OBJECTIVES: This study was aimed at evaluating the relationship between somatic symptoms, depression, anxiety and cognitive function in the patients with Mild Traumatic Brain Injury(MTBI). METHODS: Thirty seven patients with MTBI were selected from those patients who had visited the Department of Neuropsychiatry of Wonkwang University Hospital from 2003 to 2007. To assess and quantify the somatic symptoms, depression and anxiety, Personality Assessment Inventory(PAI) was used. Assessment of cognitive function was carried out by using Korean Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale(K-WAIS), Rey-Kim Memory Test, and Kims Executive Function Test. The effects of somatic symptoms, depression, and anxiety on the cognitive function were evaluated by Pearson correlation test. RESULTS: Somatic symptoms, depression, and anxiety, all showed inverse correlation to cognitive function. Specifically, 1) an increase in somatic symptoms was associated with a decrease in attention, verbal short term memory, verbal recall and recognition, and visual memory. 2) An increase in anxiety was associated with a decrease in verbal recall and recognition. 3) An increase in depression was associated with a decrease in cognitive function that requires high attention and verbal memory. CONCLUSION: The patients with MTBI displayed diverse symptoms ranging from cognitive impairment to somatic symptoms, depression, and anxiety. Somatic and emotional symptoms were correlated with cognitive function(especially executive function). Importantly, this study raises the possibility of treating the cognitive impairment associated with MTBI by treating somatic symptoms, depression, and anxiety.
Adult ; Anxiety ; Brain ; Brain Injuries ; Depression ; Executive Function ; Humans ; Intelligence ; Memory ; Neuropsychiatry ; Personality Assessment

BACKGROUND: The catheter ablation usin radiofrequency(RF) energy in patients with atrioventricular nodal reentrant tachycardia(AVNRT) and atrioventricular reentrant tachycardia(AVRT) ahs been proved as a safe and effective nonpharmacologic therapeutic modality. The purpose of our study was to evaluate the success rate and complications of the initial experience and to determine the extent of myocardial damage of RF catheter ablation. METHODS: Electrophysiologic study was performed with the standard technique. Twenty five patinents(M:F=16:9, mean age:42 years old) underwent RF catheter ablation in St. May's Hospital from April to December in 1994. The RF generator in this study was RFG-3D model and catheters were 6F or 7F steerable catheters with 4mm kistal tip. In order to evaluate the extent of myocardial damage the WBC count, LDH, CK, and CK-MB fraction were checked before and after RF catheter ablation and the Tc99m myocardial scintigraphy was performed within 72 hours of the porcedure. RESULTS: Six of twenty five patients had AVNRT, in which the success rate of selective ablation of the slow pathway was 83.8%. Nineteen patients with AVRT had one accessory pathway. The ablation success rate of 14 accessory pathways in left free wall location was 85.7%, and that of 3 in left posteroseptal location was 66.6%. Two right sided accessory pathways were not ablated successfully. The level of CK-MB fraction after ablation was within normal limit. Only one case revealed grade 2 of hot spot in Tc99m myocardial scintigraphy. CONCLUSION: The RF catheter ablation in patients with AVNRT and AVRT is a safe and effective nonpharmacologic therapeutic modality. But right sided accessory pathways are more difficult to ablate than left sided accessory pathways, requiring more experiences and better technique. The extent of myocardial damage after RF catheter ablation reveals relatively minimal by cardiac enzyme study and Tc99mmyocardial scintigraphy.
Catheter Ablation* ; Catheters ; Humans ; Myocardial Perfusion Imaging ; Radionuclide Imaging ; Tachycardia, Supraventricular*

Background: s/Aims: This study aimed to compare the minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy with venous vascular resection (MI-PDVR) and open pancreatoduodenectomy with venous vascular resection (O-PDVR) for periampullary cancer. Methods: Data of 124 patients who underwent PDVR (45 MI-PDVR, 79 O-PDVR) between January 1, 2016, and December 31, 2023, was retrospectively reviewed. Results: MI-PDVR is significantly better than O-PDVR in terms of perioperative outcomes (median operation time [452.69 minutes vs. 543.91 minutes; p = 0.004], estimated blood loss [410.44 mL vs. 747.59 mL; p < 0.01], intraoperative transfusion rate [2 cases vs. 18 cases; p = 0.01], and hospital stay [18.16 days vs. 23.91 days; p = 0.008]). The complications until the discharge day showed no significant difference between the two groups (Clavien–Dindo < 3, 84.4% vs. 82.3%; Clavien–Dindo ≥ 3, 15.6% vs. 17.7%; p = 0.809). In terms of long-term oncological outcomes, there was no statistical difference in overall survival (OS, 51.55 months [95% CI: 35.95–67.14] vs.median 49.92 months [95% CI: 40.97–58.87]; p = 0.340) and disease-free survival (DFS, median 35.06 months [95% CI: 21.47–48.65] vs.median 38.77 months [95% CI: 29.80–47.75]; p = 0.585), between the two groups. Long-term oncological outcomes for subgroup analysis focusing on pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma also showed no statistical differences in OS (40.86 months [95% CI: 34.45–47.27] vs.48.48 months [95% CI: 38.16–58.59]; p = 0.270) and DFS (24.42 months [95% CI: 17.03–31.85] vs. 34.35 months, [95% CI: 25.44–43.27]; p = 0.740). Conclusions MI-PDVR can provide better perioperative outcomes than O-PDVR, and has similar oncological impact.

Background: s/Aims: This study aimed to compare the minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy with venous vascular resection (MI-PDVR) and open pancreatoduodenectomy with venous vascular resection (O-PDVR) for periampullary cancer. Methods: Data of 124 patients who underwent PDVR (45 MI-PDVR, 79 O-PDVR) between January 1, 2016, and December 31, 2023, was retrospectively reviewed. Results: MI-PDVR is significantly better than O-PDVR in terms of perioperative outcomes (median operation time [452.69 minutes vs. 543.91 minutes; p = 0.004], estimated blood loss [410.44 mL vs. 747.59 mL; p < 0.01], intraoperative transfusion rate [2 cases vs. 18 cases; p = 0.01], and hospital stay [18.16 days vs. 23.91 days; p = 0.008]). The complications until the discharge day showed no significant difference between the two groups (Clavien–Dindo < 3, 84.4% vs. 82.3%; Clavien–Dindo ≥ 3, 15.6% vs. 17.7%; p = 0.809). In terms of long-term oncological outcomes, there was no statistical difference in overall survival (OS, 51.55 months [95% CI: 35.95–67.14] vs.median 49.92 months [95% CI: 40.97–58.87]; p = 0.340) and disease-free survival (DFS, median 35.06 months [95% CI: 21.47–48.65] vs.median 38.77 months [95% CI: 29.80–47.75]; p = 0.585), between the two groups. Long-term oncological outcomes for subgroup analysis focusing on pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma also showed no statistical differences in OS (40.86 months [95% CI: 34.45–47.27] vs.48.48 months [95% CI: 38.16–58.59]; p = 0.270) and DFS (24.42 months [95% CI: 17.03–31.85] vs. 34.35 months, [95% CI: 25.44–43.27]; p = 0.740). Conclusions MI-PDVR can provide better perioperative outcomes than O-PDVR, and has similar oncological impact.

Background: s/Aims: This study aimed to compare the minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy with venous vascular resection (MI-PDVR) and open pancreatoduodenectomy with venous vascular resection (O-PDVR) for periampullary cancer. Methods: Data of 124 patients who underwent PDVR (45 MI-PDVR, 79 O-PDVR) between January 1, 2016, and December 31, 2023, was retrospectively reviewed. Results: MI-PDVR is significantly better than O-PDVR in terms of perioperative outcomes (median operation time [452.69 minutes vs. 543.91 minutes; p = 0.004], estimated blood loss [410.44 mL vs. 747.59 mL; p < 0.01], intraoperative transfusion rate [2 cases vs. 18 cases; p = 0.01], and hospital stay [18.16 days vs. 23.91 days; p = 0.008]). The complications until the discharge day showed no significant difference between the two groups (Clavien–Dindo < 3, 84.4% vs. 82.3%; Clavien–Dindo ≥ 3, 15.6% vs. 17.7%; p = 0.809). In terms of long-term oncological outcomes, there was no statistical difference in overall survival (OS, 51.55 months [95% CI: 35.95–67.14] vs.median 49.92 months [95% CI: 40.97–58.87]; p = 0.340) and disease-free survival (DFS, median 35.06 months [95% CI: 21.47–48.65] vs.median 38.77 months [95% CI: 29.80–47.75]; p = 0.585), between the two groups. Long-term oncological outcomes for subgroup analysis focusing on pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma also showed no statistical differences in OS (40.86 months [95% CI: 34.45–47.27] vs.48.48 months [95% CI: 38.16–58.59]; p = 0.270) and DFS (24.42 months [95% CI: 17.03–31.85] vs. 34.35 months, [95% CI: 25.44–43.27]; p = 0.740). Conclusions MI-PDVR can provide better perioperative outcomes than O-PDVR, and has similar oncological impact.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficiency of powered wheelchair and scooter and to investigate the factors affecting the accidents and injuries. METHOD: We investigated 90 subjects with mobility disability who had used powered wheelchair or scooter more than a year. The subjects responded to a questionnaire of the 34 items. RESULTS: Seventy (77.7%) of respondents used powered wheelchair or scooter more than 3 days a week. More than 50% of them regarded the obstacles such as curbs or thresholds as the most common hindering factor to outside mobility. The causes of breakdown were due to battery, wheel, gear box and motor. About a third of 58 respondents were dissatisfied with the result of repair. The high cost of the repair was regarded as the leading cause of dissatisfaction. Contusions were the most common, with abrasion and sprain accounting for most of the remainder. Of the 18 users who were affected by injuries, only 11.1% wore a safety seatbelt. Only 25 of 89 respondents had a safety education. CONCLUSION: Our study showed that the efficiency of power wheelchair and scooter was relatively high. But the obstacles such as curbs, recurrent breakdown, and concerns about the accident were regarded as the hindering factors to the outside mobility. The degree of satisfaction to the safety education is relatively low, so more systemic and practical programs need to be devised.
Accounting ; Contusions ; Surveys and Questionnaires ; Questionnaires ; Self-Help Devices ; Sprains and Strains ; Wheelchairs

Laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy (LPD) in pancreatic cancer is primarily criticized for its technical and oncological safety. Although solid evidence has not yet been established, many institutions are performing LPD for pancreatic cancer patients, with continuous efforts to ensure oncologic safety. In this video, we demonstrated a case of standard LPD combined with vascular resection in pancreatic cancer.

Laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy (LPD) in pancreatic cancer is primarily criticized for its technical and oncological safety. Although solid evidence has not yet been established, many institutions are performing LPD for pancreatic cancer patients, with continuous efforts to ensure oncologic safety. In this video, we demonstrated a case of standard LPD combined with vascular resection in pancreatic cancer.