Purpose: This study aimed to analyze whether the occurrence of complications increases if radiotherapy (RT) is administered after breast reconstructive surgery using implants. Methods: This retrospective study included 80 patients who underwent breast reconstruction using implants, of which 16 (20.0%) underwent RT. Most patients underwent conventional fractionated RT (n = 13), and hypofractionated RT was performed in 3 patients. Most patients (n = 51, 63.8%) underwent delayed reconstruction, which involved implant replacement after tissue expander insertion. Only 29 patients (36.3%) underwent immediate reconstruction simultaneously with breast cancer surgery. Results: The median postoperative follow-up was 39.9 months (range, 8.7–120.3 months). Complications occurred in 18 (22.5%); infectionecrosis (n = 8), leakage/rupture (n = 8), and capsular contracture (n = 2). Infectionecrosis is common in patients undergoing RT. Complications occurred in 4 patients (25.0%) who received RT and 14 (21.9%) who did not receive RT, and complications did not significantly increase with RT (P = 0.511). There was no overall difference in complications between the immediate (4 of 29) and delayed (14 of 51) reconstruction groups (P = 0.129). Nine patients underwent reoperation because of complications; 3 (18.8%) received RT and 6 (9.4%) did not receive RT. The reoperation rate did not increase significantly with RT (P = 0.254). There were 3 cases of recurrence, and patients who received RT had no recurrence. Conclusion RT did not significantly increase the complication or reoperation rates if reconstructive surgery was performed using implants. Therefore, RT should be performed in patients at a high risk of recurrence.

Purpose: This study aimed to analyze whether the occurrence of complications increases if radiotherapy (RT) is administered after breast reconstructive surgery using implants. Methods: This retrospective study included 80 patients who underwent breast reconstruction using implants, of which 16 (20.0%) underwent RT. Most patients underwent conventional fractionated RT (n = 13), and hypofractionated RT was performed in 3 patients. Most patients (n = 51, 63.8%) underwent delayed reconstruction, which involved implant replacement after tissue expander insertion. Only 29 patients (36.3%) underwent immediate reconstruction simultaneously with breast cancer surgery. Results: The median postoperative follow-up was 39.9 months (range, 8.7–120.3 months). Complications occurred in 18 (22.5%); infectionecrosis (n = 8), leakage/rupture (n = 8), and capsular contracture (n = 2). Infectionecrosis is common in patients undergoing RT. Complications occurred in 4 patients (25.0%) who received RT and 14 (21.9%) who did not receive RT, and complications did not significantly increase with RT (P = 0.511). There was no overall difference in complications between the immediate (4 of 29) and delayed (14 of 51) reconstruction groups (P = 0.129). Nine patients underwent reoperation because of complications; 3 (18.8%) received RT and 6 (9.4%) did not receive RT. The reoperation rate did not increase significantly with RT (P = 0.254). There were 3 cases of recurrence, and patients who received RT had no recurrence. Conclusion RT did not significantly increase the complication or reoperation rates if reconstructive surgery was performed using implants. Therefore, RT should be performed in patients at a high risk of recurrence.

Purpose: This study aimed to analyze whether the occurrence of complications increases if radiotherapy (RT) is administered after breast reconstructive surgery using implants. Methods: This retrospective study included 80 patients who underwent breast reconstruction using implants, of which 16 (20.0%) underwent RT. Most patients underwent conventional fractionated RT (n = 13), and hypofractionated RT was performed in 3 patients. Most patients (n = 51, 63.8%) underwent delayed reconstruction, which involved implant replacement after tissue expander insertion. Only 29 patients (36.3%) underwent immediate reconstruction simultaneously with breast cancer surgery. Results: The median postoperative follow-up was 39.9 months (range, 8.7–120.3 months). Complications occurred in 18 (22.5%); infectionecrosis (n = 8), leakage/rupture (n = 8), and capsular contracture (n = 2). Infectionecrosis is common in patients undergoing RT. Complications occurred in 4 patients (25.0%) who received RT and 14 (21.9%) who did not receive RT, and complications did not significantly increase with RT (P = 0.511). There was no overall difference in complications between the immediate (4 of 29) and delayed (14 of 51) reconstruction groups (P = 0.129). Nine patients underwent reoperation because of complications; 3 (18.8%) received RT and 6 (9.4%) did not receive RT. The reoperation rate did not increase significantly with RT (P = 0.254). There were 3 cases of recurrence, and patients who received RT had no recurrence. Conclusion RT did not significantly increase the complication or reoperation rates if reconstructive surgery was performed using implants. Therefore, RT should be performed in patients at a high risk of recurrence.

Enterococcus faecium, particularly in its multidrug-resistant forms, causes invasive nosocomial infections. Given the limited data comparing the effectiveness of the European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing (EUCAST) and the CLSI clinical breakpoints (CBPs) for quinupristin–dalfopristin (QD) resistance and the need to evaluate their practical application, we retrospectively investigated the susceptibility patterns of 287 E.faecium bloodstream isolates from Korean hospitals to QD using the updated EUCAST and CLSI CBPs and two antimicrobial susceptibility testing methods: disk diffusion (DD) and Sensititre broth microdilution (Sensititre). QD resistance rates were 5.9% (CLSI) and 18.8% (EUCAST) for DD and 22.6% (CLSI) and 28.2% (EUCAST) for Sensititre. The most prevalent QD resistance gene types among QD-resistant isolates were ermB+msrC+ or ermB– msrC+. Categorical agreement between DD and Sensititre ranged from 77.7% to 90.7%, depending on the testing method and CBPs applied. The EUCAST zone diameter CBPs more effectively help identify QD-resistant E. faecium isolates using the DD method than the CLSI zone diameter CBPs. In comparison, the CLSI minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) CBPs provide more reliable results for resistance classification in the Sensititre method than EUCAST MIC CBPs. These findings would help improve clinical decision-making for treating multidrug-resistant E. faecium infections.

The auditory brainstem response (ABR) is a noninvasive test that measures neural activity in response to auditory stimuli. Racial differences in head shape have provided strong evidence for specific normative data and accurate device calibration. International standards emphasize the need for standardized procedures and references. This study aimed to outline the standard procedure and related normative ABR values. Standard procedures were performed according to International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) standards. Five studies from two countries were included to compare the normative values of the ABR. The dataset from the National Standard Reference Data Center (NSRDC) was used as reference. Normative values were described in terms of stimuli, latency, and amplitude. For click stimuli, the latency of the ABR showed different patterns across populations, such as those from Korea and the USA. Although the latencies reported by the NSRDC and for Koreans were relatively short, those reported for USA populations were longer. Using clicks, it was shown that the USA population had the largest ABR amplitude compared to those reported for the other two datasets. For Wave V latency using tone bursts, a similar pattern was identified with click stimuli. Frequency-specific trends were also observed. Although there is a lack of ABR datasets, the information and insights of the present study could be utilized as standard guidelines in research on ABR.