For patients with a few remaining abutment teeth, traditional removable partial dentures and implant-supported fixed prostheses are common treatment options.However, removable dentures often struggle to provide stability, especially as bone resorption occurs over time. Implant-supported fixed prostheses offer longterm stability but are costly and affected by anatomical and medical factors. A newer option is implant-assisted removable partial dentures, which use a minimal number of implants combined with a surveyed crown. This approach enhances support, retention, and stability while reducing financial and surgical burdens. It also improves the prognosis of the remaining teeth, increases patient satisfaction, and enhances masticatory function, making it a promising alternative to conventional removable dentures.

For patients with a few remaining abutment teeth, traditional removable partial dentures and implant-supported fixed prostheses are common treatment options.However, removable dentures often struggle to provide stability, especially as bone resorption occurs over time. Implant-supported fixed prostheses offer longterm stability but are costly and affected by anatomical and medical factors. A newer option is implant-assisted removable partial dentures, which use a minimal number of implants combined with a surveyed crown. This approach enhances support, retention, and stability while reducing financial and surgical burdens. It also improves the prognosis of the remaining teeth, increases patient satisfaction, and enhances masticatory function, making it a promising alternative to conventional removable dentures.

For patients with a few remaining abutment teeth, traditional removable partial dentures and implant-supported fixed prostheses are common treatment options.However, removable dentures often struggle to provide stability, especially as bone resorption occurs over time. Implant-supported fixed prostheses offer longterm stability but are costly and affected by anatomical and medical factors. A newer option is implant-assisted removable partial dentures, which use a minimal number of implants combined with a surveyed crown. This approach enhances support, retention, and stability while reducing financial and surgical burdens. It also improves the prognosis of the remaining teeth, increases patient satisfaction, and enhances masticatory function, making it a promising alternative to conventional removable dentures.

For patients with a few remaining abutment teeth, traditional removable partial dentures and implant-supported fixed prostheses are common treatment options.However, removable dentures often struggle to provide stability, especially as bone resorption occurs over time. Implant-supported fixed prostheses offer longterm stability but are costly and affected by anatomical and medical factors. A newer option is implant-assisted removable partial dentures, which use a minimal number of implants combined with a surveyed crown. This approach enhances support, retention, and stability while reducing financial and surgical burdens. It also improves the prognosis of the remaining teeth, increases patient satisfaction, and enhances masticatory function, making it a promising alternative to conventional removable dentures.

For patients with a few remaining abutment teeth, traditional removable partial dentures and implant-supported fixed prostheses are common treatment options.However, removable dentures often struggle to provide stability, especially as bone resorption occurs over time. Implant-supported fixed prostheses offer longterm stability but are costly and affected by anatomical and medical factors. A newer option is implant-assisted removable partial dentures, which use a minimal number of implants combined with a surveyed crown. This approach enhances support, retention, and stability while reducing financial and surgical burdens. It also improves the prognosis of the remaining teeth, increases patient satisfaction, and enhances masticatory function, making it a promising alternative to conventional removable dentures.

Background/Aims: Combination immunotherapy, exemplified by atezolizumab plus bevacizumab, has become the standard of care for inoperable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, the lack of predictive biomarkers and limited understanding of response mechanisms remain a challenge. Methods: Using data from the IMbrave150plus cohort, we applied an immune signature score (ISS) predictor to stratify HCC patients treated with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab or with sorafenib alone into potential high and low response groups. By applying multiple statistical approaches including a Bayesian covariate prediction algorithm, we refined the signature to 10 key genes (ISS10) for clinical use while maintaining similar predictive power to the full model. We further validated ISS10 in an independent HCC cohort treated with nivolumab plus ipilimumab. Results: The study identified a significant association between the ISS and treatment response. Among patients classified as high responders, those treated with the atezolizumab plus bevacizumab combination exhibited improved overall and progression-free survival as well as better objective response rate compared to those treated with sorafenib. We also observed a significant correlation between ISS10 and response to nivolumab plus ipilimumab treatment. Analysis of immune cell subpopulations revealed distinct characteristics associated with ISS subtypes. In particular, the ISS10 high subtype displayed a more favorable immune environment with higher proportions of antitumor macrophages and activated T-cells, potentially explaining its better response. Conclusions Our study suggests that ISS and ISS10 are promising predictive biomarkers for enhanced therapeutic outcomes in HCC patients undergoing combination immunotherapy. These markers are crucial for refining patient stratification and personalized treatment approaches to advance the effectiveness of standard-of-care regimens.

Chronic constipation is one of the most common digestive diseases encountered in clinical practice. Constipation manifests as a variety of symptoms, such as infrequent bowel movements, hard stools, feeling of incomplete evacuation, straining at defecation, a sense of anorectal blockage during defecation, and use of digital maneuvers to assist defecation. During the diagnosis of chronic constipation, the Bristol Stool Form Scale, colonoscopy, and a digital rectal examination are useful for objective symptom evaluation and differential diagnosis of secondary constipation. Physiological tests for functional constipation have complementary roles and are recommended for patients who have failed to respond to treatment with available laxatives and those who are strongly suspected of having a defecatory disorder. As new evidence on the diagnosis and management of functional constipation emerged, the need to revise the previous guideline was suggested. Therefore, these evidence-based guidelines have proposed recommendations developed using a systematic review and meta-analysis of the treatment options available for functional constipation. The benefits and cautions of new pharmacological agents (such as lubiprostone and linaclotide) and conventional laxatives have been described through a meta-analysis. The guidelines consist of 34 recommendations, including 3 concerning the definition and epidemiology of functional constipation, 9 regarding diagnoses, and 22 regarding managements. Clinicians (including primary physicians, general health professionals, medical students, residents, and other healthcare professionals) and patients can refer to these guidelines to make informed decisions regarding the management of functional constipation.