According to the Letournel classification, a transverse fracture is the only elementary fracture pattern that breaks both the anterior and posterior border of the innominate bone. A transverse acetabular fracture separates the innominate bone into two segments: the iliac segment and the ischiopubic segment. Therefore, minimally displaced transverse fractures can be stabilized by purchasing both segments with a large-diameter single screw. Although it is not a stable internal fixation construct compared with plates and screws, it provides sufficient stability to promote early mobilization and early weight-bearing while minimizing the risk of secondary displacement and preventing secondary complications associated with prolonged bed rest and immobilization. The authors successfully treated a case of minimally displaced transverse acetabular fracture with percutaneous column fixation using a retrograde fashion of a single anterior column screw. This report discusses the case with a literature review and deliberates the usefulness of the procedure.

We report two cases of lichen planus pigmentosus (LPP) that developed in a unilateral linear pattern. The patients presented with unilateral linear brown macules on the extremities. Skin biopsy showed orthokeratosis, basal hydropic degeneration with scarce lymphohistiocytic infiltrates, and numerous melanophages in both patients. These patients, to the best of our knowledge, are the first cases of LPP presenting with a linear pattern. LPP should be considered in the differential diagnosis of linear hyperpigmented skin lesions.
Adolescent ; Adult ; Biopsy ; Female ; Human ; Hyperpigmentation/diagnosis/pathology ; Lichen Planus/*diagnosis/pathology ; Skin/pathology

OBJECTIVE: The mGluR1 (metabotropic glutamate receptor 1) gene, a G protein–coupled receptor, is known to mediate perceptions of umami tastes. Genetic variation in taste receptors may influence dietary intake, and in turn have an impact on nutritional status and risk of chronic disease. We investigated the association of mGluR1 rs2814863 polymorphism with lipid profiles and cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk, together with their modulation by macronutrient intake in Korean adults. METHODS: The subjects consisted of 8,380 Koreans aged 40-69 years participating in the Anseong and Ansan Cohort Study, which was a part of the Korean Genome Epidemiology Study (KoGES). Data was collected using self-administered questionnaires, anthropometric measurements, and blood chemical analysis. RESULTS: Carriers of C allele at mGluR1 rs2814863 was associated with decreased high density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) and increased triglyceride as compared to carriers of TT. Also, carriers of the C allele showed higher fat intake and lower carbohydrate intake than those with carriers of TT. After adjustment for multiple testing using false-discovery rate method, the significant difference of HDL-C, triglyceride, dietary fat, and carbohydrate across genotypes disappeared. Gene-diet interaction effects between rs2814863 and macronutrients intake were not significantly associated with HDL-C and triglyceride levels. However, carriers of C allele demonstrated significantly higher odds of CVD {odds ratio=1.13, 95% CI=1.02-1.25} compared with carriers of TT. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings support significant associations between the mGluR1 rs2814863 genotype and CVD-related variables in Korean adults. However, these associations are not modified by macronutrient intake.
Adult* ; Alleles ; Blood Chemical Analysis ; Cardiovascular Diseases* ; Cholesterol, HDL ; Chronic Disease ; Cohort Studies ; Dietary Fats ; Epidemiology ; Genes, vif ; Genetic Variation ; Genome ; Genotype ; Gyeonggi-do ; Humans ; Methods ; Nutritional Status ; Polymorphism, Single Nucleotide ; Receptors, Glutamate ; Receptors, Metabotropic Glutamate* ; Triglycerides

Syndrome of inappropriate secretion of antidiuretic hormone (SIADH) may be observed in various types of cancer, but is mainly seen in small-cell carcinoma. It can also be caused by several chemotherapeutic agents. However, it is a very rare phenomenon in esophageal cancer or its treatment. We report here on a case of SIADH related to esophageal cancer treatment. A 55-year-old man received chemoradiotherapy (CRT) for esophageal cancer. After receiving CRT for 5 days, he complained of nausea, dizziness, and general weakness, and his sodium level had dropped to 107 mEq/L. His volume status was clinically euvolemic and there were no edema or pigmentation. After hypertonic saline infusion, the sodium level increased and the symptoms improved. There have been several reports of SIADH associated with malignancies or chemotherapy agents. However, to the best of our knowledge, this is the first Korean case of SIADH associated with esophageal cancer that occurred after cisplatin treatment.
Chemoradiotherapy ; Cisplatin ; Dizziness ; Drug Therapy ; Edema ; Esophageal Neoplasms* ; Humans ; Inappropriate ADH Syndrome ; Middle Aged ; Nausea ; Pigmentation ; Sodium

Objective: To explore the perception of drug utilization review (DUR) system and DUR modernization pilot project among healthcare professionals and patients. Methods: We conducted 8 times of focus group interviews (FGI) between August 1, 2019 to December 31, 2019. The healthcare professionals and patients who participated in the DUR modernization pilot project were included in the present study. Based on the type of project participation or medical institution, the participants were divided into the following four groups: group 1, hospital; group 2, clinic; group 3, pharmacy; and group 4, patient. Within each group, interviews were conducted under a pre-defined agenda to identify the implicit perceptions of the participants; the contents of the interviews were, then, categorized. Results: Healthcare professionals established a consensus on the positive aspects of the DUR system and DUR modernization pilot project. However, substantial concerns remain, such as additional workload associated with monitoring adverse events or acquiring consents from patients. Furthermore, a difference of opinion over the DUR convenience system was observed. Among 3 DUR convenience system, the personal medication history review service was highly utilized, but pop-up hold function and communication system was rarely used. Conclusion We observed that systematic intervention using the DUR system is effective for both healthcare providers and consumers. Adverse events caused by inappropriate drug use can be prevented by continuous patient monitoring. Therefore, the role of DUR system needs to be expanded to establish a safe drug management system.

Objective: To explore the perception of drug utilization review (DUR) system and DUR modernization pilot project among healthcare professionals and patients. Methods: We conducted 8 times of focus group interviews (FGI) between August 1, 2019 to December 31, 2019. The healthcare professionals and patients who participated in the DUR modernization pilot project were included in the present study. Based on the type of project participation or medical institution, the participants were divided into the following four groups: group 1, hospital; group 2, clinic; group 3, pharmacy; and group 4, patient. Within each group, interviews were conducted under a pre-defined agenda to identify the implicit perceptions of the participants; the contents of the interviews were, then, categorized. Results: Healthcare professionals established a consensus on the positive aspects of the DUR system and DUR modernization pilot project. However, substantial concerns remain, such as additional workload associated with monitoring adverse events or acquiring consents from patients. Furthermore, a difference of opinion over the DUR convenience system was observed. Among 3 DUR convenience system, the personal medication history review service was highly utilized, but pop-up hold function and communication system was rarely used. Conclusion We observed that systematic intervention using the DUR system is effective for both healthcare providers and consumers. Adverse events caused by inappropriate drug use can be prevented by continuous patient monitoring. Therefore, the role of DUR system needs to be expanded to establish a safe drug management system.

Background: and Purpose Migraine is one of the most common chronic neurological diseases worldwide. Although diverse treatment regimens have been recommended, there is insufficient evidence for which treatment patterns to apply in routine clinical settings. Methods: We used nationwide claims data from South Korea for 2015–2021 to identify incident migraine patients with at least one prescription for migraine. Patients were categorized according to their initial treatment classes and followed up from the date of treatment initiation. Treatment regimens included prophylactic treatments (antidepressants, anticonvulsants, beta blockers, calcium-channel blockers, and renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system [RAAS] inhibitors) and acute treatments (acetaminophen, antiemetics, aspirin, ergotamine, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs [NSAIDs], opioids, and triptans). The treatment patterns of migraine were evaluated until the end of the study period, including the secular trends, prevalence, persistence, and changes in migraine treatment. Results: Among the 761,350 included patients who received migraine treatment, the most frequently prescribed acute treatment was an NSAID (69.9%), followed by acetaminophen (50.0%).The most-prescribed prophylactic treatment was flunarizine (36.9%), followed by propranolol (24.4%). Among the patients, 54.8% received acute treatment, 13.5% received prophylactic treatment, and 31.6% received both treatment types. However, 65.7% of the patients discontinued their treatment within 3 months. The 3-month persistence rate was highest for triptans (25.2%) among the acute treatments and for RAAS inhibitors (62.0%) among the prophylactic treatments. Conclusions While the prevalence rates of medication use were found to align with current migraine guidelines, frequent switching and rapid discontinuation of drugs were observed in routine clinical settings.

Background: and Purpose Migraine is one of the most common chronic neurological diseases worldwide. Although diverse treatment regimens have been recommended, there is insufficient evidence for which treatment patterns to apply in routine clinical settings. Methods: We used nationwide claims data from South Korea for 2015–2021 to identify incident migraine patients with at least one prescription for migraine. Patients were categorized according to their initial treatment classes and followed up from the date of treatment initiation. Treatment regimens included prophylactic treatments (antidepressants, anticonvulsants, beta blockers, calcium-channel blockers, and renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system [RAAS] inhibitors) and acute treatments (acetaminophen, antiemetics, aspirin, ergotamine, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs [NSAIDs], opioids, and triptans). The treatment patterns of migraine were evaluated until the end of the study period, including the secular trends, prevalence, persistence, and changes in migraine treatment. Results: Among the 761,350 included patients who received migraine treatment, the most frequently prescribed acute treatment was an NSAID (69.9%), followed by acetaminophen (50.0%).The most-prescribed prophylactic treatment was flunarizine (36.9%), followed by propranolol (24.4%). Among the patients, 54.8% received acute treatment, 13.5% received prophylactic treatment, and 31.6% received both treatment types. However, 65.7% of the patients discontinued their treatment within 3 months. The 3-month persistence rate was highest for triptans (25.2%) among the acute treatments and for RAAS inhibitors (62.0%) among the prophylactic treatments. Conclusions While the prevalence rates of medication use were found to align with current migraine guidelines, frequent switching and rapid discontinuation of drugs were observed in routine clinical settings.

Background: and Purpose Migraine is one of the most common chronic neurological diseases worldwide. Although diverse treatment regimens have been recommended, there is insufficient evidence for which treatment patterns to apply in routine clinical settings. Methods: We used nationwide claims data from South Korea for 2015–2021 to identify incident migraine patients with at least one prescription for migraine. Patients were categorized according to their initial treatment classes and followed up from the date of treatment initiation. Treatment regimens included prophylactic treatments (antidepressants, anticonvulsants, beta blockers, calcium-channel blockers, and renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system [RAAS] inhibitors) and acute treatments (acetaminophen, antiemetics, aspirin, ergotamine, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs [NSAIDs], opioids, and triptans). The treatment patterns of migraine were evaluated until the end of the study period, including the secular trends, prevalence, persistence, and changes in migraine treatment. Results: Among the 761,350 included patients who received migraine treatment, the most frequently prescribed acute treatment was an NSAID (69.9%), followed by acetaminophen (50.0%).The most-prescribed prophylactic treatment was flunarizine (36.9%), followed by propranolol (24.4%). Among the patients, 54.8% received acute treatment, 13.5% received prophylactic treatment, and 31.6% received both treatment types. However, 65.7% of the patients discontinued their treatment within 3 months. The 3-month persistence rate was highest for triptans (25.2%) among the acute treatments and for RAAS inhibitors (62.0%) among the prophylactic treatments. Conclusions While the prevalence rates of medication use were found to align with current migraine guidelines, frequent switching and rapid discontinuation of drugs were observed in routine clinical settings.

Background: and Purpose Migraine is one of the most common chronic neurological diseases worldwide. Although diverse treatment regimens have been recommended, there is insufficient evidence for which treatment patterns to apply in routine clinical settings. Methods: We used nationwide claims data from South Korea for 2015–2021 to identify incident migraine patients with at least one prescription for migraine. Patients were categorized according to their initial treatment classes and followed up from the date of treatment initiation. Treatment regimens included prophylactic treatments (antidepressants, anticonvulsants, beta blockers, calcium-channel blockers, and renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system [RAAS] inhibitors) and acute treatments (acetaminophen, antiemetics, aspirin, ergotamine, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs [NSAIDs], opioids, and triptans). The treatment patterns of migraine were evaluated until the end of the study period, including the secular trends, prevalence, persistence, and changes in migraine treatment. Results: Among the 761,350 included patients who received migraine treatment, the most frequently prescribed acute treatment was an NSAID (69.9%), followed by acetaminophen (50.0%).The most-prescribed prophylactic treatment was flunarizine (36.9%), followed by propranolol (24.4%). Among the patients, 54.8% received acute treatment, 13.5% received prophylactic treatment, and 31.6% received both treatment types. However, 65.7% of the patients discontinued their treatment within 3 months. The 3-month persistence rate was highest for triptans (25.2%) among the acute treatments and for RAAS inhibitors (62.0%) among the prophylactic treatments. Conclusions While the prevalence rates of medication use were found to align with current migraine guidelines, frequent switching and rapid discontinuation of drugs were observed in routine clinical settings.