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.

Background: The epidemiology of pathogenic bacteria varies according to the socioeconomic status and antimicrobial resistance status. However, longitudinal epidemiological studies to evaluate the changes in species distribution and antimicrobial susceptibility of pathogenic bacteria nationwide are lacking. We retrospectively investigated the nationwide trends in species distribution and antimicrobial susceptibility of pathogenic bacteria over the last 20 years in Korea. Methods: From 1997 to 2016, annual cumulative antimicrobial susceptibility and species distribution data were collected from 12 university hospitals in five provinces and four metropolitan cities in South Korea. Results: The prevalence of Staphylococcus aureus was the highest (13.1%) until 2012 but decreased to 10.3% in 2016, consistent with the decrease in oxacillin resistance from 76.1% in 2008 to 62.5% in 2016. While the cefotaxime resistance of Escherichia coli increased from 9.0% in 1997 to 34.2% in 2016, E. coli became the most common species since 2013, accounting for 14.5% of all isolates in 2016. Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Acinetobacter baumannii rose to third and fifth places in 2008 and 2010, respectively, while imipenem resistance increased from 13.9% to 30.8% and 0.7% to 73.5% during the study period, respectively.Streptococcus agalactiae became the most common pathogenic streptococcal species in 2016, as the prevalence of Streptococcus pneumoniae decreased since 2010. During the same period, pneumococcal penicillin susceptibility decreased to 79.0%, and levofloxacin susceptibility of S. agalactiae decreased to 77.1% in 2016. Conclusion The epidemiology of pathogenic bacteria has changed significantly over the past 20 years according to trends in antimicrobial resistance in Korea. Efforts to confine antimicrobial resistance would change the epidemiology of pathogenic bacteria and, consequently, the diagnosis and treatment of infectious diseases.