Background: Primary cutaneous CD30+ lymphoproliferative disorders (pcCD30-LPDs) are a diseases with various clinical and prognostic characteristics. Objective: Increasing our knowledge of the clinical characteristics of pcCD30-LPDs and identifying potential prognostic variables in an Asian population. Methods: Clinicopathological features and survival data of pcCD30-LPD cases obtained from 22 hospitals in South Korea were examined. Results: A total of 413 cases of pcCD30-LPDs (lymphomatoid papulosis [LYP], n=237; primary cutaneous anaplastic large cell lymphoma [C-ALCL], n=176) were included. Ninety percent of LYP patients and roughly 50% of C-ALCL patients presented with multiple skin lesions. Both LYP and C-ALCL affected the lower limbs most frequently. Multiplicity and advanced T stage of LYP lesions were associated with a chronic course longer than 6 months. Clinical morphology with patch lesions and elevated serum lactate dehydrogenase were significantly associated with LPDs during follow-up in LYP patients. Extracutaneous involvement of C-ALCL occurred in 13.2% of patients. Lesions larger than 5 cm and increased serum lactate dehydrogenase were associated with a poor prognosis in C-ALCL. The survival of patients with C-ALCL was unaffected by the anatomical locations of skin lesions or other pathological factors. Conclusion The multiplicity or size of skin lesions was associated with a chronic course of LYP and survival among patients with C-ALCL.

Objective: To compare the safety profiles of biportal endoscopic spinal surgery (BESS) and microscopic spinal surgery (MSS) for lumbar disc herniation and spinal stenosis by analyzing the associated adverse events. Methods: We pooled data from 2 prospective randomized controlled trials involving 220 patients (110 in each group) who underwent single-level lumbar surgery. Participants aged 20–80 years with radiating pain due to lumbar disc herniation or spinal stenosis were included in this study. Adverse events were recorded and analyzed over a 12-month follow-up period. Results: The overall adverse event rates were 9.1% (10 of 110) in the BESS group and 17.3% (19 of 110) in the MSS group, which were not statistically significantly different (p=0.133). Notably, wound dehiscence occurred in 8.2% of MSS cases but in none of the BESS cases. Both groups showed similarly low rates of complications, such as dural tears, epidural hematoma, and nerve root injury. The most common adverse event in the BESS group was recurrent disc herniation (2.7%), whereas that in the MSS group was wound dehiscence (8.2%). Conclusion BESS demonstrated a safety profile comparable to that of MSS for the treatment of lumbar disc herniation and spinal stenosis, with a trend towards fewer overall complications. BESS offers particular advantages in terms of reducing wound-related complications. These findings suggest that BESS is a safe alternative to conventional MSS and potentially offers the benefits of a minimally invasive approach without compromising patient safety.

Objective: To compare the safety profiles of biportal endoscopic spinal surgery (BESS) and microscopic spinal surgery (MSS) for lumbar disc herniation and spinal stenosis by analyzing the associated adverse events. Methods: We pooled data from 2 prospective randomized controlled trials involving 220 patients (110 in each group) who underwent single-level lumbar surgery. Participants aged 20–80 years with radiating pain due to lumbar disc herniation or spinal stenosis were included in this study. Adverse events were recorded and analyzed over a 12-month follow-up period. Results: The overall adverse event rates were 9.1% (10 of 110) in the BESS group and 17.3% (19 of 110) in the MSS group, which were not statistically significantly different (p=0.133). Notably, wound dehiscence occurred in 8.2% of MSS cases but in none of the BESS cases. Both groups showed similarly low rates of complications, such as dural tears, epidural hematoma, and nerve root injury. The most common adverse event in the BESS group was recurrent disc herniation (2.7%), whereas that in the MSS group was wound dehiscence (8.2%). Conclusion BESS demonstrated a safety profile comparable to that of MSS for the treatment of lumbar disc herniation and spinal stenosis, with a trend towards fewer overall complications. BESS offers particular advantages in terms of reducing wound-related complications. These findings suggest that BESS is a safe alternative to conventional MSS and potentially offers the benefits of a minimally invasive approach without compromising patient safety.

Objective: To compare the safety profiles of biportal endoscopic spinal surgery (BESS) and microscopic spinal surgery (MSS) for lumbar disc herniation and spinal stenosis by analyzing the associated adverse events. Methods: We pooled data from 2 prospective randomized controlled trials involving 220 patients (110 in each group) who underwent single-level lumbar surgery. Participants aged 20–80 years with radiating pain due to lumbar disc herniation or spinal stenosis were included in this study. Adverse events were recorded and analyzed over a 12-month follow-up period. Results: The overall adverse event rates were 9.1% (10 of 110) in the BESS group and 17.3% (19 of 110) in the MSS group, which were not statistically significantly different (p=0.133). Notably, wound dehiscence occurred in 8.2% of MSS cases but in none of the BESS cases. Both groups showed similarly low rates of complications, such as dural tears, epidural hematoma, and nerve root injury. The most common adverse event in the BESS group was recurrent disc herniation (2.7%), whereas that in the MSS group was wound dehiscence (8.2%). Conclusion BESS demonstrated a safety profile comparable to that of MSS for the treatment of lumbar disc herniation and spinal stenosis, with a trend towards fewer overall complications. BESS offers particular advantages in terms of reducing wound-related complications. These findings suggest that BESS is a safe alternative to conventional MSS and potentially offers the benefits of a minimally invasive approach without compromising patient safety.

Objective: To compare the safety profiles of biportal endoscopic spinal surgery (BESS) and microscopic spinal surgery (MSS) for lumbar disc herniation and spinal stenosis by analyzing the associated adverse events. Methods: We pooled data from 2 prospective randomized controlled trials involving 220 patients (110 in each group) who underwent single-level lumbar surgery. Participants aged 20–80 years with radiating pain due to lumbar disc herniation or spinal stenosis were included in this study. Adverse events were recorded and analyzed over a 12-month follow-up period. Results: The overall adverse event rates were 9.1% (10 of 110) in the BESS group and 17.3% (19 of 110) in the MSS group, which were not statistically significantly different (p=0.133). Notably, wound dehiscence occurred in 8.2% of MSS cases but in none of the BESS cases. Both groups showed similarly low rates of complications, such as dural tears, epidural hematoma, and nerve root injury. The most common adverse event in the BESS group was recurrent disc herniation (2.7%), whereas that in the MSS group was wound dehiscence (8.2%). Conclusion BESS demonstrated a safety profile comparable to that of MSS for the treatment of lumbar disc herniation and spinal stenosis, with a trend towards fewer overall complications. BESS offers particular advantages in terms of reducing wound-related complications. These findings suggest that BESS is a safe alternative to conventional MSS and potentially offers the benefits of a minimally invasive approach without compromising patient safety.

Objective: To compare the safety profiles of biportal endoscopic spinal surgery (BESS) and microscopic spinal surgery (MSS) for lumbar disc herniation and spinal stenosis by analyzing the associated adverse events. Methods: We pooled data from 2 prospective randomized controlled trials involving 220 patients (110 in each group) who underwent single-level lumbar surgery. Participants aged 20–80 years with radiating pain due to lumbar disc herniation or spinal stenosis were included in this study. Adverse events were recorded and analyzed over a 12-month follow-up period. Results: The overall adverse event rates were 9.1% (10 of 110) in the BESS group and 17.3% (19 of 110) in the MSS group, which were not statistically significantly different (p=0.133). Notably, wound dehiscence occurred in 8.2% of MSS cases but in none of the BESS cases. Both groups showed similarly low rates of complications, such as dural tears, epidural hematoma, and nerve root injury. The most common adverse event in the BESS group was recurrent disc herniation (2.7%), whereas that in the MSS group was wound dehiscence (8.2%). Conclusion BESS demonstrated a safety profile comparable to that of MSS for the treatment of lumbar disc herniation and spinal stenosis, with a trend towards fewer overall complications. BESS offers particular advantages in terms of reducing wound-related complications. These findings suggest that BESS is a safe alternative to conventional MSS and potentially offers the benefits of a minimally invasive approach without compromising patient safety.

Background: Postpartum depression (PPD) can negatively affect infant well-being and child development. Although the frequency and risk factors of PPD symptoms might vary depending on the country and culture, there is limited research on these risk factors among Korean women. This study aimed to elucidate the potential risk factors of PPD throughout pregnancy to help improve PPD screening and prevention in Korean women. Methods: The pregnant women at 12 gestational weeks (GW) were enrolled from two obstetric specialized hospitals from March 2013 to November 2017. A questionnaire survey was administered at 12 GW, 24 GW, 36 GW, and 4 weeks postpartum. Depressive symptoms were assessed using the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale, and PPD was defined as a score of ≥ 10. Results: PPD was prevalent in 16.3% (410/2,512) of the participants. Depressive feeling at 12 GW and postpartum factors of stress, relationship with children, depressive feeling, fear, sadness, and neonatal intensive care unit admission of baby were significantly associated with a higher risk of PPD. Meanwhile, high postpartum quality of life and marital satisfaction at postpartum period were significantly associated with a lower risk of PPD. We developed a model for predicting PPD using factors as mentioned above and it had an area under the curve of 0.871. Conclusion Depressive feeling at 12 GW and postpartum stress, fear, sadness, relationship with children, low quality of life, and low marital satisfaction increased the risk of PPD. A risk model that comprises significant factors can effectively predict PPD and can be helpful for its prevention and appropriate treatment.

Previously, most fractures have been treated through bone reduction and immobilization. With an increase in the patients’ need for an early return to their normal function, development in surgical techniques and materials have accelerated. However, delayed union or non-union of the fracture site sometimes inhibits immediate return to normal life. To enhance fracture healing, diverse materials and methods have been developed. This is a review on the current modalities of fracture healing enhancement, which aims to provide a comprehensive knowledge regarding fracture healing for researchers and health practitioners.

Background/Aims: Histamine-2 receptor antagonists (H2RA) are used to treat acid-related disorders and functional dyspepsia. In contrast to other H2RAs, nizatidine promotes gastric emptying (GE). We investigated the effects of nizatidine and famotidine on intragastric pH and the GE rate in rats exposed to stress. Materials and Methods: We used 8-week-old male Wistar rats. Based on administration of water or drugs after an overnight fast, the animals were categorized into the nonstress-water, stress-water, stress-nizatidine, stress-famotidine, and stress-nizatidine with mosapride groups. The rats had access to pre-weighed food for 10 minutes, and those in the stress groups were exposed to 1 hour of restraint stress. Intragastric pH was measured under isoflurane anesthesia, and the GE rate was measured after the rats were sacrificed. Results: The GE rate was significantly lower in the stress-water and stress-famotidine groups than in the nonstress-water group. However, GE in the stress-nizatidine and stress-nizatidine with mosapride group did not significantly differ from that in the nonstress- water group. The GE rate was significantly higher in the stress-nizatidine with mosapride than in the stress-famotidine group. Intragastric pH was significantly higher in the stress-nizatidine and stress-famotidine groups than in the stress-water group. Nonetheless, there was no significant difference in pH between the stress-nizatidine and stress-famotidine groups. The intragastric pH was slightly but significantly higher in the stress-nizatidine with mosapride group than in the stress-nizatidine and stress-famotidine groups. Conclusions In contrast to famotidine, nizatidine prevents stress-induced GE delay, which suggests that nizatidine is superior to other H2RAs for treatment of functional dyspepsia associated with delayed GE.

Background: Isotretinoin is a gold standard treatment for moderate to severe acne vulgaris but is associated with cheilitis. Though moisturizing agents or petrolatum have been suggested, uncomfortable isotretinoin-induced cheilitis can disrupt treatment of acne patients. Topical tacrolimus has been used in atopic dermatitis with good safety and efficacy; however, there is no study of application of topical tacrolimus in cheilitis induced by isotretinoin. Objective: In this study, we aimed to describe the efficacy of topical tacrolimus 0.1% ointment on cheilitis associated with isotretinoin therapy using isotretinoin cheilitis grading scale (ICGS), investigator global assessment (IGA), and patient global assessment (PGA). We also observed the side effects of topical tacrolimus ointment. Methods: Fifty acne vulgaris patients with isotretinoin-induced cheilitis were randomly allocated to either topical tacrolimus or petrolatum treatment using permuted-block randomization. Patients were followed-up at 4 and 8 weeks, at which cheilitis lesions were photographed and evaluated with ICGS, IGA, and PGA. Results: Compared to petrolatum group, tacrolimus group had greater responses to treatment as measured by mean values of ICGS, IGA, PGA at follow-up visits. Also, the ICGS decrease was larger in the tacrolimus group compared with the petrolatum group even according to isotretinoin dose. Conclusion Topical tacrolimus ointment had superior efficacy in treating cheilitis induced by isotretinoin compared to petrolatum. Erythema, fissures, scales, and commissures all showed better response to tacrolimus ointment. Topical tacrolimus ointment can be administered as an effective strategy in treatment of cheilitis as a complication of isotretinoin therapy and can improve compliance of acne patients.