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: During the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, patients with myasthenia gravis (MG) were more susceptible to poor outcomes owing to respiratory muscle weakness and immunotherapy. Several studies conducted in the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic reported higher mortality in patients with MG compared to the general population. This study aimed to investigate the clinical course and prognosis of COVID-19 in patients with MG and to compare these parameters between vaccinated and unvaccinated patients in South Korea. Methods: This multicenter, retrospective study, which was conducted at 14 tertiary hospitals in South Korea, reviewed the medical records and identified MG patients who contracted COVID-19 between February 2022 and April 2022. The demographic and clinical characteristics associated with MG and vaccination status were collected. The clinical outcomes of COVID-19 infection and MG were investigated and compared between the vaccinated and unvaccinated patients. Results: Ninety-two patients with MG contracted COVID-19 during the study. Nine (9.8%) patients required hospitalization, 4 (4.3%) of whom were admitted to the intensive care unit. Seventy-five of 92 patients were vaccinated before contracting COVID-19 infection, and 17 were not. During the COVID-19 infection, 6 of 17 (35.3%) unvaccinated patients were hospitalized, whereas 3 of 75 (4.0%) vaccinated patients were hospitalized (P < 0.001). The frequencies of ICU admission and mechanical ventilation were significantly lower in the vaccinated patients than in the unvaccinated patients (P = 0.019 and P = 0.032, respectively). The rate of MG deterioration was significantly lower in the vaccinated patients than in the unvaccinated patients (P = 0.041). Logistic regression after weighting revealed that the risk of hospitalization and MG deterioration after COVID-19 infection was significantly lower in the vaccinated patients than in the unvaccinated patients. Conclusion This study suggests that the clinical course and prognosis of patients with MG who contracted COVID-19 during the dominance of the omicron variant of COVID-19 may be milder than those at the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic when vaccination was unavailable. Vaccination may reduce the morbidity of COVID-19 in patients with MG and effectively prevent MG deterioration induced by COVID-19 infection.

The new Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration (CKD-EPI) equations without a race coefficient have gained recognition across the United States. We aimed to test whether these new equations performed well in Korean patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). Methods: This study included 2,149 patients with CKD G1–G5 without kidney replacement therapy from the Korean Cohort Study for Outcome in Patients with CKD (KNOW-CKD). The estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) was calculated using the new CKD-EPI equations with serum creatinine and cystatin C. The primary outcome was 5-year risk of kidney failure with replacement therapy (KFRT). Results: When we adopted the new creatinine equation [eGFRcr (NEW)], 81 patients (23.1%) with CKD G3a based on the current creatinine equation (eGFRcr) were reclassified as CKD G2. Accordingly, the number of patients with eGFR of <60 mL/min/1.73 m2 decreased from 1,393 (64.8%) to 1,312 (61.1%). The time-dependent area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for 5-year KFRT risk was comparable between the eGFRcr (NEW) (0.941; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.922–0.960) and eGFRcr (0.941; 95% CI, 0.922–0.961). The eGFRcr (NEW) showed slightly better discrimination and reclassification than the eGFRcr. However, the new creatinine and cystatin C equation [eGFRcr-cys (NEW)] performed similarly to the current creatinine and cystatin C equation. Furthermore, eGFRcr-cys (NEW) did not show better performance for KFRT risk than eGFRcr (NEW). Conclusion: Both the current and the new CKD-EPI equations showed excellent predictive performance for 5-year KFRT risk in Korean patients with CKD. These new equations need to be further tested for other clinical outcomes in Koreans.

The Committee of Clinical Practice Guidelines of the Korean Diabetes Association (KDA) updated the previous clinical practice guidelines for Korean adults with diabetes and prediabetes and published the seventh edition in May 2021. We performed a comprehensive systematic review of recent clinical trials and evidence that could be applicable in real-world practice and suitable for the Korean population. The guideline is provided for all healthcare providers including physicians, diabetes experts, and certified diabetes educators across the country who manage patients with diabetes or the individuals at the risk of developing diabetes mellitus. The recommendations for screening diabetes and glucose-lowering agents have been revised and updated. New sections for continuous glucose monitoring, insulin pump use, and non-alcoholic fatty liver disease in patients with diabetes mellitus have been added. The KDA recommends active vaccination for coronavirus disease 2019 in patients with diabetes during the pandemic. An abridgement that contains practical information for patient education and systematic management in the clinic was published separately.

The Committee of Clinical Practice Guidelines of the Korean Diabetes Association (KDA) updated the previous clinical practice guidelines for Korean adults with diabetes and prediabetes and published the seventh edition in May 2021. We performed a comprehensive systematic review of recent clinical trials and evidence that could be applicable in real-world practice and suitable for the Korean population. The guideline is provided for all healthcare providers including physicians, diabetes experts, and certified diabetes educators across the country who manage patients with diabetes or the individuals at the risk of developing diabetes mellitus. The recommendations for screening diabetes and glucose-lowering agents have been revised and updated. New sections for continuous glucose monitoring, insulin pump use, and non-alcoholic fatty liver disease in patients with diabetes mellitus have been added. The KDA recommends active vaccination for coronavirus disease 2019 in patients with diabetes during the pandemic. An abridgement that contains practical information for patient education and systematic management in the clinic was published separately.

Point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) is a useful tool that is widely used in the emergency and intensive care areas. In Korea, insurance coverage of ultrasound examination has been gradually expanding in accordance with measures to enhance Korean National Insurance Coverage since 2017 to 2021, and which will continue until 2021. Full coverage of health insurance for POCUS in the emergency and critical care areas was implemented in July 2019. The National Health Insurance Act classified POCUS as a single or multiple-targeted ultrasound examination (STU vs. MTU). STU scans are conducted of one organ at a time, while MTU includes scanning of multiple organs simultaneously to determine each clinical situation. POCUS can be performed even if a diagnostic ultrasound examination is conducted, based on the physician's decision. However, the Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service plans to monitor the prescription status of whether the POCUS and diagnostic ultrasound examinations are prescribed simultaneously and repeatedly. Additionally, MTU is allowed only in cases of trauma, cardiac arrest, shock, chest pain, and dyspnea and should be performed by a qualified physician. Although physicians should scan all parts of the chest, heart, and abdomen when they prescribe MTU, they are not required to record all findings in the medical record. Therefore, appropriate prescription, application, and recording of POCUS are needed to enhance the quality of patient care and avoid unnecessary cut of medical budget spending. The present article provides background and clinical guidance for POCUS based on the implementation of full health insurance coverage for POCUS that began in July 2019 in Korea.
Abdomen ; Budgets ; Chest Pain ; Critical Care ; Dyspnea ; Emergencies ; Heart ; Heart Arrest ; Insurance Coverage ; Insurance ; Insurance, Health ; Korea ; Medical Records ; National Health Programs ; Patient Care ; Point-of-Care Systems ; Prescriptions ; Shock ; Thorax ; Ultrasonography

Point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) is a useful tool that is widely used in the emergency and intensive care areas. In Korea, insurance coverage of ultrasound examination has been gradually expanding in accordance with measures to enhance Korean National Insurance Coverage since 2017 to 2021, and which will continue until 2021. Full coverage of health insurance for POCUS in the emergency and critical care areas was implemented in July 2019. The National Health Insurance Act classified POCUS as a single or multiple-targeted ultrasound examination (STU vs. MTU). STU scans are conducted of one organ at a time, while MTU includes scanning of multiple organs simultaneously to determine each clinical situation. POCUS can be performed even if a diagnostic ultrasound examination is conducted, based on the physician's decision. However, the Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service plans to monitor the prescription status of whether the POCUS and diagnostic ultrasound examinations are prescribed simultaneously and repeatedly. Additionally, MTU is allowed only in cases of trauma, cardiac arrest, shock, chest pain, and dyspnea and should be performed by a qualified physician. Although physicians should scan all parts of the chest, heart, and abdomen when they prescribe MTU, they are not required to record all findings in the medical record. Therefore, appropriate prescription, application, and recording of POCUS are needed to enhance the quality of patient care and avoid unnecessary cut of medical budget spending. The present article provides background and clinical guidance for POCUS based on the implementation of full health insurance coverage for POCUS that began in July 2019 in Korea.

PURPOSE: The treatment strategy for elderly patients older than 80 years with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) has not been established because of poor treatment tolerability and lack of data. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This multicenter retrospective study was conducted to investigate clinical characteristics, treatment patterns and outcomes of patients older than 80 years who were diagnosed with DLBCL at 19 institutions in Korea between 2005 and 2016. RESULTS: A total of 194 patients were identified (median age, 83.3 years). Of these, 114 patients had an age-adjusted International Prognostic Index (aaIPI) score of 2-3 and 48 had a Charlson index score of 4 or more. R-CHOP was given in 124 cases, R-CVP in 13 cases, other chemotherapy in 17 cases, radiation alone in nine cases, and surgery alone in two cases. Twenty-nine patients did not undergo any treatment. The median number of chemotherapy cycles was three. Only 37 patients completed the planned treatment cycles. The overall response rate from 105 evaluable patients was 90.5% (complete response, 41.9%). Twentynine patients died due to treatment-related toxicities (TRT). Thirteen patients died due to TRT after the first cycle. Median overall survival was 14.0 months. The main causes of death were disease progression (30.8%) and TRT (27.1%). In multivariate analysis, overall survival was affected by aaIPI, hypoalbuminemia, elevated creatinine, and treatment. CONCLUSION: Age itself should not be a contraindication to treatment. However, since elderly patients show higher rates of TRT due to infection, careful monitoring and dose modification of chemotherapeutic agents is needed.
Aged* ; B-Lymphocytes* ; Cause of Death ; Creatinine ; Disease Progression ; Drug Therapy ; Humans ; Hypoalbuminemia ; Korea ; Lymphoma, B-Cell* ; Multivariate Analysis ; Retrospective Studies*

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the association between baseline characteristics, three physical performance tests and fall history in a sample of the elderly from Korean population. METHODS: A total of 307 participants (mean age, 76.70±4.85 years) were categorized into one of two groups, i.e., fallers and non-fallers. Fifty-two participants who had reported falling unexpectedly at least once in the previous 12 months were assigned to the fallers group. Physical performance tests included Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB), Berg Balance Scale (BBS), Timed Up and Go test. The differences between the two study groups were compared and we analyzed the correlations between fall histories and physical performance tests. RESULTS: SPPB demonstrated a significant association with fall history. Although the BBS total scores did not show statistical significance, two dynamic balance test items of BBS (B12 and B13) showed a significant association among fallers. CONCLUSION: This study suggests that SPPB and two dynamic balance test items of the BBS can be used in screening for risk of falls in an ambulatory elderly population.
Accidental Falls ; Aged* ; Cross-Sectional Studies* ; Humans ; Mass Screening