Remimazolam is a novel benzodiazepine with unique pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties, making it an ideal candidate for sedation during endoscopic procedures. Distinguished by its rapid onset and short duration of action, remimazolam offers a safer and more efficient alternative to traditional sedatives, such as midazolam and propofol, with fewer side effects, such as hypotension, bradycardia, and respiratory depression. This article reviews the characteristics of remimazolam and its practical advantages, including ease of use, quick recovery time, and minimal residual sedation, emphasizing its potential to improve patient safety and procedural efficiency in clinical endoscopy settings.

Remimazolam is a novel benzodiazepine with unique pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties, making it an ideal candidate for sedation during endoscopic procedures. Distinguished by its rapid onset and short duration of action, remimazolam offers a safer and more efficient alternative to traditional sedatives, such as midazolam and propofol, with fewer side effects, such as hypotension, bradycardia, and respiratory depression. This article reviews the characteristics of remimazolam and its practical advantages, including ease of use, quick recovery time, and minimal residual sedation, emphasizing its potential to improve patient safety and procedural efficiency in clinical endoscopy settings.

Remimazolam is a novel benzodiazepine with unique pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties, making it an ideal candidate for sedation during endoscopic procedures. Distinguished by its rapid onset and short duration of action, remimazolam offers a safer and more efficient alternative to traditional sedatives, such as midazolam and propofol, with fewer side effects, such as hypotension, bradycardia, and respiratory depression. This article reviews the characteristics of remimazolam and its practical advantages, including ease of use, quick recovery time, and minimal residual sedation, emphasizing its potential to improve patient safety and procedural efficiency in clinical endoscopy settings.

Objective: Primary frozen shoulder causes significant pain and progressively restricts shoulder movements. Diagnosis is made clinically based on patient history and physical examination. Management is mainly non-invasive owing to its self-limiting clinical course. However, clinical practice guidelines for frozen shoulder have not yet been developed in Korea. The developed guidelines aim to provide evidence-based recommendations for the diagnosis and treatment of frozen shoulder. Methods: A guideline development committee reviewed the literature from four databases (PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and KMbase). Using the Population, Intervention, Comparator, and Outcome (PICO) framework, the committee formulated two backgrounds and 16 key questions to address common clinical concerns. Recommendations were made using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation framework. Results: Diabetes, thyroid disease, and dyslipidemia significantly increase the risk of developing a frozen shoulder. Although frozen shoulder is often self-limiting, some patients may experience long-term functional disabilities. Ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging should be used as adjunctive tools alongside clinical diagnosis, and rather than as independent diagnostic methods. Noninvasive approaches, such as medications, physical modalities, exercises, electrical stimulation, and manual therapy, may reduce pain and improve shoulder function. Other noninvasive interventions have limited evidence, and their application should be based on clinical judgment. Intra-articular steroid injections are recommended for treatment, and physiotherapy or hydrodilation with steroid injections can also be beneficial. Conclusion These guidelines provide evidence-based recommendations for diagnosing and treating primary frozen shoulder.

Background: It is well known that a large number of patients with diabetes also have dyslipidemia, which significantly increases the risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD). This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of combination drugs consisting of metformin and atorvastatin, widely used as therapeutic agents for diabetes and dyslipidemia. Methods: This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group and phase III multicenter study included adults with glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) levels >7.0% and <10.0%, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) >100 and <250 mg/dL. One hundred eighty-five eligible subjects were randomized to the combination group (metformin+atorvastatin), metformin group (metformin+atorvastatin placebo), and atorvastatin group (atorvastatin+metformin placebo). The primary efficacy endpoints were the percent changes in HbA1c and LDL-C levels from baseline at the end of the treatment. Results: After 16 weeks of treatment compared to baseline, HbA1c showed a significant difference of 0.94% compared to the atorvastatin group in the combination group (0.35% vs. −0.58%, respectively; P<0.0001), whereas the proportion of patients with increased HbA1c was also 62% and 15%, respectively, showing a significant difference (P<0.001). The combination group also showed a significant decrease in LDL-C levels compared to the metformin group (−55.20% vs. −7.69%, P<0.001) without previously unknown adverse drug events. Conclusion The addition of atorvastatin to metformin improved HbA1c and LDL-C levels to a significant extent compared to metformin or atorvastatin alone in diabetes and dyslipidemia patients. This study also suggested metformin’s preventive effect on the glucose-elevating potential of atorvastatin in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and dyslipidemia, insufficiently controlled with exercise and diet. Metformin and atorvastatin combination might be an effective treatment in reducing the CVD risk in patients with both diabetes and dyslipidemia because of its lowering effect on LDL-C and glucose.

Background: Adrenocortical carcinomas (ACCs) are rare tumors with aggressive but varied prognosis. Stage, Grade, Resection status, Age, Symptoms (S-GRAS) score, based on clinical and pathological factors, was found to best stratify the prognosis of European ACC patients. This study assessed the prognostic performance of modified S-GRAS (mS-GRAS) scores including modified grade (mG) by integrating mitotic counts into the Ki67 index (original grade), in Korean ACC patients. Methods: Patients who underwent surgery for ACC between January 1996 and December 2022 at three medical centers in Korea were retrospectively analyzed. mS-GRAS scores were calculated based on tumor stage, mG (Ki67 index or mitotic counts), resection status, age, and symptoms. Patients were divided into four groups (0–1, 2–3, 4–5, and 6–9 points) based on total mS-GRAS score. The associations of each variable and mS-GRAS score with recurrence and survival were evaluated using Cox regression analysis, Harrell’s concordance index (C-index), and the Kaplan–Meier method. Results: Data on mS-GRAS components were available for 114 of the 153 patients who underwent surgery for ACC. These 114 patients had recurrence and death rates of 61.4% and 48.2%, respectively. mS-GRAS score was a significantly better predictor of recurrence (C-index=0.829) and death (C-index=0.747) than each component (P<0.05), except for resection status. mS-GRAS scores correlated with shorter progression-free survival (P=8.34E-24) and overall survival (P=2.72E-13). Conclusion mS-GRAS scores showed better prognostic performance than tumor stage and grade in Asian patients who underwent surgery for ACC.

Background: Maladaptation to vascular, metabolic, and physiological changes during pregnancy can lead to fetal growth disorders. Moreover, adverse outcomes during pregnancy can further increase the risk of cardiovascular and metabolic diseases in mothers. Delivering a large-for-gestational-age (LGA) baby may indicate a pre-existing metabolic dysfunction, whereas delivering a small-for-gestational-age (SGA) baby may indicate a pre-existing vascular dysfunction. This study aims to assess the risk of hypertension (HTN) and diabetes mellitus (DM) in women with normal body mass index (BMI) scores who did not experience gestational DM or hypertensive disorders during pregnancy based on the offspring’s birthweight. Methods: This retrospective nationwide study included women with normal BMI scores who delivered a singleton baby after 37 weeks. Women with a history of DM or HTN before pregnancy and those with gestational DM or hypertensive disorders, were excluded from the study. We compared the risk of future maternal outcomes (HTN and DM) according to the offspring’s birthweight. Multivariate analyses were performed to estimate the hazard ratio (HR) for the future risk of HTN or DM. Results: A total of 64,037 women were included in the analysis. Of these, women who delivered very LGA babies (birthweight > 97th percentile) were at a higher risk of developing DM than those who delivered appropriate-for-gestational-age (AGA) babies (adjusted HR = 1.358 [1.068–1.727]), and women who delivered very SGA babies (birthweight < 3rd percentile) were at a higher risk of developing HTN than those who delivered AGA babies (adjusted HR = 1.431 [1.181–1.734]), even after adjusting for age, parity, gestational age at delivery, fetal sex, maternal BMI score, and a history of smoking. Conclusion These findings provide a novel support for the use of the offspring’s birthweight as a predictor of future maternal diseases such as HTN and DM.