Background: Complete revascularization has demonstrated better outcomes in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) and multivessel disease. However, in the case of left main (LM) culprit lesion AMI with multivessel disease, there is limited evidence to suggest that complete revascularization is better. Methods: We reviewed 16,831 patients in the Korea Acute Myocardial Infarction Registry who were treated from July 2016 to June 2020, and 399 patients were enrolled with LM culprit lesion AMI treated with percutaneous coronary intervention. We categorized the patients as those treated with complete revascularization (n=295) or incomplete revascularization (n=104). The study endpoint was major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE), a composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, ischemia-driven revascularization, stent thrombosis, and stroke. We performed propensity score matching (PSM) and analyzed the incidence of MACCE at 1 year. Results: After PSM, the two groups were well balanced. There was no significant difference between the two groups in MACCE at 1 year (12.1% vs. 15.2%; hazard ratio, 1.28; 95% confidence interval, 0.60–2.74; p=0.524) after PSM. The components of MACCE and major bleeding were also not significantly different. Conclusion There was no significant difference in clinical outcomes between the groups treated with complete or incomplete revascularization for LM culprit lesion AMI with multivessel disease.

Background: Complete revascularization has demonstrated better outcomes in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) and multivessel disease. However, in the case of left main (LM) culprit lesion AMI with multivessel disease, there is limited evidence to suggest that complete revascularization is better. Methods: We reviewed 16,831 patients in the Korea Acute Myocardial Infarction Registry who were treated from July 2016 to June 2020, and 399 patients were enrolled with LM culprit lesion AMI treated with percutaneous coronary intervention. We categorized the patients as those treated with complete revascularization (n=295) or incomplete revascularization (n=104). The study endpoint was major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE), a composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, ischemia-driven revascularization, stent thrombosis, and stroke. We performed propensity score matching (PSM) and analyzed the incidence of MACCE at 1 year. Results: After PSM, the two groups were well balanced. There was no significant difference between the two groups in MACCE at 1 year (12.1% vs. 15.2%; hazard ratio, 1.28; 95% confidence interval, 0.60–2.74; p=0.524) after PSM. The components of MACCE and major bleeding were also not significantly different. Conclusion There was no significant difference in clinical outcomes between the groups treated with complete or incomplete revascularization for LM culprit lesion AMI with multivessel disease.

Background: Complete revascularization has demonstrated better outcomes in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) and multivessel disease. However, in the case of left main (LM) culprit lesion AMI with multivessel disease, there is limited evidence to suggest that complete revascularization is better. Methods: We reviewed 16,831 patients in the Korea Acute Myocardial Infarction Registry who were treated from July 2016 to June 2020, and 399 patients were enrolled with LM culprit lesion AMI treated with percutaneous coronary intervention. We categorized the patients as those treated with complete revascularization (n=295) or incomplete revascularization (n=104). The study endpoint was major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE), a composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, ischemia-driven revascularization, stent thrombosis, and stroke. We performed propensity score matching (PSM) and analyzed the incidence of MACCE at 1 year. Results: After PSM, the two groups were well balanced. There was no significant difference between the two groups in MACCE at 1 year (12.1% vs. 15.2%; hazard ratio, 1.28; 95% confidence interval, 0.60–2.74; p=0.524) after PSM. The components of MACCE and major bleeding were also not significantly different. Conclusion There was no significant difference in clinical outcomes between the groups treated with complete or incomplete revascularization for LM culprit lesion AMI with multivessel disease.

Background: Complete revascularization has demonstrated better outcomes in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) and multivessel disease. However, in the case of left main (LM) culprit lesion AMI with multivessel disease, there is limited evidence to suggest that complete revascularization is better. Methods: We reviewed 16,831 patients in the Korea Acute Myocardial Infarction Registry who were treated from July 2016 to June 2020, and 399 patients were enrolled with LM culprit lesion AMI treated with percutaneous coronary intervention. We categorized the patients as those treated with complete revascularization (n=295) or incomplete revascularization (n=104). The study endpoint was major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE), a composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, ischemia-driven revascularization, stent thrombosis, and stroke. We performed propensity score matching (PSM) and analyzed the incidence of MACCE at 1 year. Results: After PSM, the two groups were well balanced. There was no significant difference between the two groups in MACCE at 1 year (12.1% vs. 15.2%; hazard ratio, 1.28; 95% confidence interval, 0.60–2.74; p=0.524) after PSM. The components of MACCE and major bleeding were also not significantly different. Conclusion There was no significant difference in clinical outcomes between the groups treated with complete or incomplete revascularization for LM culprit lesion AMI with multivessel disease.

Background: The benefits of transradial access (TRA) over transfemoral access (TFA) for bifurcation percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) are uncertain because of the limited availability of device selection. This study aimed to compare the procedural differences and the in-hospital and long-term outcomes of TRA and TFA for bifurcation PCI using secondgeneration drug-eluting stents (DESs). Methods: Based on data from the Coronary Bifurcation Stenting Registry III, a retrospective registry of 2,648 patients undergoing bifurcation PCI with second-generation DES from 21 centers in South Korea, patients were categorized into the TRA group (n = 1,507) or the TFA group (n = 1,141). After propensity score matching (PSM), procedural differences, in-hospital outcomes, and device-oriented composite outcomes (DOCOs; a composite of cardiac death, target vessel-related myocardial infarction, and target lesion revascularization) were compared between the two groups (772 matched patients each group). Results: Despite well-balanced baseline clinical and lesion characteristics after PSM, the use of the two-stent strategy (14.2% vs. 23.7%, P = 0.001) and the incidence of in-hospital adverse outcomes, primarily driven by access site complications (2.2% vs. 4.4%, P = 0.015), were significantly lower in the TRA group than in the TFA group. At the 5-year follow-up, the incidence of DOCOs was similar between the groups (6.3% vs. 7.1%, P = 0.639). Conclusion The findings suggested that TRA may be safer than TFA for bifurcation PCI using second-generation DESs. Despite differences in treatment strategy, TRA was associated with similar long-term clinical outcomes as those of TFA. Therefore, TRA might be the preferred access for bifurcation PCI using second-generation DES.

Objective: Emergency department-based interventions are known to be effective at reducing the risk of repeat suicide attempts among patients admitted to emergency departments after attempting suicide. However, the factors that influence loss to follow-up after emergency department-based interventions are not well known. Methods: This study investigated suicide attempt patients who registered with an emergency department-based intervention and received counseling at least once from January 2019 to December 2020. Patients were allocated to a follow-up group or a loss-to-follow-up group depending on whether emergency department-based interventions had been performed more than three times. Clinical factors and socioeconomic status were considered independent variables. Logistic regression analysis was performed to identify factors that influenced loss to emergency department-based interventions. Results: Of 339 patients enrolled, 210 (61.9%) were lost to follow-up. Time taken to initiation of intervention after discharge (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]=2.42; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.38-4.30) and suicide attempt associated with physical illness (aOR=0.31; 95% CI, 0.14-0.68) independently influenced loss to emergency department-based interventions. Conclusion Initiation of intervention after discharge significantly influenced emergency department-based intervention follow-up loss of suicide attempt patients. The study suggests initiation of intervention prior to discharge might reduce the risk of repeat suicide attempts.

Purpose: Alcohol is one of the most commonly co-ingested agents in deliberate self-poisoning (DSP) cases presenting at the emergency department (ED). The increased impulsivity, aggressiveness, and disinhibition caused by alcohol ingestion may have different clinical features and outcomes in cases of DSP. This study investigates whether alcohol co-ingestion affects the clinical features and outcomes of DSP patients in the ED. Methods: This was a single-center retrospective study. We investigated DSP cases who visited our ED from January 2010 to December 2016. Patients were classified into two groups: with (ALC+) or without (ALC–) alcohol co-ingestion. The clinical features of DSP were compared by considering the co-ingestion of alcohol, and the factors related to discharge against medical advice (AMA) of DSP were analyzed. Results: A total of 689 patients were included in the study, with 272 (39.5%) in the ALC+ group. Majority of the ALC+ group patients were middle-aged males (45-54 years old) and arrived at the ED at night. The rate of discharge AMA from ED was significantly higher in the ALC+ group (130; 47.8%) compared to the ALC– group (p=0.001). No significant differences were obtained in the poisoning severity scores between the two groups (p=0.223). Multivariate analysis revealed that alcohol co-ingestion (odds ratio [OR]=1.42; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.01-1.98), alert mental status (OR=1.65; 95% CI, 1.17-2.32), past psychiatric history (OR=0.04; 95% CI, 0.01-0.28), age >65 years (OR=0.42; 95% CI, 0.23-0.78), and time from event to ED arrival >6 hrs (OR=0.57; 95% CI, 0.37-0.88) were independent predictive factors of discharge AMA (p=0.043, p=0.004, p=0.001, p=0.006, and p=0.010, respectively). Conclusion Our results determined a high association between alcohol co-ingestion and the outcome of discharge AMA in DSP patients. Emergency physicians should, therefore, be aware that DSP patients who have co-ingested alcohol may be uncooperative and at high risk of discharge AMA.

Background: Since the implementation of the nationwide coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination campaign, emergency departments (EDs) have had an increasing number of patients reporting postvaccination cardiovascular adverse effects. We investigated the clinical features of patients who visited the ED for cardiovascular adverse reactions after COVID-19 mRNA vaccination. Methods: We conducted a retrospective observational study in two EDs. Patients with cardiovascular adverse reactions after COVID-19 mRNA vaccination who visited EDs between June 1, 2021, and October 15, 2021, were selected. The clinical data of these patients were collected by reviewing medical records. Results: Among 683 patients, 426 (62.4%) were female. The number of patients in their 20s was the highest (38.9% of males, 28.2% of females) (P < 0.001). More patients visited the ED for adverse reactions following the first vaccine dose than following the second dose (67.6% vs. 32.2%). Chief complaints were chest pain/discomfort (74.4%), dyspnea (14.3%) and palpitation (11.3%). The final diagnosis was a nonspecific cause (63.1%), and 663 (97.1%) patients were discharged from the ED. The admission rate was higher in males than in females (3.9% vs. 1.9%). Myocarditis was diagnosed in four males, who showed mild clinical progression and were discharged within 5 hospital days. Conclusion Most patients who visited the ED with cardiovascular adverse reactions were discharged from the ED, but some were admitted for other medical diseases as well as adverse vaccine reactions. Therefore, further surveillance and a differential diagnosis of cardiovascular adverse events after COVID-19 mRNA vaccination should be considered by emergency physicians.

Objective: Emergency cricothyroidotomy is an infrequently performed procedure and post-procedural complications may result from attempting to pass a device with a large external diameter through the cricothyroid membrane. This study aimed to determine the maximum height of the cricothyroid membrane according to the patient’ s sex and age based on cervical-spine computed tomography (C-spine CT) in the emergency department (ED) and determine the appropriate endotracheal tube (ETT) size. Methods: A retrospective analysis of patients was conducted from May 2014 to April 2020 in the ED. The data were obtained from medical records. Electronic calipers were used to measure the maximum height of the cricothyroid membrane in C-spine CT by an emergency physician and an emergency medicine resident. Results: Six hundred and sixty-four patients were included in the study. The mean height of the cricothyroid membrane was 10.11±2.24 mm in males (n=351) and 8.90±1.84 mm in females (n=313) (P<0.001). In males, the cricothyroid membrane height showed significant variance between the ≥75-year-old and the 25-34-year-old groups (9.26±2.40 mm vs. 11.80±2.36 mm) (P<0.001). The tube size of the cricothyroidotomy equipment was suitable for more than 72.1% of patients when applied with an ETT (internal diameter ≤6.0 mm). Conclusion This study showed that the height of the cricothyroid membrane differed according to sex and also age in males. It may thus be necessary to consider anatomical differences according to sex and age when selecting the appropriate tube size to reduce complications during emergency cricothyroidotomy.

Background: When a sudden outbreak of an infectious disease occurs, emergency medical services (EMS) response could be negatively affected. The poor prognosis of acute stroke may be largely attributed to delays in treatment. This study aimed to identify the impact of the sudden outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on EMS response for patients with acute stroke. Methods: This comparative cross-sectional study was conducted in 25 safety centers in Seoul, Korea. We enrolled patients with acute stroke who were transferred to the emergency department by EMS. The study period was from February–April 2020 and the same period in 2019. Patients were divided into two groups, pre-COVID-19 period and early-COVID-19 period, and previously collected patient data were analyzed. We performed comparative analyses of EMS response and clinical outcomes between the groups. Results: Of 465 patients, 231 (49.7%) had an acute stroke during the study period. There was no significant difference between clinical characteristics of patients with acute stroke before and after the COVID-19 outbreak. EMS response times increased significantly during the early COVID-19 outbreak. The intensive care unit admission rate and mortality rate increased during the early COVID-19 outbreak. Conclusion In the initial phase after the sudden COVID-19 outbreak, EMS response times for acute stroke were delayed and the clinical outcomes of patients with acute stroke deteriorated.