This study aimed to assess the utilization trends of pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) among lung cancer patients in Korea using the National Health Insurance Service (NHIS) database (2017 to 2021). PR was introduced and covered under the NHIS in 2016, primarily for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, but recent evidence suggests its benefits for lung cancer patients. Data extraction was based on Korea Informative Classification of Diseases 8th revision codes C33 and C34, with PR prescriptions identified by codes MM440 and MM290.Descriptive statistical analysis was performed, and propensity score matching was used for comparison between PR and non-PR groups. Results showed a significant increase in PR utilization, with the number of patients receiving PR (MM440) rising from 1,002 in 2017 to 3,723 in 2021, indicating a 3.7-fold increase. However, the proportion of patients receiving PR remained low at 2.9% in 2021. Enhanced access to PR services and improved evaluation strategies are essential for optimizing patient outcomes.

This study aimed to assess the utilization trends of pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) among lung cancer patients in Korea using the National Health Insurance Service (NHIS) database (2017 to 2021). PR was introduced and covered under the NHIS in 2016, primarily for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, but recent evidence suggests its benefits for lung cancer patients. Data extraction was based on Korea Informative Classification of Diseases 8th revision codes C33 and C34, with PR prescriptions identified by codes MM440 and MM290.Descriptive statistical analysis was performed, and propensity score matching was used for comparison between PR and non-PR groups. Results showed a significant increase in PR utilization, with the number of patients receiving PR (MM440) rising from 1,002 in 2017 to 3,723 in 2021, indicating a 3.7-fold increase. However, the proportion of patients receiving PR remained low at 2.9% in 2021. Enhanced access to PR services and improved evaluation strategies are essential for optimizing patient outcomes.

This study aimed to assess the utilization trends of pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) among lung cancer patients in Korea using the National Health Insurance Service (NHIS) database (2017 to 2021). PR was introduced and covered under the NHIS in 2016, primarily for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, but recent evidence suggests its benefits for lung cancer patients. Data extraction was based on Korea Informative Classification of Diseases 8th revision codes C33 and C34, with PR prescriptions identified by codes MM440 and MM290.Descriptive statistical analysis was performed, and propensity score matching was used for comparison between PR and non-PR groups. Results showed a significant increase in PR utilization, with the number of patients receiving PR (MM440) rising from 1,002 in 2017 to 3,723 in 2021, indicating a 3.7-fold increase. However, the proportion of patients receiving PR remained low at 2.9% in 2021. Enhanced access to PR services and improved evaluation strategies are essential for optimizing patient outcomes.

This study aimed to assess the utilization trends of pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) among lung cancer patients in Korea using the National Health Insurance Service (NHIS) database (2017 to 2021). PR was introduced and covered under the NHIS in 2016, primarily for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, but recent evidence suggests its benefits for lung cancer patients. Data extraction was based on Korea Informative Classification of Diseases 8th revision codes C33 and C34, with PR prescriptions identified by codes MM440 and MM290.Descriptive statistical analysis was performed, and propensity score matching was used for comparison between PR and non-PR groups. Results showed a significant increase in PR utilization, with the number of patients receiving PR (MM440) rising from 1,002 in 2017 to 3,723 in 2021, indicating a 3.7-fold increase. However, the proportion of patients receiving PR remained low at 2.9% in 2021. Enhanced access to PR services and improved evaluation strategies are essential for optimizing patient outcomes.

Purpose: This study was performed to examine the ultrasonography (US) features of normal parathyroid glands (PTGs) that were identified on preoperative US and subsequently confirmed during thyroid surgery. Methods: This retrospective study included a consecutive sample of 161 patients (mean±standard deviation age, 56±14 years; 128 women) with 294 normal PTGs identified on preoperative US PTG mapping and confirmed during thyroidectomy. A presumed normal PTG on US was defined as a small, round to oval, hyperechoic structure in the central neck. These presumed normal PTGs, as identified on preoperative US, were mapped onto thyroid computed tomography images and diagrams of the thyroid gland and neck. During the preoperative real-time US examinations, the location, size, shape, echogenicity, echotexture, and intraglandular vascular flow of the identified presumed PTGs were assessed. These characteristics were compared between superior and inferior PTGs using the generalized estimating equation method. Results: The typical US features of homogeneous hyperechogenicity without intraglandular vascular flow were observed in 267 (90.8%) normal PTGs, while atypical features, including isoechogenicity (1.0%), heterogeneous echotexture with focal hypoechogenicity (5.8%), and intraglandular vascular flow (3.7%), were noted in 27 (9.2%). Inferior PTGs were more frequently identified in posterolateral (36.1% vs. 5.3%) and thyroid pole locations (29.9% vs. 5.3%), and less frequently in posteromedial locations (29.2% vs. 88.0%), compared to superior PTGs (P<0.001 for each comparison). Conclusion Most normal PTGs displayed the typical US features of homogeneous hyperechogenicity without intraglandular vascular flow. However, in rare cases, normal PTGs exhibited atypical features, including isoechogenicity, heterogeneous echotexture with focal hypoechogenicity, and intraglandular vascular flow.

Purpose: We aimed to assess the clinical efficacy and safety of combining silodosin and solifenacin for overactive bladder (OAB) in females. Methods: A retrospective analysis of 586 females with OAB was conducted. Patients received either combination therapy (silodosin 8 mg + solifenacin 5 mg) or monotherapy (solifenacin 5 mg) for 12 weeks. Baseline and follow-up assessments included the overactive bladder symptom score (OABSS), International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), quality of life (QoL), maximum flow rate (Qmax), voided volume (VV), and postvoid residual urine volume (PVR). Results: Overall, 287 and 299 patients received combination therapy and monotherapy respectively. Both groups experienced significant improvements in OABSS and total IPSS after 12 weeks. The combination therapy group demonstrated a greater improvement in QoL compared to the monotherapy group (P=0.031). No significant differences were observed in Qmax or VV between the groups. However, the combination therapy group showed a significant reduction in PVR compared to the monotherapy group (P<0.001). Conclusions Combining silodosin with solifenacin significantly improved OAB symptoms and QoL in females. This combination therapy was particularly effective in reducing postvoid residual volume compared to solifenacin alone. These findings suggest that adding an alpha-blocker to antimuscarinic therapy can enhance OAB management and patient satisfaction.

Lecanemab (product name Leqembi ® ) is an anti-amyloid monoclonal antibody treatment approved for use in Korea for patients with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) or mild dementia due to Alzheimer's disease. The Korean Dementia Association has created recommendations for the appropriate use of lecanemab to assist clinicians. These recommendations include selecting patients for administration, necessary pre-administration tests and preparations,administration methods, monitoring for amyloid related imaging abnormalities (ARIA), and communication with patients and caregivers. Lecanemab is recommended for patients with MCI or mild dementia who confirmed positive amyloid biomarkers, and should not be administered to patients with severe hypersensitivity to lecanemab or those unable to undergo magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) evaluation. To predict the risk of ARIA before administration, apolipoprotein E genotyping is conducted, and regular brain MRI evaluations are recommended to monitor for ARIA during treatment. The most common adverse reactions are infusion-related reactions, which require appropriate management upon occurrence. Additional caution is needed when co-administering with anticoagulants or tissue plasminogen activator due to the risk of macrohemorrhage. Clinicians should consider the efficacy and necessary conditions for administration, as well as the safety of lecanemab, to make a comprehensive decision regarding its use.

Purpose: We aimed to assess the clinical efficacy and safety of combining silodosin and solifenacin for overactive bladder (OAB) in females. Methods: A retrospective analysis of 586 females with OAB was conducted. Patients received either combination therapy (silodosin 8 mg + solifenacin 5 mg) or monotherapy (solifenacin 5 mg) for 12 weeks. Baseline and follow-up assessments included the overactive bladder symptom score (OABSS), International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), quality of life (QoL), maximum flow rate (Qmax), voided volume (VV), and postvoid residual urine volume (PVR). Results: Overall, 287 and 299 patients received combination therapy and monotherapy respectively. Both groups experienced significant improvements in OABSS and total IPSS after 12 weeks. The combination therapy group demonstrated a greater improvement in QoL compared to the monotherapy group (P=0.031). No significant differences were observed in Qmax or VV between the groups. However, the combination therapy group showed a significant reduction in PVR compared to the monotherapy group (P<0.001). Conclusions Combining silodosin with solifenacin significantly improved OAB symptoms and QoL in females. This combination therapy was particularly effective in reducing postvoid residual volume compared to solifenacin alone. These findings suggest that adding an alpha-blocker to antimuscarinic therapy can enhance OAB management and patient satisfaction.

Background/Aims: We investigated how interactions between humans and computer-aided detection (CADe) systems are influenced by the user’s experience and polyp characteristics. Methods: We developed a CADe system using YOLOv4, trained on 16,996 polyp images from 1,914 patients and 1,800 synthesized sessile serrated lesion (SSL) images. The performance of polyp detection with CADe assistance was evaluated using a computerized test module. Eighteen participants were grouped by colonoscopy experience (nurses, fellows, and experts). The value added by CADe based on the histopathology and detection difficulty of polyps were analyzed. Results: The area under the curve for CADe was 0.87 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.83 to 0.91). CADe assistance increased overall polyp detection accuracy from 69.7% to 77.7% (odds ratio [OR], 1.88; 95% CI, 1.69 to 2.09). However, accuracy decreased when CADe inaccurately detected a polyp (OR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.58 to 0.87). The impact of CADe assistance was most and least prominent in the nurses (OR, 1.97; 95% CI, 1.71 to 2.27) and the experts (OR, 1.42; 95% CI, 1.15 to 1.74), respectively. Participants demonstrated better sensitivity with CADe assistance, achieving 81.7% for adenomas and 92.4% for easy-to-detect polyps, surpassing the standalone CADe performance of 79.7% and 89.8%, respectively. For SSLs and difficult-to-detect polyps, participants' sensitivities with CADe assistance (66.5% and 71.5%, respectively) were below those of standalone CADe (81.1% and 74.4%). Compared to the other two groups (56.1% and 61.7%), the expert group showed sensitivity closest to that of standalone CADe in detecting SSLs (79.7% vs 81.1%, respectively). Conclusions CADe assistance boosts polyp detection significantly, but its effectiveness depends on the user’s experience, particularly for challenging lesions.

Lecanemab (product name Leqembi ® ) is an anti-amyloid monoclonal antibody treatment approved for use in Korea for patients with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) or mild dementia due to Alzheimer's disease. The Korean Dementia Association has created recommendations for the appropriate use of lecanemab to assist clinicians. These recommendations include selecting patients for administration, necessary pre-administration tests and preparations,administration methods, monitoring for amyloid related imaging abnormalities (ARIA), and communication with patients and caregivers. Lecanemab is recommended for patients with MCI or mild dementia who confirmed positive amyloid biomarkers, and should not be administered to patients with severe hypersensitivity to lecanemab or those unable to undergo magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) evaluation. To predict the risk of ARIA before administration, apolipoprotein E genotyping is conducted, and regular brain MRI evaluations are recommended to monitor for ARIA during treatment. The most common adverse reactions are infusion-related reactions, which require appropriate management upon occurrence. Additional caution is needed when co-administering with anticoagulants or tissue plasminogen activator due to the risk of macrohemorrhage. Clinicians should consider the efficacy and necessary conditions for administration, as well as the safety of lecanemab, to make a comprehensive decision regarding its use.