Background: Thrombocytopenia is a condition where platelet counts are below the normal range (< 150 ×103 /µL), resulting in a higher risk of bleeding and affecting the results of hip arthroplasty. We assessed the impact of preoperative platelet counts on the clinical results of patients who underwent hip arthroplasty. Methods: Between April 2003 and March 2023, 437 patients (451 hips), who had preoperative thrombocytopenia of less than 150 ×103 /µL platelets, underwent hip arthroplasty. Preoperative platelet levels were categorized into severe thrombocytopenia (< 50 ×103 /µL) and non-severe thrombocytopenia (50–149 ×103 /µL). Total blood loss, operation time, requirement of transfusion, amount of transfusion, duration of surgical wound oozing, length of hospital stay, mortality rate at 1 year after surgery, and any complication were compared between the 2 groups. Results: No notable differences were observed in the surgery time or the total amount of blood loss between the groups. The requirement of transfusion and the amount of transfused blood were higher in the severe thrombocytopenia group. Prolonged oozing was found in around 18% in both groups, while periprosthetic joint infections occurred in 3 of the non-severe thrombocytopenia group. No significant difference was noted in the duration of hospital stay (25.6 ± 18.3 days vs. 19.4 ± 16.6 days, p = 0.067) and 1-year mortality (22.2% vs. 11.8%, p = 0.110). Conclusions Hip arthroplasties are safe for patients with low platelet counts and do not lead to prolonged hospital stays. On the other hand, patients with severe thrombocytopenia tend to need blood transfusions more frequently than those with less severe thrombocytopenia.

Background: The Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Osteosynthesefragen (AO) and the Orthopaedic Trauma Association (OTA) classification system for diaphyseal fracture has been recently revised to refine and enhance the accuracy of fracture categorization. This study aimed to investigate the interobserver reliability of the new AO/OTA classification and to compare it with the older version in femoral shaft fractures. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed 139 patients (mean age, 43.8 ± 19.5 years; 92 men and 47 women) with femoral shaft fractures who were treated from 2003 to 2017. Four well-trained observers independently classified each fracture following the previous and revised AO/OTA classification system. We calculated the Fleiss kappa for the interobserver reliability. Results: The previous classification showed the kappa value of 0.580 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.547–0.613), and the revised version showed 0.528 (95% CI, 0.504–0.552). Both the old and the revised versions showed moderate reliability. Conclusions Our study highlights the moderate interobserver reliability of both the previous and new AO/OTA classification systems for diaphyseal femur fractures. These findings emphasize the importance of standardized systems in clinical decision-making and underscore the need for ongoing education and collaboration to enhance fracture classification.

Background: During the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, there was a shortage of medical resources and the need for proper treatment guidelines for brain tumor patients became more pressing. Thus, the Korean Society for Neuro-Oncology (KSNO), a multidisciplinary academic society, has undertaken efforts to develop a guideline that is tailored to the domestic situation and that can be used in similar crisis situations in the future. As part II of the guideline, this consensus survey is to suggest management options in specific clinical scenarios during the crisis period. Methods: The KSNO Guideline Working Group consisted of 22 multidisciplinary experts on neuro-oncology in Korea. In order to confirm a consensus reached by the experts, opinions on 5 specific clinical scenarios about the management of brain tumor patients during the crisis period were devised and asked. To build-up the consensus process, Delphi method was employed. Results: The summary of the final consensus from each scenario are as follows. For patients with newly diagnosed astrocytoma with isocitrate dehydrogenase (IDH)-mutant and oligodendroglioma with IDH-mutant/1p19q codeleted, observation was preferred for patients with low-risk, World Health Organization (WHO) grade 2, and Karnofsky Performance Scale (KPS) ≥60, while adjuvant radiotherapy alone was preferred for patients with high-risk, WHO grade 2, and KPS ≥60. For newly diagnosed patients with glioblastoma, the most preferred adjuvant treatment strategy after surgery was radiotherapy plus temozolomide except for patients aged ≥70 years with KPS of 60 and unmethylated MGMT promoters. In patients with symptomatic brain metastasis, the preferred treatment differed according to the number of brain metastasis and performance status. For patients with newly diagnosed atypical meningioma, adjuvant radiation was deferred in patients with older age, poor performance status, complete resection, or low mitotic count. Conclusion It is imperative that proper medical care for brain tumor patients be sustained and provided, even during the crisis period. The findings of this consensus survey will be a useful reference in determining appropriate treatment options for brain tumor patients in the specific clinical scenarios covered by the survey during the future crisis.

Background: During the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, the need for appropriate treatment guidelines for patients with brain tumors was indispensable due to the lack and limitations of medical resources. Thus, the Korean Society for Neuro-Oncology (KSNO), a multidisciplinary academic society, has undertaken efforts to develop a guideline that is tailored to the domestic situation and that can be used in similar crisis situations in the future. Methods: The KSNO Guideline Working Group was composed of 22 multidisciplinary experts on neuro-oncology in Korea. In order to reach consensus among the experts, the Delphi method was used to build up the final recommendations. Results: All participating experts completed the series of surveys, and the results of final survey were used to draft the current consensus recommendations. Priority levels of surgery and radiotherapy during crises were proposed using appropriate time window-based criteria for management outcome. The highest priority for surgery is assigned to patients who are life-threatening or have a risk of significant impact on a patient’s prognosis unless immediate intervention is given within 24–48 hours. As for the radiotherapy, patients who are at risk of compromising their overall survival or neurological status within 4–6 weeks are assigned to the highest priority. Curative-intent chemotherapy has the highest priority, followed by neoadjuvant/adjuvant and palliative chemotherapy during a crisis period. Telemedicine should be actively considered as a management tool for brain tumor patients during the mass infection crises such as the COVID-19 pandemic. Conclusion It is crucial that adequate medical care for patients with brain tumors is maintained and provided, even during times of crisis. This guideline will serve as a valuable resource, assisting in the delivery of treatment to brain tumor patients in the event of any future crisis.

Background/Aims: Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is a curative treatment modality for early gastric neoplasms; however, ESD can be a time-consuming process. To overcome this pitfall, we developed the one-step knife (OSK) approach, which combines an endoscopic knife and injection needle on a single sheath. We aimed to evaluate whether this approach could reduce the ESD procedure time. Methods: This single-blinded randomized multicenter trial at four tertiary hospitals from June 2019 to June 2020 included patients aged 19 to 85 years undergoing ESD. Patients were randomly assigned to two groups (OSK or conventional knife [CK]). The injection time, total procedure time, resected specimen size, submucosal fluid amount, degree of device satisfaction, and adverse events were evaluated and compared between groups. Results: Fifty-one patients were analyzed (OSK: 25 patients and CK: 26 patients). No baseline differences were observed between groups, with the exception of a higher portion of males in the OSK group. The mean injection time was significantly reduced in the OSK group (39.0 seconds) compared to that in the CK group (87.5 seconds, p<0.001). A decrease of more than 10 minutes in the total procedure time (18.0 minutes vs 28.1 minutes, p=0.055) in the OSK group compared to the CK group was observed. Second-look esophagogastroduodenoscopy revealed two delayed bleeding cases in the OSK group that were easily controlled by endoscopic hemostasis. Conclusions OSK reduced the injection time and showed a decrease in total procedure time compared with the CK approach. OSK can be a feasible tool for ESD, especially in difficult cases.

Purpose: We aimed to assess the real-world efficacy of nab-paclitaxel in metastatic breast cancer patients. Materials and Methods: This is a retrospective study performed in two tertiary referral hospitals in Korea. Patients with metastatic breast cancer treated with nab-paclitaxel (Abraxane®) between March 2016 and March 2020 were enrolled. Results: A total of 102 patients with metastatic breast cancer were included. Patients were heavily pre-treated with a median of four prior lines of chemotherapy (5 lines when including endocrine therapy in hormone-receptor-positive patients), and 66 patients (64.7%) were exposed to taxanes in the metastatic setting. According to St. Gallen molecular subtypes, 36 patients (35.3%) were luminal A, 28 (27.5%) were luminal B, 18 (17.7%) were human epidermal growth factor receptor 2–positive and 20 (19.6%) had triple-negative disease. Fifty patients (49.0%) were treated with a 3-weekly regimen (260 mg/m2 on day 1 every 3 weeks), and 52 (51.0%) were treated with a weekly regimen (100 mg/m2 every week). Objective response rate was 22.9%. After a median follow-up of 22.0 months, median progression-free survival (PFS) was 4.0 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.6 to 4.8) and median overall survival was 8.7 months (95% CI, 7.5 to 11.2). Patients treated with weekly regimen had longer PFS compared to 3-weekly regimen (5.5 vs. 2.3 months, p < 0.001). Multivariate analysis revealed the treatment regimen as an independent prognostic factor for PFS. There was no grade 3 or 4 hypersensitivity reaction. Conclusion This real-world data shows that nab-paclitaxel is a reasonable treatment option in heavily pre-treated and/or taxane-exposed metastatic breast cancer patients.

Background/Aims: While distal radial artery (DRA) access is increasingly being used for diagnostic coronary angiography, limited information is available regarding DRA size. We aimed to determine the DRA reference diameters of Korean patients and identify the predictors of DRA diameter < 2.3 mm. Methods: The outer bilateral DRA diameters were assessed using a linear ultrasound probe in 1,162 consecutive patients who underwent transthoracic echocardiography. The DRA diameter was measured by the perpendicular angle in the dorsum of the hand, and the average values were compared by sex. DRA diameter < 2.3 mm was defined as unsuitable for routine diagnostic coronary angiography using a 5 Fr introducer sheath. Results: The mean DRA diameters were 2.31 ± 0.43 mm (right) and 2.35 ± 0.45 mm (left). The DRA was smaller in women than men (right: 2.15 ± 0.38 mm vs. 2.43 ± 0.44 mm, p < 0.001; left: 2.18 ± 0.39 mm vs. 2.47 ± 0.45 mm, p < 0.001). The DRA diameter was approximately 20% smaller than the radial artery diameter. A total of 630 (54.2%) and 574 (49.4%) patients had DRA diameter < 2.3 mm in the right and left hands, respectively. Female sex, low body mass index (BMI), and low body surface area (BSA) were significant predictors of DRA diameter < 2.3 mm. Conclusions We provided reference DRA diameters for Korean patients. Approximately 50% of the studied patients had DRA diameter < 2.3 mm. Female sex, low BMI, and low BSA remained significant predictors of DRA diameter < 2.3 mm.

Purpose: Endocrine therapy is a standard treatment for hormone receptor-positive breast cancer, which accounts for 60%–75% of all breast cancer. Hormone receptor positivity is a prognostic and predictive biomarker in breast cancer. Approximately 50%–80% of breast cancer is also positive for androgen receptor (AR), but the prognostic and predictive value of AR expression in breast cancer is controversial. Here, we investigated AR expression and its prognostic value in patients with surgically resected breast cancer in Korea. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of patients who had surgically resected breast cancer to collect AR expression data and other clinicopathological data. The optimal cut-off for AR positivity was determined using a receiver operating characteristic curve analysis. Results: We reviewed 957 patients with surgically resected breast cancer from June 2012 to April 2013. The median follow-up was 62 months, and relapse events occurred in 101 (10.6%) patients. Unlike the cut-off value of 1% or 10% in previous reports, 35% was determined to be best for predicting relapse-free survival (RFS) in this study. At the cut-off value of 35%, 654 (68.4%) patients were AR-positive. AR expression was more prevalent in luminal A (87.6%) and luminal B (73.1%) types than in human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive (56.2%) or triple-negative (20.6%) types. AR expression of ≥ 35% was significantly related to longer RFS in a multivariate analysis (hazard ratio, 0.430; 95% confidence interval, 0.260–0.709; p = 0.001). Conclusion We propose a cut-off value of 35% to best predict RFS in patients with surgically resected breast cancer. AR expression was positive in 68.4% of patients, and AR positivity was found to be an independent prognostic factor for longer RFS.

PURPOSE: Data on the efficacy of olanzapine in patients receiving moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (MEC) are limited. This study aimed to evaluate and compare the efficacy of olanzapine versus placebo in controlling nausea and vomiting in patients receiving MEC. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study to determine whether olanzapine can reduce the frequency of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) and improve the quality of life (QOL) in patients receiving palonosetron and dexamethasone as prophylaxis for MEC-induced nausea and vomiting. The primary end point was complete response for the acute phase (0-24 hours after chemotherapy). The secondary end points were complete response for the delayed (24-120 hours) and overall phase (0-120 hours), proportion of significant nausea (visual analogue scale ≥ 25 mm), use ofrescue medications, and effect on QOL. RESULTS: Fifty-six patients were randomized to the olanzapine (n=29) and placebo (n=27) groups. Complete response rates were not significantly different between the olanzapine and placebo groups in the acute (96.5% vs. 88.0%, p=0.326), delayed (69.0% vs. 48.0%, p=0.118), and overall phases (69.0% vs. 48.0%, p=0.118). However, the percentage of patients with significant nausea (17.2% vs. 44.0%, p=0.032) and the use of rescue medications (0.03±0.19 vs. 1.88±2.88, p=0.002) were lower in the olanzapine group than in the placebo. Furthermore, the olanzapine group demonstrated better QOL (p=0.015). CONCLUSION: Olanzapine combined with palonosetron and dexamethasone significantly improved QOL and vomiting control among previously untreated patients receiving MEC, although the efficacy was limited to the reduction of the frequency of CINV.
Antiemetics ; Dexamethasone ; Drug Therapy* ; Humans ; Nausea* ; Quality of Life ; Vomiting*