1.Clinical Outcomes and Use of Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator in Ischemic Heart Failure Patients with Reduced Ejection Fraction:A Retrospective Observational Study
Kyung Hoon CHO ; Ki Hong LEE ; Yong-Kyu LEE ; Seok OH ; Yongwhan LIM ; Joon Ho AHN ; Seung Hun LEE ; Dae Young HYUN ; Min Chul KIM ; Doo Sun SIM ; Young Joon HONG ; Ju Han KIM ; Youngkeun AHN ; Jang Hoon LEE ; Joo-Yong HAHN ; Yu-Ri KIM ; Nam Sik YOON ; Hyung Wook PARK ; Weon KIM ; Myung Ho JEONG ;
Chonnam Medical Journal 2026;62(2):55-63
Limited data exist regarding the real-world practices and clinical outcomes in patients with ischemic heart failure with reduced left ventricular ejection fractions (LVEFs).Using nationwide registry data from South Korea, we aimed to investigate long-term outcomes and clinical practices, especially implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) implantation, in patients with reduced LVEFs at least 40 days after acute myocardial infarction (AMI). Of 13,056 patients with AMI between 2011 and 2015, we analyzed 350 (median age, 66 years [interquartile range, 56-75]) who had LVEFs <40% on follow-up transthoracic echocardiogram 40 days after the index event. The primary outcome was cardiac-cause mortality at 3 years. Secondary outcomes comprised major cardiovascular events as well as outcomes defined by the use of ICDs, cardiac resynchronization therapy defibrillators (CRT-Ds), and electrophysiology studies. Among 350 patients, 39 (11.1%) died from cardiac causes during 3 years of follow-up. Eleven (3.1%) were hospitalized for ventricular tachycardia. The rate of ICD or CRT-D implantation up to 3 years was 5.7% (20/350). Cox time-to-event analysis revealed older age, LVEF <30%, diabetes mellitus, and previous MI or revascularization as positively associated with cardiac death, whereas the use of statins and body weight <67 kg were negatively associated. This nationwide Korean registry demonstrated that only 5.7% of patients who had reduced LVEFs after 40 days of AMI underwent ICD implantations over 3 years. Considering the high mortality, concerted efforts are needed to improve clinical outcomes for patients who may have been candidates for ICD implantation.
2.Management of Abrupt Vessel Closure During Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Narrative Review
Yongwhan LIM ; Seok OH ; Joon Ho AHN ; Seung Hun LEE ; Dae Young HYUN ; Kyung Hoon CHO ; Min Chul KIM ; Doo Sun SIM ; Young Joon HONG ; Ju Han KIM ; Youngkeun AHN
Journal of Cardiovascular Intervention 2026;5(1):1-10
Abrupt vessel closure (AVC) is a complication of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and is defined as the sudden cessation of forward coronary blood flow due to a variety of mechanisms. The incidence of AVC has markedly decreased from approximately 3.0% in the early era to about 0.3% today. Nevertheless, cardiovascular interventionists must remain prepared to manage AVC effectively, given its significant impact on clinical outcomes.AVC can arise from several mechanisms, including dissection, intramural hematoma, intracoronary thrombosis, air embolism, vasospasm, and no-reflow. The clinical impact of AVC varies depending on the extent of myocardium affected, ranging from asymptomatic events or transient ischemic chest pain to cardiogenic shock or cardiac arrest. Both a general approach for stabilizing hemodynamic consequences and an etiology-specific management strategy are essential. Hasty decision-making may worsen the situation, whereas a structured approach—focused on hemodynamic stabilization, logical diagnostic processes, and targeted interventions—can improve outcomes. In this narrative review, we describe the mechanisms underlying each etiology, outline mechanism-specific management strategies, and discuss general approaches to managing patients with AVC through logical diagnostic and treatment processes. We hope this review offers valuable insights into this uncommon but significant complication and enhances readers’ skills in managing AVC more effectively during PCI.
3.Risk Factors of Complications in Patients With Persistent or Long-Standing Persistent Atrial Fibrillation/Atrial Flutter Who Underwent Electrical Cardioversion:A Multicenter Cardioversion Registry
Ki-Hun KIM ; Junbeom PARK ; Donghwan KU ; Jino PARK ; Seunghwan KIM ; Dong-Kie KIM ; Doo-Il KIM ; Sun Gyu CHOI ; Pil-Sung YANG ; Ju Youn KIM ; Jaemin SHIM ; Jinhee AHN ; Sung Ho LEE ; Sung Il IM ; Hong Euy LIM
Journal of Korean Medical Science 2026;41(1):e19-
Background:
Identifying the risks related to the complications of electrical cardioversion (ECV) can alert the determinaton of rhythm control in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF).
Methods:
We retrospectively reviewed 1,058 patients who underwent ECV for persistent or long-standing persistent AF/atrial flutter (AFL) from multiple centers. Patients were classified into the no-complication (1,023 patients) and complication (35 patients) groups based on the following major complications: stroke and/or systemic embolism (SSE), myocardial infarction, major bleeding, implantation of cardiac implantable electronic devices, ventricular tachycardia/fibrillation, and death at 1 year follow-up after ECV.
Results:
Compared with the no-complication group, the complication group exhibited a higher proportion of female patients (37% vs. 22%), as well as a higher proportion of patients with older age (67 ± 11 vs. 61 ± 10 years), diabetes mellitus (DM) (49% vs. 24%), heart failure (HF) (49% vs. 30%), SSE (23% vs. 9%), high CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc (CV) score (3.6 ± 1.8 vs.2.2 ± 1.4), low left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) (50 ± 16% vs. 58 ± 21%), and high left atrial volume index (LAVI) (51 ± 26 vs. 40 ± 20 mL/m 2 ). Class I and III antiarrhythmics were less prescribed in the complication group than in the no-complication group (57% vs.76%). Univariate analysis for complications revealed age (≥ 65 years), female sex, DM, HF, SSE, LVEF (< 50%), LAVI (≥ 40 mL/m 2 ), CV score (≥ 3), bradycardia on Holter (< 60/min), and no antiarrhythmics as risk factors. Among these, multivariate analysis revealed clinical significance of female sex and SSE.
Conclusion
Female sex and a history of SSE were the most important risk factors of complications in patients with persistent or long-standing persistent AF/AFL who underwent ECV.
9.Comparison of Clinical Outcomes between Drug-Eluting Balloons and Drug-Eluting Stents in Patients with Small Coronary Artery Disease
Man Su KIM ; Seong Ho PARK ; Seok OH ; Dae Yong HYUN ; Seung Hun LEE ; Yong Hwan LIM ; Jun Ho AHN ; Kyung Hoon CHO ; Min Chul KIM ; Doo Sun SIM ; Young Joon HONG ; Ju Han KIM ; Youngkeun AHN ; Myung Ho JEONG
Korean Journal of Medicine 2024;99(5):253-262
Background/Aims:
Drug-eluting balloons (DEBs) represent a novel therapeutic approach for patients with small coronary artery disease. However, further studies are needed to compare the clinical efficacy of DEBs versus drug-eluting stents (DESs).
Methods:
In total, 492 patients (age, 67.9 ± 11.0 years; 339 men) with small coronary artery lesions (diameter < 2.75 mm) were randomly assigned to group I (DEB) (n = 104; age, 67.2 ± 10.7 years; 83 men) and group II (DES) (n = 388; age, 68.0 ± 11.1 years; 254 men). For inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) analysis, the study population was stratified into groups I (n = 269) and II (n = 280). We compared the incidences of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) between the two groups during 12 months of clinical follow-up.
Results:
Group I had shorter device lengths (22.4 ± 5.8 mm) compared with group II (27.4 ± 9.3 mm; p < 0.001). Additionally, devices in group I were smaller in diameter (2.4 ± 0.1 mm) compared with those in group II (2.6 ± 0.1 mm; p < 0.001). Left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) was lower in group I (53.8% ± 12.6%) than in group II (58.6% ± 11.9%; p < 0.001). After IPTW, no significant differences in LVEF were observed between groups I and II. During 12 months of follow-up, the incidence of total MACE did not differ between the two groups.
Conclusions
No significant differences were observed in clinical efficacy between DEB and DES for the treatment of small coronary artery disease. Therefore, DEB can be considered a viable alternative to DES in patients with small coronary artery disease.
10.Comparison of Clinical Outcomes between Drug-Eluting Balloons and Drug-Eluting Stents in Patients with Small Coronary Artery Disease
Man Su KIM ; Seong Ho PARK ; Seok OH ; Dae Yong HYUN ; Seung Hun LEE ; Yong Hwan LIM ; Jun Ho AHN ; Kyung Hoon CHO ; Min Chul KIM ; Doo Sun SIM ; Young Joon HONG ; Ju Han KIM ; Youngkeun AHN ; Myung Ho JEONG
Korean Journal of Medicine 2024;99(5):253-262
Background/Aims:
Drug-eluting balloons (DEBs) represent a novel therapeutic approach for patients with small coronary artery disease. However, further studies are needed to compare the clinical efficacy of DEBs versus drug-eluting stents (DESs).
Methods:
In total, 492 patients (age, 67.9 ± 11.0 years; 339 men) with small coronary artery lesions (diameter < 2.75 mm) were randomly assigned to group I (DEB) (n = 104; age, 67.2 ± 10.7 years; 83 men) and group II (DES) (n = 388; age, 68.0 ± 11.1 years; 254 men). For inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) analysis, the study population was stratified into groups I (n = 269) and II (n = 280). We compared the incidences of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) between the two groups during 12 months of clinical follow-up.
Results:
Group I had shorter device lengths (22.4 ± 5.8 mm) compared with group II (27.4 ± 9.3 mm; p < 0.001). Additionally, devices in group I were smaller in diameter (2.4 ± 0.1 mm) compared with those in group II (2.6 ± 0.1 mm; p < 0.001). Left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) was lower in group I (53.8% ± 12.6%) than in group II (58.6% ± 11.9%; p < 0.001). After IPTW, no significant differences in LVEF were observed between groups I and II. During 12 months of follow-up, the incidence of total MACE did not differ between the two groups.
Conclusions
No significant differences were observed in clinical efficacy between DEB and DES for the treatment of small coronary artery disease. Therefore, DEB can be considered a viable alternative to DES in patients with small coronary artery disease.

Result Analysis
Print
Save
E-mail