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.

Objective: Discharge against medical advice (DAMA) from emergency departments (EDs) accounts for 0.1% to 2.7%. DAMA carries a risk of increased mortality and readmissions, and higher medical nationwide cost. Our aim was to investigate the general characteristics of DAMA patients from ED and discover for methods to reduce DAMA. Methods: In this study, we collected and analyzed the medical records of patients who visited the ED of a general hospital from 2015 to 2020. The subjects were categorized into a DAMA group and a non-DAMA group. We compared these groups with respect to gender, age, duration of ED stay, way to visit, the reason for the visit, insurance type, accompanied by guardian, and severity classification. In addition, the factors related to ED revisits or hospitalization within one month after DAMA were analyzed. Results: Of the 209,076 patients, 1,982 were subject to DAMA from ED. The DAMA group had a higher ratio of visits to ED by ambulance (53.2% vs. 21.4%, P<0.001), critically ill patients (74.1% vs. 51.7%, P<0.001), and medical aid type 1 (7.7% vs. 3.4%, P<0.001). The factors for the high ratio of ED revisit within one month after DAMA were as follows: critically ill patients (odds ratio [OR], 1.916; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.305-2.814), accompanied by a guardian (OR, 1.525; 95% CI, 1.105-2.105), and medical aid type 1 (OR, 2.025; 95% CI, 1.358-3.02). Conclusion Developing a manual on DAMA procedures and a system that can provide economic and social support to patients is to be established to reduce DAMA from ED.

Background: A total of 8,303 individuals (4.3%) with adverse reactions (n=191,860) after vaccination developed serious conditions or died. Such health developments could cause people not vaccinated yet or waiting for a booster shot to become fearful of the vaccination. Methods: The 3-month (July–September 2021) clinical data of 41 patients from the family medicine department of a single medical center were analyzed retrospectively to determine risk factors and to investigate the clinical course to identify the cause of symptoms in detail. Results: A significant number of older adults aged over 50 years reported experiencing general weakness (P=0.026) but fewer incidences of fever than patients aged 50 years or younger (P=0.011). Eighteen of the 41 patients were requested to visit more than twice or consult a specialist. In 14 patients, the symptoms were explained by other medical causes. Conclusion The primary physician has a pivotal role in thoroughly evaluating patients who complain of adverseeffects after vaccination, considering the broad multitude of symptoms and medical conditions presented. To thoroughlyevaluate and appropriately advise patients with adverse reactions to their chosen vaccine, taking detailedmedical history and nutritional counseling are required to identify possible underlying causes, resolve symptoms,and educate them on self-care and regarding vaccines.

Background: There has been no comparison of the determinants of admission route between acute ischemic stroke (AIS) and acute myocardial infarction (AMI). We examined whether factors associated with direct versus transferred-in admission to regional cardiocerebrovascular centers (RCVCs) differed between AIS and AMI. Methods: Using a nationwide RCVC registry, we identified consecutive patients presenting with AMI and AIS between July 2016 and December 2018. We explored factors associated with direct admission to RCVCs in patients with AIS and AMI and examined whether those associations differed between AIS and AMI, including interaction terms between each factor and disease type in multivariable models. To explore the influence of emergency medical service (EMS) paramedics on hospital selection, stratified analyses according to use of EMS were also performed. Results: Among the 17,897 and 8,927 AIS and AMI patients, 66.6% and 48.2% were directly admitted to RCVCs, respectively. Multivariable analysis showed that previous coronary heart disease, prehospital awareness, higher education level, and EMS use increased the odds of direct admission to RCVCs, but the odds ratio (OR) was different between AIS and AMI (for the first 3 factors, AMI > AIS; for EMS use, AMI < AIS). EMS use was the single most important factor for both AIS and AMI (OR, 4.72 vs. 3.90). Hypertension and hyperlipidemia increased, while living alone decreased the odds of direct admission only in AMI;additionally, age (65–74 years), previous stroke, and presentation during non-working hours increased the odds only in AIS. EMS use weakened the associations between direct admission and most factors in both AIS and AMI. Conclusions Various patient factors were differentially associated with direct admission to RCVCs between AIS and AMI. Public education for symptom awareness and use of EMS is essential in optimizing the transportation and hospitalization of patients with AMI and AIS.

Background and Objectives: The aim of this study was to demonstrate the efficacy and safety of treatment with drug-coated balloon (DCB) in a large real-world population. Methods: Patients treated with DCBs were included in a multicenter observational registry that enrolled patients from 18 hospitals in Korea between January 2009 and December 2017. The primary outcome was target lesion failure (TLF) defined as a composite of cardiovascular death, target vessel myocardial infarction, and clinically indicated target lesion revascularization at 12 months. Results: The study included 2,509 patients with 2,666 DCB-treated coronary artery lesions (1,688 [63.3%] with in-stent restenosis [ISR] lesions vs. 978 [36.7%] with de novo lesions).The mean age with standard deviation was 65.7±11.3 years; 65.7% of the patients were men.At 12 months, the primary outcome, TLF, occurred in 179 (6.7%), 151 (8.9%), 28 (2.9%) patients among the total, ISR, and de novo lesion populations, respectively. A history of hypertension, diabetes, acute coronary syndrome, previous coronary artery bypass graft, reduced left ventricular ejection fraction, B2C lesion and ISR lesion were independent predictors of 12 months TLF in the overall study population. Conclusions This large multicenter DCB registry study revealed the favorable clinical outcome of DCB treatment in real-world practice in patient with ISR lesion as well as small de novo coronary lesion.

Background and Objectives: Endovascular therapy (EVT) first strategy has been widely adopted for the treatment of chronic limb threatening ischemia (CLTI) patients in realworld practice. This study aimed to investigate long-term outcomes of CLTI patients who underwent EVT and identify prognostic factors. Methods: From the retrospective cohorts of a Korean multicenter endovascular therapy registry, 1,036 patients with CLTI (792 men, 68.8 ± 9.5 years) were included. The primary endpoint was amputation-free survival (AFS) defined as the absence of major amputation or death. Secondary endpoints were major adverse limb events (MALE; a composite of major amputation, minor amputation, and reintervention). Results: Five-year AFS and freedom from MALE were 69.8% and 61%, respectively. After multivariate analysis, age (hazard ratio [HR], 1.476; p<0.001), end-stage renal disease (ESRD; HR, 2.340; p<0.001), Rutherford category (RC) 6 (HR, 1.456; p=0.036), and suboptimal EVT (HR, 1.798; p=0.005) were identified as predictors of major amputation or death, whereas smoking (HR, 0.594; p=0.007) was protective. Low body mass index (HR, 1.505; p=0.046), ESRD (HR, 1.648; p=0.001), femoropopliteal lesion (HR, 1.877; p=0.004), RC-6 (HR, 1.471;p=0.008), and suboptimal EVT (HR, 1.847; p=0.001) were predictors of MALE. The highest hazard rates were observed during the first 6 months for both major amputation or death and MALE. After that, the hazard rate decreased and rose again after 3–4 years. Conclusions In CLTI patients, long-term outcomes of EVT were acceptable. ESRD, RC-6, and suboptimal EVT were common predictors for poor clinical outcomes.

Background/Aims: The prevalence and effects of airway diseases, including asthma, eosinophilic bronchitis (EB), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), and asthma-COPD overlap (ACO) have not been thoroughly studied in patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF). This study aimed to evaluate the prevalence of airway diseases in patients with IPF and to identify the differences in symptoms based on the presence of airway diseases. Methods: This single-institution prospective cohort study was conducted from June 2017 to September 2018, at the Seoul National University Hospital. Spirometry with bronchodilator, methacholine bronchial provocation test, induced sputum with eosinophil stain, and exhaled nitric oxide were performed to confirm the presence of airway disease. The modified Medical Research Council (mMRC) dyspnea scale, COPD assessment test (CAT), St. George’s Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ), EuroQol-5 dimension (EQ-5D) index, and cough-specific quality of life questionnaire (CQLQ) data were collected to assess symptom severity. Results: Total 147 patients with IPF were screened, and 70 patients were analyzed. The prevalence of airway diseases in the participants was as follows: 5.0% had COPD, 1.7% had asthma, 3.3% had ACO, and 1.7% had EB. The mMRC, CAT, SGRQ, EQ-5D, and CQLQ scores did not differ regardless of combined airway disease. After 3 months, the SGRQ (p = 0.028) and CQLQ (p = 0.030) scores were significantly higher in patients with airway disease than in those without. Conclusions The prevalence of airway diseases in patients with IPF is low, but when airway diseases are accompanied by IPF, symptom severity and quality of life may worsen rapidly.