Hypermobility of the bladder neck in response to increased intraabdominal pressure is the anatomical cause of female stress urinary incontinence ( SUI) and the degree of bladder neck movement has been used to classify SUI patients and to guide management decisions. We performed transvaginal ultrasonography in 14 SUI patients and 20 normal female as control to assess its role on the demonstration of the anatomical features associated with SUI. We adopted three anatomical factors in the sagittal plane which affect the bladder neck mobility , vertical (JY) and horizontal(JX) distance difference between pubic symphysis and bladder neck, and rotation angle difference(JZ) composed of by pubic symphysis and bladder neck during rest and stress states. There were significant differences in Y and Z between the two groups. Three months after corrective surgery for SUI these two factors showed significant improvement in all patients. It could be concluded that transvaginal ultrasonography is a safe and reliable method to diagnosis and evaluate the postoperative outcome for SUI.
Diagnosis ; Female ; Humans ; Neck ; Pubic Symphysis ; Ultrasonography* ; Urinary Bladder ; Urinary Incontinence*

Granulosa cell tumors of the ovary are rare, and account for 2 to 3% of ovarian tumors. Granulosa cell tumors are discovered often in perimenopausal or postmenopausal women but 10 to 26% are found in the reproductive age group. The tumors associated with pregnancy are infrequent. In this study, we present a case of granulosa cell tumor of left ovary at pregnancy.
Female ; Granulosa Cell Tumor* ; Granulosa Cells* ; Humans ; Ovary ; Pregnancy*

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for tumors occurring in the remnant stomach is technically difficult to perform because of limited working space and severe fibrosis and staples present around the suture line. We aimed to elucidate the feasibility and clinical outcomes of performing ESD for tumors in the remnant stomach. METHODS: Between December 2007 and January 2013, 18 patients underwent ESD for tumors (six adenomas and 12 differentiated-type early gastric cancers [EGCs]) occurring in the remnant stomach after distal gastrectomy. Clinicopathologic features and clinical outcomes after ESD were retrospectively analyzed. RESULTS: Two-thirds of the lesions were located on the body, and half were located on the suture line. En bloc resection, R0 resection, and en bloc with R0 resection rates were 88.9%, 100%, and 88.9%, respectively. Curative resection rate for EGC was 91.7%. Perforation occurred in one patient (5.6%) and was successfully managed by endoscopic closure with metallic clips and conservative management. There was no significant bleeding after ESD. During a median follow-up of 47.5 months, no local, metachronous, or extragastric recurrence was seen for either EGC or adenoma lesions. CONCLUSIONS: ESD is a feasible and effective treatment modality and can be considered a primary intervention for early gastric neoplasia occurring in the remnant stomach.
Adenoma ; Fibrosis ; Follow-Up Studies ; Gastrectomy* ; Gastric Stump* ; Hemorrhage ; Humans ; Recurrence ; Retrospective Studies ; Stomach Neoplasms ; Sutures

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Many patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) also present with extraesophageal symptoms (EESs). This study sought to determine the prevalence of concomitant EESs and to evaluate quality of life (QOL) impairment in a Korean population with GERD. METHODS: This questionnaire-based study was carried out from 64 hospitals in Korea between October 2008 and March 2009. Patients with typical GERD symptoms of heartburn or acid regurgitation were recruited for study. Participants filled out questionnaire consisting of GerdQ questions and EES questions. All participants underwent endoscopy and were divided into patients with erosive reflux disease (ERD) and with non-erosive reflux disease (NERD). RESULTS: A total of 1,712 patients were included in this study. Of these, 697 (40.7%) patients had ERD and 1,015 (59.3%) NERD. The prevalence of EES was 90.3%. The most prevalent EES was epigastric burning (73.2%), followed by globus (51.8%), chest pain (48.4%), cough (32.0%), hoarseness (24.2%) and wheezing (17.3%). Individual EES was more prevalent in patients with ERD than in those with NERD. Regarding QOL, 701 patients (41.0%) had sleep disturbance and 676 (37.7%) had taken additional over-the-counter medication for heartburn and/or regurgitation, which were more prevalent in patients with ERD than in those with NERD (49.5% vs. 35.1% and 45.8% vs. 32.2%, respectively; all P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of EES is high in Korean patients with symptomatic GERD. Individual EES is more prevalent in patients with ERD than in those with NERD. QOL impairment is observed less frequently than previous studies.
Burns ; Chest Pain ; Cough ; Endoscopy ; Gastroesophageal Reflux* ; Heartburn ; Hoarseness ; Humans ; Korea* ; Prevalence* ; Quality of Life ; Surveys and Questionnaires ; Respiratory Sounds

BACKGROUND/AIMS: A diagnosis of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is based on the typical symptoms, such as acid regurgitation and heartburn. However, there is a very high inter-observer variation in the evaluation of GERD patients. METHODS: The endoscopic images of forty-two cases with reflux symptoms (2 still images and 15-second video images per case) were analyzed by 18 experienced endoscopists and 22 trainees. The findings were classified into the following: (1) 6 groups (modified LA classification: 4 LA groups, minimal, and normal), (2) erosinve and non-erosive, and (3) confluent erosive and others. The level of inter-observer variation is expressed as a kappa value. RESULTS: The level of inter-observer agreement of the 18 experienced endoscopists for classifying the patients into 6 groups was fairly low (kappa=0.364). However, when the findings were classified into the 2 groups suggested in the Genval workshop (NERD, A, or B versus C or D), the level of inter- observer agreement increased substantially (kappa=0.710). The kappa value of the 22 trainees for classifying the patients into 6 groups was 0.402. CONCLUSIONS: Modified LA classification with minimal change lesions showed a fairly low level of agreement. The problem caused by inter-observer variations decreased significantly when the findings were classified into two groups.
Classification ; Diagnosis* ; Education ; Gastroesophageal Reflux* ; Heartburn ; Humans ; Observer Variation*

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Therapies of functional dyspepsia (FD) are limited. DA-9701 is a novel prokinetic agent formulated with Pharbitis semen and Corydalis Tuber. We aimed to assess the efficacy of DA-9701 compared with itopride in FD patients. METHODS: Patients with FD randomly received either itopride 50 mg or DA-9701 30 mg t.i.d after a 2-week baseline period. After 4 weeks of treatment, 2 primary efficacy endpoints were analyzed: the change from baseline in composite score of the 8 dyspeptic symptoms and the overall treatment effect. Impact on patients' quality of life was assessed using the Nepean Dyspepsia Index (NDI) questionnaire. RESULTS: We randomly assigned 464 patients with 455 having outcome data. The difference of the composite score change of the 8 symptoms between the 2 groups was 0.62, indicating that DA-9701 was not inferior to itopride. The overall treatment effect response rate was not different between the groups. When responder was defined as > or = 5 of the 7 Likert scale, responder rates were 37% of DA-9701 and 36% of itopride group. Patients receiving DA-9701 experienced similar mean percentage of days with adequate relief during the 4-week treatment period compared with those receiving itopride (56.8% vs 59.1%). Both drugs increased the NDI score of 5 domains without any difference in change of the NDI score between the groups. The safety profile of both drugs was comparable. CONCLUSIONS: DA-9701 significantly improves symptoms in patients with FD. DA-9701 showed non-inferior efficacy to itopride with comparable safety.
Corydalis ; Dyspepsia* ; Humans ; Quality of Life ; Surveys and Questionnaires ; Semen

BACKGROUND/AIMS: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of a controlled release, once-daily formulation of mosapride (UI05MSP015CT) in patients with functional dyspepsia (FD). METHODS: Patients with FD were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either UI05MSP015CT (15 mg once a day, study group) or mosapride (5 mg three times a day, control group) and corresponding placebo for 4 weeks. The primary endpoint was a change in the gastrointestinal symptom score (GIS) evaluated at enrollment and after 4 weeks. Secondary endpoints were changes in the Nepean Dyspepsia Index-Korean version (NDI-K), rate of satisfactory symptom relief, and rate of adverse events. RESULTS: A total of 138 patients were enrolled (female, 73.9%; mean age, 44.0±15.4 years). After excluding patients who violated the study protocol, 59 and 58 patients from the study and control groups, respectively, were included in the per-protocol analysis. No difference was observed in drug compliance between the control and study groups (97.07%±4.52% vs 96.85%±6.05%, p=0.870). Changes in GIS scores were 9.69±6.44 and 10.01±5.92 in the study and control groups. The mean difference in GIS change between groups was 0.33 (95% confidence interval, 1.75 to 2.41), demonstrating non-inferiority of UI-05MSP015CT (p=0.755). The rate of satisfactory symptom relief was not different between the study and control groups (39.0% vs 56.9%, p=0.053). No differences in change in NDI-K score (14.3 vs 16.9, p=0.263) or rates of adverse events (12.9% vs. 4.4%, p=0.062) were observed between the study and control groups. CONCLUSIONS: Once-daily mosapride is not inferior to conventional mosapride in efficacy and is safe in patients with FD.
Compliance ; Dyspepsia* ; Humans

Background/Aims: Prokinetics such as mosapride citrate CR (conventional-release; Gasmotin) are commonly used in functional dyspepsia (FD). This study aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of once-a-day mosapride citrate SR (DWJ1252), a sustained-release formulation of mosapride citrate, compared with mosapride citrate CR 3 times a day, in patients with FD. Methods: In this multicenter, randomized, double-blind, active-controlled, non-inferiority study, 119 patients with FD (by the Rome III criteria, 60 for mosapride citrate SR and 59 for mosapride citrate CR) were randomly allocated to mosapride citrate SR once daily or mosapride citrate CR thrice daily for 4 weeks in 16 medical institutions. Primary end point was the change in gastrointestinal symptom (GIS) score from baseline, assessed by GIS questionnaires on 5-point Likert scale after 4-week treatment. Secondary end points and safety profiles were also analyzed. Results: The study included 51 and 49 subjects in the mosapride citrate SR and mosapride citrate CR groups, respectively. GIS scores at week 4 were significantly reduced in both groups (mean ± SD: − 10.04 ± 4.45 and − 10.86 ± 5.53 in the mosapride citrate SR and mosapride citrate CR groups, respectively; P < 0.001), and the GIS changes from baseline did not differ between the 2 groups (difference, 0.82 point; 95% CI, − 1.17, 2.81; P = 0.643). Changes in GIS at weeks 2 and 4 and quality of life at week 4, and the improvement rates of global assessments at weeks 2 and 4, did not differ between the groups. Adverse events were similar in the 2 groups, and there were no serious adverse events. Conclusion In patients with FD, mosapride citrate SR once daily is as effective as mosapride citrate CR thrice daily, with a similar safety profile.

Background: Despite the proven effectiveness of oral antivirals against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 in randomized trials, their clinical reevaluation is vital in the context of widespread immunity and milder prevalent variants. This study aimed to assess the effectiveness of oral antivirals for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Methods: This retrospective cohort study utilized a target trial emulation framework to analyze patients with COVID-19 aged 60+ from January to December 2022. Data were obtained from the Korea Disease Control and Prevention Agency and Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service. The study involved 957,036 patients treated with nirmatrelvir/ritonavir and 243,360 treated with molnupiravir, each compared with the matched control groups. Primary outcome was progression to critical COVID-19 requiring advanced respiratory support. Secondary outcomes included progression to severe COVID-19, need for supplemental oxygen, and death within 30 days of the onset of COVID-19.Number needed to treat (NNT) derived from the absolute risk reduction. Results: Nirmatrelvir/ritonavir was significantly associated with a reduced risk of severe (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.823; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.803–0.843), critical (aOR, 0.560; 95% CI, 0.503–0.624), and fatal COVID-19 (aOR, 0.694; 95% CI, 0.647–0.744).Similarly, molnupiravir reduced the risk of severe (aOR, 0.895; 95% CI, 0.856–0.937), critical (aOR, 0.672; 95% CI, 0.559–0.807), and fatal cases (aOR, 0.679; 95% CI, 0.592–0.779).NNTs for nirmatrelvir/ritonavir were 203.71 (severe), 1,230.12 (critical), and 691.50 (death);for molnupiravir, they were 352.70 (severe), 1,398.62 (critical), and 862.98 (death). Higher effectiveness was associated with older adults, unvaccinated individuals, and the late pandemic phase. Conclusion Nirmatrelvir/ritonavir and molnupiravir are effective in preventing progression to severe disease in elderly adults with COVID-19.

Background: Despite the proven effectiveness of oral antivirals against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 in randomized trials, their clinical reevaluation is vital in the context of widespread immunity and milder prevalent variants. This study aimed to assess the effectiveness of oral antivirals for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Methods: This retrospective cohort study utilized a target trial emulation framework to analyze patients with COVID-19 aged 60+ from January to December 2022. Data were obtained from the Korea Disease Control and Prevention Agency and Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service. The study involved 957,036 patients treated with nirmatrelvir/ritonavir and 243,360 treated with molnupiravir, each compared with the matched control groups. Primary outcome was progression to critical COVID-19 requiring advanced respiratory support. Secondary outcomes included progression to severe COVID-19, need for supplemental oxygen, and death within 30 days of the onset of COVID-19.Number needed to treat (NNT) derived from the absolute risk reduction. Results: Nirmatrelvir/ritonavir was significantly associated with a reduced risk of severe (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.823; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.803–0.843), critical (aOR, 0.560; 95% CI, 0.503–0.624), and fatal COVID-19 (aOR, 0.694; 95% CI, 0.647–0.744).Similarly, molnupiravir reduced the risk of severe (aOR, 0.895; 95% CI, 0.856–0.937), critical (aOR, 0.672; 95% CI, 0.559–0.807), and fatal cases (aOR, 0.679; 95% CI, 0.592–0.779).NNTs for nirmatrelvir/ritonavir were 203.71 (severe), 1,230.12 (critical), and 691.50 (death);for molnupiravir, they were 352.70 (severe), 1,398.62 (critical), and 862.98 (death). Higher effectiveness was associated with older adults, unvaccinated individuals, and the late pandemic phase. Conclusion Nirmatrelvir/ritonavir and molnupiravir are effective in preventing progression to severe disease in elderly adults with COVID-19.