Background: and Purpose This study evaluated the diagnostic utility of an anti-signal-recognition particle 54 (anti-SRP54) antibody-based enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) as well as the clinical, serological, and pathological characteristics of patients with SRP immune-mediated necrotizing myopathy (IMNM). Methods: We evaluated 87 patients with idiopathic inflammatory myopathy and 107 healthy participants between January 2002 and December 2023. The sensitivity and specificity of the ELISA for anti-SRP54 antibodies were assessed, and the clinical profiles of patients with antiSRP54 antibodies were determined. Results: The ELISA for anti-SRP54 antibodies had a sensitivity and specificity of 88% and 99%, respectively, along with a test–retest reliability of 0.92 (p<0.001). The 32 patients diagnosed with anti-SRP IMNM using a line-blot immunoassay included 28 (88%) who tested positive for anti-SRP54 antibodies using the ELISA, comprising 12 (43%) males and 16 (57%) females whose median ages at symptom onset and diagnosis were 43.0 years and 43.5 years, respectively. Symptoms included proximal muscle weakness in all 28 (100%) patients, neck weakness in 9 (32%), myalgia in 15 (54%), dysphagia in 5 (18%), dyspnea in 4 (14%), dysarthria in 2 (7%), interstitial lung disease in 2 (7%), and myocarditis in 2 (7%). The median serum creatine kinase (CK) level was 7,261 U/L (interquartile range: 5,086–10,007 U/L), and the median anti-SRP54 antibody level was 2.0 U/mL (interquartile range: 1.0–5.6 U/mL). The serum CK level was significantly higher in patients with coexisting anti-Ro-52 antibodies. Conclusions This study has confirmed the reliability of the ELISA for anti-SRP54 antibodies and provided insights into the clinical, serological, and pathological characteristics of South Korean patients with anti-SRP IMNM.

Background: and Purpose This study evaluated the diagnostic utility of an anti-signal-recognition particle 54 (anti-SRP54) antibody-based enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) as well as the clinical, serological, and pathological characteristics of patients with SRP immune-mediated necrotizing myopathy (IMNM). Methods: We evaluated 87 patients with idiopathic inflammatory myopathy and 107 healthy participants between January 2002 and December 2023. The sensitivity and specificity of the ELISA for anti-SRP54 antibodies were assessed, and the clinical profiles of patients with antiSRP54 antibodies were determined. Results: The ELISA for anti-SRP54 antibodies had a sensitivity and specificity of 88% and 99%, respectively, along with a test–retest reliability of 0.92 (p<0.001). The 32 patients diagnosed with anti-SRP IMNM using a line-blot immunoassay included 28 (88%) who tested positive for anti-SRP54 antibodies using the ELISA, comprising 12 (43%) males and 16 (57%) females whose median ages at symptom onset and diagnosis were 43.0 years and 43.5 years, respectively. Symptoms included proximal muscle weakness in all 28 (100%) patients, neck weakness in 9 (32%), myalgia in 15 (54%), dysphagia in 5 (18%), dyspnea in 4 (14%), dysarthria in 2 (7%), interstitial lung disease in 2 (7%), and myocarditis in 2 (7%). The median serum creatine kinase (CK) level was 7,261 U/L (interquartile range: 5,086–10,007 U/L), and the median anti-SRP54 antibody level was 2.0 U/mL (interquartile range: 1.0–5.6 U/mL). The serum CK level was significantly higher in patients with coexisting anti-Ro-52 antibodies. Conclusions This study has confirmed the reliability of the ELISA for anti-SRP54 antibodies and provided insights into the clinical, serological, and pathological characteristics of South Korean patients with anti-SRP IMNM.

Background: and Purpose This study evaluated the diagnostic utility of an anti-signal-recognition particle 54 (anti-SRP54) antibody-based enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) as well as the clinical, serological, and pathological characteristics of patients with SRP immune-mediated necrotizing myopathy (IMNM). Methods: We evaluated 87 patients with idiopathic inflammatory myopathy and 107 healthy participants between January 2002 and December 2023. The sensitivity and specificity of the ELISA for anti-SRP54 antibodies were assessed, and the clinical profiles of patients with antiSRP54 antibodies were determined. Results: The ELISA for anti-SRP54 antibodies had a sensitivity and specificity of 88% and 99%, respectively, along with a test–retest reliability of 0.92 (p<0.001). The 32 patients diagnosed with anti-SRP IMNM using a line-blot immunoassay included 28 (88%) who tested positive for anti-SRP54 antibodies using the ELISA, comprising 12 (43%) males and 16 (57%) females whose median ages at symptom onset and diagnosis were 43.0 years and 43.5 years, respectively. Symptoms included proximal muscle weakness in all 28 (100%) patients, neck weakness in 9 (32%), myalgia in 15 (54%), dysphagia in 5 (18%), dyspnea in 4 (14%), dysarthria in 2 (7%), interstitial lung disease in 2 (7%), and myocarditis in 2 (7%). The median serum creatine kinase (CK) level was 7,261 U/L (interquartile range: 5,086–10,007 U/L), and the median anti-SRP54 antibody level was 2.0 U/mL (interquartile range: 1.0–5.6 U/mL). The serum CK level was significantly higher in patients with coexisting anti-Ro-52 antibodies. Conclusions This study has confirmed the reliability of the ELISA for anti-SRP54 antibodies and provided insights into the clinical, serological, and pathological characteristics of South Korean patients with anti-SRP IMNM.

Background: Although symptomatic local recurrence (SLR) of spinal metastasis is relatively common after aggressive surgery, there have been few studies on SLR according to the extent of tumor removal. This study aimed to evaluate the incidence of SLR after surgery in spinal metastasis and analyze the risk factors of SLR. Methods: This study included patients with spinal metastasis to all 3 vertebral columns. SLR was defined as the occurrence of new symptoms, confirmed by radiologic regrowth of tumor. The extent of tumor removal was classified into 3 types (corpectomy, separation surgery, and only posterior column removal). The Kaplan-Meier method was used to analyze the SLR rate after surgery.The presumed risk factors of SLR were evaluated using log-rank test and Cox regression analysis. Results: This study included 102 patients with a mean follow-up period of 17.7 months (range, 3–84 months). After surgical treatment, SLR was confirmed in 35 patients (34.3%). Kaplan-Meier analysis predicted that the incidence of SLR was 4.4% at 6 months, 21.5% at 12 months, 34.0% at 18 months, and 42.7% at 24 months. In the univariate analysis, the primary malignancy site, number of vertebral metastases, and surgery for progressed tumor after previous radiation therapy were significant (p = 0.042, p = 0.048, and p = 0.008, respectively). No significant differences were observed in the extent of tumor removal (p = 0.536). In the multivariate analysis, the significant risk factors of SLR included only previous radiation therapy (p = 0.012). The risk of SLR was 2.8 times higher in patients who received surgery for progressed tumor after previous radiation therapy than in those without it. Conclusions The SLR of spinal metastasis was predicted in 21.5% of patients at 1 year after surgical treatment. The extent of tumor removal did not seem to affect SLR. Surgery for progressed tumor after previous radiation therapy was confirmed as the only substantial risk factor. Therefore, the tumor's response to preoperative radiation therapy is the most important factor in determining SLR.

Background: Although symptomatic local recurrence (SLR) of spinal metastasis is relatively common after aggressive surgery, there have been few studies on SLR according to the extent of tumor removal. This study aimed to evaluate the incidence of SLR after surgery in spinal metastasis and analyze the risk factors of SLR. Methods: This study included patients with spinal metastasis to all 3 vertebral columns. SLR was defined as the occurrence of new symptoms, confirmed by radiologic regrowth of tumor. The extent of tumor removal was classified into 3 types (corpectomy, separation surgery, and only posterior column removal). The Kaplan-Meier method was used to analyze the SLR rate after surgery.The presumed risk factors of SLR were evaluated using log-rank test and Cox regression analysis. Results: This study included 102 patients with a mean follow-up period of 17.7 months (range, 3–84 months). After surgical treatment, SLR was confirmed in 35 patients (34.3%). Kaplan-Meier analysis predicted that the incidence of SLR was 4.4% at 6 months, 21.5% at 12 months, 34.0% at 18 months, and 42.7% at 24 months. In the univariate analysis, the primary malignancy site, number of vertebral metastases, and surgery for progressed tumor after previous radiation therapy were significant (p = 0.042, p = 0.048, and p = 0.008, respectively). No significant differences were observed in the extent of tumor removal (p = 0.536). In the multivariate analysis, the significant risk factors of SLR included only previous radiation therapy (p = 0.012). The risk of SLR was 2.8 times higher in patients who received surgery for progressed tumor after previous radiation therapy than in those without it. Conclusions The SLR of spinal metastasis was predicted in 21.5% of patients at 1 year after surgical treatment. The extent of tumor removal did not seem to affect SLR. Surgery for progressed tumor after previous radiation therapy was confirmed as the only substantial risk factor. Therefore, the tumor's response to preoperative radiation therapy is the most important factor in determining SLR.

Background: s/Aims: Minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy (MIPD), such as totally laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy (TLPD) or robot-assisted pancreatoduodenectomy (RAPD), is increasingly performed worldwide. This study aimed to compare the perioperative outcomes of TLPD and RAPD, and compare the oncologic outcomes between MIPD and open pancreatoduodenectomy (OPD) for malignant disease. Methods: This retrospective study was conducted at two hospitals that followed similar oncological surgical principles, including the extent of resection. RAPD was performed at Seoul National University Hospital, and TLPD at Seoul National University Bundang Hospital. Patient demographics, perioperative outcomes, and oncological outcomes were analyzed. Propensity score matching (PSM) analysis was performed to compare oncologic outcomes between MIPD and OPD. Results: Between 2015 and 2020, 332 RAPD and 178 TLPD were performed. The rates of Clavian–Dindo grade ≥ 3 complications (19.3% vs. 20.2%, p = 0.816), clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula (9.9% vs. 11.8%, p = 0.647), and open conversions (6.6% vs. 10.5%, p = 0.163) were comparable between the two groups. The mean operation time (341 minutes vs. 414 minutes, p < 0.001) and postoperative hospital stay were shorter in the RAPD group (11 days vs. 14 days, p = 0.034). After PSM, the 5-year overall survival rate was comparable between MIPD and OPD for overall malignant disease (58.4% vs. 55.5%, p = 0.180). Conclusions Both RAPD and TLPD are safe and feasible, and MIPD has clinical outcomes that are comparable to those of OPD. Although RAPD exhibits some advantages, its perioperative outcomes are similar to those associated with TLPD. A surgical method may be selected based on the convenience of surgical movements, medical costs, and operator experience.

Background: Although symptomatic local recurrence (SLR) of spinal metastasis is relatively common after aggressive surgery, there have been few studies on SLR according to the extent of tumor removal. This study aimed to evaluate the incidence of SLR after surgery in spinal metastasis and analyze the risk factors of SLR. Methods: This study included patients with spinal metastasis to all 3 vertebral columns. SLR was defined as the occurrence of new symptoms, confirmed by radiologic regrowth of tumor. The extent of tumor removal was classified into 3 types (corpectomy, separation surgery, and only posterior column removal). The Kaplan-Meier method was used to analyze the SLR rate after surgery.The presumed risk factors of SLR were evaluated using log-rank test and Cox regression analysis. Results: This study included 102 patients with a mean follow-up period of 17.7 months (range, 3–84 months). After surgical treatment, SLR was confirmed in 35 patients (34.3%). Kaplan-Meier analysis predicted that the incidence of SLR was 4.4% at 6 months, 21.5% at 12 months, 34.0% at 18 months, and 42.7% at 24 months. In the univariate analysis, the primary malignancy site, number of vertebral metastases, and surgery for progressed tumor after previous radiation therapy were significant (p = 0.042, p = 0.048, and p = 0.008, respectively). No significant differences were observed in the extent of tumor removal (p = 0.536). In the multivariate analysis, the significant risk factors of SLR included only previous radiation therapy (p = 0.012). The risk of SLR was 2.8 times higher in patients who received surgery for progressed tumor after previous radiation therapy than in those without it. Conclusions The SLR of spinal metastasis was predicted in 21.5% of patients at 1 year after surgical treatment. The extent of tumor removal did not seem to affect SLR. Surgery for progressed tumor after previous radiation therapy was confirmed as the only substantial risk factor. Therefore, the tumor's response to preoperative radiation therapy is the most important factor in determining SLR.

Background: s/Aims: Minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy (MIPD), such as totally laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy (TLPD) or robot-assisted pancreatoduodenectomy (RAPD), is increasingly performed worldwide. This study aimed to compare the perioperative outcomes of TLPD and RAPD, and compare the oncologic outcomes between MIPD and open pancreatoduodenectomy (OPD) for malignant disease. Methods: This retrospective study was conducted at two hospitals that followed similar oncological surgical principles, including the extent of resection. RAPD was performed at Seoul National University Hospital, and TLPD at Seoul National University Bundang Hospital. Patient demographics, perioperative outcomes, and oncological outcomes were analyzed. Propensity score matching (PSM) analysis was performed to compare oncologic outcomes between MIPD and OPD. Results: Between 2015 and 2020, 332 RAPD and 178 TLPD were performed. The rates of Clavian–Dindo grade ≥ 3 complications (19.3% vs. 20.2%, p = 0.816), clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula (9.9% vs. 11.8%, p = 0.647), and open conversions (6.6% vs. 10.5%, p = 0.163) were comparable between the two groups. The mean operation time (341 minutes vs. 414 minutes, p < 0.001) and postoperative hospital stay were shorter in the RAPD group (11 days vs. 14 days, p = 0.034). After PSM, the 5-year overall survival rate was comparable between MIPD and OPD for overall malignant disease (58.4% vs. 55.5%, p = 0.180). Conclusions Both RAPD and TLPD are safe and feasible, and MIPD has clinical outcomes that are comparable to those of OPD. Although RAPD exhibits some advantages, its perioperative outcomes are similar to those associated with TLPD. A surgical method may be selected based on the convenience of surgical movements, medical costs, and operator experience.

Background: s/Aims: Minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy (MIPD), such as totally laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy (TLPD) or robot-assisted pancreatoduodenectomy (RAPD), is increasingly performed worldwide. This study aimed to compare the perioperative outcomes of TLPD and RAPD, and compare the oncologic outcomes between MIPD and open pancreatoduodenectomy (OPD) for malignant disease. Methods: This retrospective study was conducted at two hospitals that followed similar oncological surgical principles, including the extent of resection. RAPD was performed at Seoul National University Hospital, and TLPD at Seoul National University Bundang Hospital. Patient demographics, perioperative outcomes, and oncological outcomes were analyzed. Propensity score matching (PSM) analysis was performed to compare oncologic outcomes between MIPD and OPD. Results: Between 2015 and 2020, 332 RAPD and 178 TLPD were performed. The rates of Clavian–Dindo grade ≥ 3 complications (19.3% vs. 20.2%, p = 0.816), clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula (9.9% vs. 11.8%, p = 0.647), and open conversions (6.6% vs. 10.5%, p = 0.163) were comparable between the two groups. The mean operation time (341 minutes vs. 414 minutes, p < 0.001) and postoperative hospital stay were shorter in the RAPD group (11 days vs. 14 days, p = 0.034). After PSM, the 5-year overall survival rate was comparable between MIPD and OPD for overall malignant disease (58.4% vs. 55.5%, p = 0.180). Conclusions Both RAPD and TLPD are safe and feasible, and MIPD has clinical outcomes that are comparable to those of OPD. Although RAPD exhibits some advantages, its perioperative outcomes are similar to those associated with TLPD. A surgical method may be selected based on the convenience of surgical movements, medical costs, and operator experience.

Background: Although symptomatic local recurrence (SLR) of spinal metastasis is relatively common after aggressive surgery, there have been few studies on SLR according to the extent of tumor removal. This study aimed to evaluate the incidence of SLR after surgery in spinal metastasis and analyze the risk factors of SLR. Methods: This study included patients with spinal metastasis to all 3 vertebral columns. SLR was defined as the occurrence of new symptoms, confirmed by radiologic regrowth of tumor. The extent of tumor removal was classified into 3 types (corpectomy, separation surgery, and only posterior column removal). The Kaplan-Meier method was used to analyze the SLR rate after surgery.The presumed risk factors of SLR were evaluated using log-rank test and Cox regression analysis. Results: This study included 102 patients with a mean follow-up period of 17.7 months (range, 3–84 months). After surgical treatment, SLR was confirmed in 35 patients (34.3%). Kaplan-Meier analysis predicted that the incidence of SLR was 4.4% at 6 months, 21.5% at 12 months, 34.0% at 18 months, and 42.7% at 24 months. In the univariate analysis, the primary malignancy site, number of vertebral metastases, and surgery for progressed tumor after previous radiation therapy were significant (p = 0.042, p = 0.048, and p = 0.008, respectively). No significant differences were observed in the extent of tumor removal (p = 0.536). In the multivariate analysis, the significant risk factors of SLR included only previous radiation therapy (p = 0.012). The risk of SLR was 2.8 times higher in patients who received surgery for progressed tumor after previous radiation therapy than in those without it. Conclusions The SLR of spinal metastasis was predicted in 21.5% of patients at 1 year after surgical treatment. The extent of tumor removal did not seem to affect SLR. Surgery for progressed tumor after previous radiation therapy was confirmed as the only substantial risk factor. Therefore, the tumor's response to preoperative radiation therapy is the most important factor in determining SLR.