Purpose: This study aims to develop and implement an economic evaluation using a micro-costing approach to provide a precise and transparent analysis of the direct costs of cystoscopic procedures in Korean hospitals. The study seeks to identify key cost components and evaluate whether current reimbursement rates accurately reflect these direct costs. Materials and Methods: Significant variations in cost items were identified across different studies. An economic evaluation was conducted using a micro-costing methodology for the cost analysis of cystoscopic procedures, developed through literature review, data collection from studies, and expert consultations. Results: Gangnam Severance Hospital (GSH) performed 2,188 cystoscopic procedures, including 1,847 cystoscopies and 341 JJ stent removals, with average costs of $100.8 and $110.6, respectively. At National Health Insurance Service Ilsan Hospital (NHIMC), 1,463 procedures were performed, including 1,167 cystoscopies and 296 JJ stent removals, with average costs of $119.2 and $125.3. Cystoscopy costs at GSH were driven by reprocessing ($45.8, 45.4%) and equipment ($33.1, 32.9%), while NHIMC’s were $52.5 (44.0%) for equipment and $48.7 (40.8%) for reprocessing. Both hospitals incurred financial losses, with NHIS (National Health Insurance Service) covering only about 71.7% and 60.6% of costs for cystoscopy, and 71.0% and 62.7% for JJ stent removal. Conclusions The significant discrepancy between HIRA (Health Insurance Review & Assessment Service)’s estimated costs and those identified here suggests that current fees for cystoscopic procedures may be underestimated and require reassessment.Given the results, reevaluating these rates is essential to ensure fair compensation for healthcare providers and to deliver optimal patient care.

Objective: This study aimed to compare the accuracy of robotic spine surgery and conventional pedicle screw fixation in lumbar degenerative disease. We evaluated clinical and radiological outcomes to demonstrate the noninferiority of robotic surgery. Methods: This study employed propensity score matching and included 3 groups: robot-assisted mini-open posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) (robotic surgery, RS), c-arm guided minimally invasive surgery transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (C-arm guidance, CG), and freehand open PLIF (free of guidance, FG) (54 patients each). The mean follow-up period was 2.2 years. The preoperative spine condition was considered. Accuracy was evaluated using the Gertzbein-Robbins scale (GRS score) and Babu classification (Babu score). Radiological outcomes included adjacent segmental disease (ASD) and mechanical failure. Clinical outcomes were assessed based on the visual analogue scale, Oswestry Disability Index, 36-item Short Form health survey, and clinical ASD rate. Results: Accuracy was higher in the RS group (p < 0.01) than in other groups. The GRS score was lower in the CG group, whereas the Babu score was lower in the FG group compared with the RS group. No significant differences were observed in radiological and clinical outcomes among the 3 groups. Regression analysis identified preoperative facet degeneration, GRS and Babu scores as significant variables for radiological and clinical ASD. Mechanical failure was influenced by the GRS score and patients’ age. Conclusion This study showed the superior accuracy of robotic spine surgery compared with conventional techniques. When combined with minimally invasive surgery, robotic surgery is advantageous with reduced ligament and muscle damage associated with traditional open procedures.

Objective: This study aimed to compare the accuracy of robotic spine surgery and conventional pedicle screw fixation in lumbar degenerative disease. We evaluated clinical and radiological outcomes to demonstrate the noninferiority of robotic surgery. Methods: This study employed propensity score matching and included 3 groups: robot-assisted mini-open posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) (robotic surgery, RS), c-arm guided minimally invasive surgery transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (C-arm guidance, CG), and freehand open PLIF (free of guidance, FG) (54 patients each). The mean follow-up period was 2.2 years. The preoperative spine condition was considered. Accuracy was evaluated using the Gertzbein-Robbins scale (GRS score) and Babu classification (Babu score). Radiological outcomes included adjacent segmental disease (ASD) and mechanical failure. Clinical outcomes were assessed based on the visual analogue scale, Oswestry Disability Index, 36-item Short Form health survey, and clinical ASD rate. Results: Accuracy was higher in the RS group (p < 0.01) than in other groups. The GRS score was lower in the CG group, whereas the Babu score was lower in the FG group compared with the RS group. No significant differences were observed in radiological and clinical outcomes among the 3 groups. Regression analysis identified preoperative facet degeneration, GRS and Babu scores as significant variables for radiological and clinical ASD. Mechanical failure was influenced by the GRS score and patients’ age. Conclusion This study showed the superior accuracy of robotic spine surgery compared with conventional techniques. When combined with minimally invasive surgery, robotic surgery is advantageous with reduced ligament and muscle damage associated with traditional open procedures.

Objective: This study aimed to compare the accuracy of robotic spine surgery and conventional pedicle screw fixation in lumbar degenerative disease. We evaluated clinical and radiological outcomes to demonstrate the noninferiority of robotic surgery. Methods: This study employed propensity score matching and included 3 groups: robot-assisted mini-open posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) (robotic surgery, RS), c-arm guided minimally invasive surgery transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (C-arm guidance, CG), and freehand open PLIF (free of guidance, FG) (54 patients each). The mean follow-up period was 2.2 years. The preoperative spine condition was considered. Accuracy was evaluated using the Gertzbein-Robbins scale (GRS score) and Babu classification (Babu score). Radiological outcomes included adjacent segmental disease (ASD) and mechanical failure. Clinical outcomes were assessed based on the visual analogue scale, Oswestry Disability Index, 36-item Short Form health survey, and clinical ASD rate. Results: Accuracy was higher in the RS group (p < 0.01) than in other groups. The GRS score was lower in the CG group, whereas the Babu score was lower in the FG group compared with the RS group. No significant differences were observed in radiological and clinical outcomes among the 3 groups. Regression analysis identified preoperative facet degeneration, GRS and Babu scores as significant variables for radiological and clinical ASD. Mechanical failure was influenced by the GRS score and patients’ age. Conclusion This study showed the superior accuracy of robotic spine surgery compared with conventional techniques. When combined with minimally invasive surgery, robotic surgery is advantageous with reduced ligament and muscle damage associated with traditional open procedures.

Objective: This study aimed to compare the accuracy of robotic spine surgery and conventional pedicle screw fixation in lumbar degenerative disease. We evaluated clinical and radiological outcomes to demonstrate the noninferiority of robotic surgery. Methods: This study employed propensity score matching and included 3 groups: robot-assisted mini-open posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) (robotic surgery, RS), c-arm guided minimally invasive surgery transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (C-arm guidance, CG), and freehand open PLIF (free of guidance, FG) (54 patients each). The mean follow-up period was 2.2 years. The preoperative spine condition was considered. Accuracy was evaluated using the Gertzbein-Robbins scale (GRS score) and Babu classification (Babu score). Radiological outcomes included adjacent segmental disease (ASD) and mechanical failure. Clinical outcomes were assessed based on the visual analogue scale, Oswestry Disability Index, 36-item Short Form health survey, and clinical ASD rate. Results: Accuracy was higher in the RS group (p < 0.01) than in other groups. The GRS score was lower in the CG group, whereas the Babu score was lower in the FG group compared with the RS group. No significant differences were observed in radiological and clinical outcomes among the 3 groups. Regression analysis identified preoperative facet degeneration, GRS and Babu scores as significant variables for radiological and clinical ASD. Mechanical failure was influenced by the GRS score and patients’ age. Conclusion This study showed the superior accuracy of robotic spine surgery compared with conventional techniques. When combined with minimally invasive surgery, robotic surgery is advantageous with reduced ligament and muscle damage associated with traditional open procedures.

Objective: This study aimed to compare the accuracy of robotic spine surgery and conventional pedicle screw fixation in lumbar degenerative disease. We evaluated clinical and radiological outcomes to demonstrate the noninferiority of robotic surgery. Methods: This study employed propensity score matching and included 3 groups: robot-assisted mini-open posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) (robotic surgery, RS), c-arm guided minimally invasive surgery transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (C-arm guidance, CG), and freehand open PLIF (free of guidance, FG) (54 patients each). The mean follow-up period was 2.2 years. The preoperative spine condition was considered. Accuracy was evaluated using the Gertzbein-Robbins scale (GRS score) and Babu classification (Babu score). Radiological outcomes included adjacent segmental disease (ASD) and mechanical failure. Clinical outcomes were assessed based on the visual analogue scale, Oswestry Disability Index, 36-item Short Form health survey, and clinical ASD rate. Results: Accuracy was higher in the RS group (p < 0.01) than in other groups. The GRS score was lower in the CG group, whereas the Babu score was lower in the FG group compared with the RS group. No significant differences were observed in radiological and clinical outcomes among the 3 groups. Regression analysis identified preoperative facet degeneration, GRS and Babu scores as significant variables for radiological and clinical ASD. Mechanical failure was influenced by the GRS score and patients’ age. Conclusion This study showed the superior accuracy of robotic spine surgery compared with conventional techniques. When combined with minimally invasive surgery, robotic surgery is advantageous with reduced ligament and muscle damage associated with traditional open procedures.

Background: s/Aims: Reported incidence of extrahepatic bile duct cancer is higher in Asians than in Western populations. Korea, in particular, is one of the countries with the highest incidence rates of extrahepatic bile duct cancer in the world. Although research and innovative therapeutic modalities for extrahepatic bile duct cancer are emerging, clinical guidelines are currently unavailable in Korea. The Korean Society of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic Surgery in collaboration with related societies (Korean Pancreatic and Biliary Surgery Society, Korean Society of Abdominal Radiology, Korean Society of Medical Oncology, Korean Society of Radiation Oncology, Korean Society of Pathologists, and Korean Society of Nuclear Medicine) decided to establish clinical guideline for extrahepatic bile duct cancer in June 2021. Methods: Contents of the guidelines were developed through subgroup meetings for each key question and a preliminary draft was finalized through a Clinical Guidelines Committee workshop. Results: In November 2021, the finalized draft was presented for public scrutiny during a formal hearing. Conclusions The extrahepatic guideline committee believed that this guideline could be helpful in the treatment of patients.

Background: and Purpose: The efficacy and safety of GV1001 have been demonstrated in patients with moderate-to-severe Alzheimer’s disease (AD). In this study, we aimed to further demonstrate the effectiveness of GV1001 using subscales of the Severe Impairment Battery (SIB), which is a validated measure to assess cognitive function in patients with moderate-tosevere AD. Methods: We performed a post hoc analysis of data from a 6 month, multicenter, phase 2, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial with GV1001 (ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03184467). Patients were randomized to receive either GV1001 or a placebo for 24 weeks. In the current study, nine subscales of SIB—social interaction, memory, orientation, language, attention, praxis, visuospatial ability, construction, and orientation to name— were compared between the treatment (GV1001 1.12 mg) and placebo groups at weeks 12 and 24. The safety endpoints for these patients were also determined based on adverse events. Results: In addition to the considerable beneficial effect of GV1001 on the SIB total score, GV1001 1.12 mg showed the most significant effect on language function at 24 weeks compared to placebo in both the full analysis set (FAS) and per-protocol set (PPS) (p=0.017 and p=0.011, respectively). The rate of adverse events did not differ significantly between the 2 groups. Conclusions Patients with moderate-to-severe AD receiving GV1001 had greater language benefits than those receiving placebo, as measured using the SIB language subscale.

BACKGROUND: The repair of large bone defects remains a significant challenge in clinical practice and requires bone grafts or substitute materials. In this study, we developed a unique hybrid bone scaffold comprising a three dimensional (3D)-printed metal plate for weight bearing and a biodegradable polymer tube serving as bone conduit. We assessed the long-term effect of the hybrid bone scaffold in repairing radial bone defects in a beagle model. METHODS: Bone defects were created surgically on the radial bone of three beagle dogs and individually-tailored scaffolds were used for reconstruction with or without injection of autologous bone and decellularized extracellular matrix (dECM). The repaired tissue was evaluated by X-ray, micro-computed tomography, and histological observation 6 months after surgery. The functional integrity of hybrid bone scaffold-mediated reconstructions was assessed by gait analysis. RESULTS: In vivo analysis showed that the hybrid bone scaffolds maintained the physical space and bone conductivity around the defect. New bone was formed adjacent to the scaffolds. Addition of autologous bone and dECM in the polymer tube improved healing by enhancing bone induction and osteoconduction. Furthermore, the beagles’ gait appeared normal by 4 months. CONCLUSION The future of bone healing and regeneration is closely related to advances in tissue engineering. Bone production using autologous bone and dECM loaded on 3D-printed hybrid bone scaffolds can successfully induce osteogenesis and provide mechanical force for functional bone regeneration, even in large bone defects.

Ectopic sebaceous glands are found very rarely in the esophagus; heretofore, several cases have been reported. The sebaceous gland is originally a source of an endodermal origin; however, there have been controversies regarding whether the origin of the esophageal ectopic sebaceous gland is ectodermal or endodermal. Ectopic sebaceous glands of the esophagus usually do not cause symptoms; thus, they are often found incidentally on endoscopy for routine health screening. Endoscopic findings are characterized by single or multiple yellow patches or nodular lesions of various sizes, sometimes with small central openings. We report two cases of esophageal ectopic sebaceous glands found incidentally during endoscopy with magnifying endoscopic findings. The lesions were in the mid-esophagus and lower esophagus, respectively, and both endoscopic findings were similar as multiple yellowish patches or plaques. Magnifying endoscopy revealed the openings of the excretory ducts surrounded by circular microvessels in both cases.
Ectoderm ; Endoderm ; Endoscopy* ; Esophagus ; Mass Screening ; Microvessels ; Sebaceous Glands*