tinea pedis as a common skin condition by which anyone can be affected. Furthermore, 88.4% had heard that the treatment of tinea pedis could be harmful, causing skin rash (60.4%) and worsening liver function (48.5%). Among 896 participants who noticed suspicious symptoms, 81.2% did not visit the clinic because it was not severe (50.1%) and seemed easily manageable (25.7%). Of the respondents, 84.4% preferred to meet dermatologists rather than non-dermatologist doctors regarding skin diseases, mainly because of trust in experts and belief in a faster cure. Conclusion Providing accurate and detailed information via online media, educational campaigns, and medical papers can rectify misconceptions and improve patient appliance, contributing to public skin health.

Objectives: ：This study was aimed to investigate the changes in metabolic syndrome (MetS) status and long-term impact of its components over a 10-year period in severe mental illness (SMI) patients in a national mental hospital. Methods: ：A total of 93 patients (schizophrenia=88, bipolar disorder=5) who met the diagnosis of Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, fourth edition, text revision (DSM-IV-TR) and participated in the MetS study in 2011 were included. MetS was defined by revised National Cholesterol Education Program-Adult Treatment Panel III (revised NCEP-ATP-III) guidelines. Results: ：The prevalence of MetS was significantly increased from 40.9% in 2011 to 60.2% in 2020. There were significant differences in admission status and hospitalization months, compared to the groups with and without MetS. Upon reviewing the changes over a decade, systolic blood pressure (SBP) was a significant factor in the group without MetS. In the group with MetS, SBP, waist circumference, and BMI (body mass index) were significant factors. Multiple logistic regression analysis revealed that hospitalization during follow-up periods [odds ratio (OR)=0.969, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.948-0.991] and BMI (OR=1.426, 95% CI: 1.196-1.701) were significantly associated with MetS in subjects. Conclusion ：The prevalence of MetS in patients with SMI significantly increased over time. The admission status and hospitalization were also confirmed to be the significant values of MetS.

BACKGROUND: Cardiovascular risk remains increased despite optimal low density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) level induced by intensive statin therapy. Therefore, recent guidelines recommend non-high density lipoprotein cholesterol (non-HDL-C) as a secondary target for preventing cardiovascular events. The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy and tolerability of omega-3 fatty acids (OM3-FAs) in combination with atorvastatin compared to atorvastatin alone in patients with mixed dyslipidemia. METHODS: This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, and phase III multicenter study included adults with fasting triglyceride (TG) levels ≥200 and <500 mg/dL and LDL-C levels <110 mg/dL. Eligible subjects were randomized to ATOMEGA (OM3-FAs 4,000 mg plus atorvastatin calcium 20 mg) or atorvastatin 20 mg plus placebo groups. The primary efficacy endpoints were the percent changes in TG and non-HDL-C levels from baseline at the end of treatment. RESULTS: After 8 weeks of treatment, the percent changes from baseline in TG (−29.8% vs. 3.6%, P<0.001) and non-HDL-C (−10.1% vs. 4.9%, P<0.001) levels were significantly greater in the ATOMEGA group (n=97) than in the atorvastatin group (n=103). Moreover, the proportion of total subjects reaching TG target of <200 mg/dL in the ATOMEGA group was significantly higher than that in the atorvastatin group (62.9% vs. 22.3%, P<0.001). The incidence of adverse events did not differ between the two groups. CONCLUSION The addition of OM3-FAs to atorvastatin improved TG and non-HDL-C levels to a significant extent compared to atorvastatin alone in subjects with residual hypertriglyceridemia.

Background: and Purpose: The importance of the specialized management of neurocritical patients is being increasingly recognized. We evaluated the impact of neurointensivist comanagement on the clinical outcomes (particularly the mortality rate) of neurocritical patients admitted to a semiclosed neurocritical-care unit (NCU). Methods: We retrospectively included neurocritical patients admitted to the NCU between March 2015 and February 2018. We analyzed the clinical data and compared the outcomes between patients admitted before and after the initiation of neurointensivist co-management in March 2016. Results: There were 1,785 patients admitted to the NCU during the study period. Patients younger than 18 years (n=28) or discharged within 48 hours (n=200) were excluded. The 1,557 remaining patients comprised 590 and 967 who were admitted to the NCU before and after the initiation of co-management, respectively. Patients admitted under neurointensivist co-management were older and had higher Acute Physiologic Assessment and Chronic Health Evaluation II scores. The 30-day mortality rate was significantly lower after neurointensivist co-management (p=0.042). A multivariate logistic regression analysis demonstrated that neurointensivist co-management significantly reduced mortality rates in the NCU and in the hospital overall [odds ratio=0.590 (p=0.002) and 0.585 (p=0.001), respectively]. Conclusions Despite the higher severity of the condition during neurointensivist co-management, co-management significantly improved clinical outcomes (including the mortality rate) in neurocritical patients.

OBJECTIVE: The biological rhythm is closely related to mood symptoms. The purpose of this study was to assess the differences in biological rhythms among subjects with mood disorder [bipolar I disorder (BD I), bipolar II disorder (BD II), major depressive disorder (MDD)] and healthy control subjects.METHODS: A total of 462 early-onset mood disorder subjects were recruited from nine hospitals. The controls subjects were recruited from the general population of South Korea. Subject groups and control subject were evaluated for the Korean language version of Biological Rhythms Interview of Assessment in Neuropsychiatry (K-BRIAN) at the initial evaluation.RESULTS: The mean K-BRIAN scores were 35.59 [standard deviation (SD)=13.37] for BD I, 43.05 (SD=11.85) for BD II, 43.55 (SD=12.22) for MDD, and 29.1 (SD=8.15) for the control group. In the case of mood disorders, biological rhythm disturbances were greater than that in the control group (p<0.05). A significant difference existed between BD I and BD II (BD I Bipolar Disorder ; Cohort Studies ; Depression ; Depressive Disorder, Major ; Korea ; Mood Disorders ; Neuropsychiatry ; Periodicity