Background/Aims: Data from Asia regarding the short-term and long-term outcomes for acute severe ulcerative colitis (ASUC) are limited. We assessed the outcomes of ASUC, identified the risk factors for colectomy, and compared colectomy rates between the pre-biologics and post-biologics eras in Taiwan. Methods: The patients with an ASUC diagnosis between January 2013 and March 2022 at 5 tertiary medical centers were retrospectively analyzed. Results: In total, 98 patients were enrolled, with 68.4% diagnosed in the post-biologics era. In 78.6% of the ASUC patients initially received intravenous steroid therapy, for which the success rate was 74.1%. As for rescue therapy, 15 patients (93.8%) received biologics and 1 (6.3%) received cyclosporin. Biologics rescue therapy had a 93.3% success rate. One (1%) mortality due to septic shock occurred. The colectomy rate for index ASUC admission was 11.2%. Patients receiving colectomy were predominantly male (P= 0.012) and at older age (P= 0.016). Higher C-reactive protein (P= 0.035), lower albumin (P= 0.017), and hemoglobin (P= 0.023) levels were associated with colectomy risk. During a median follow-up of 24 months, 13 patients (15.1%) had recurrent ASUC and 23.1% of patients received colectomy. The accumulated colectomy rate at 3 years did not differ between the pre- and post-biologics eras (16.1% vs. 13.4%, P= 0.270). Conclusions This is the first Asian study on ASUC to compare colectomy rates between the prebiologics and post-biologics eras, revealing no significant difference. The recurrent ASUC had a higher colectomy rate than the index ASUC.

Background: Cerebral hypoxia-ischemia impairs brain development in extremely preterm infants and is associated with poor neurological outcomes. Near-infrared spectroscopy (NIRS) is a noninvasive continuous monitoring method for regional cerebral oxygen saturation (rcSO2).Purpose: This study evaluated the clinical feasibility and neurological impact of a neurocritical care bundle that incorporates prolonged multidisciplinary hemodynamic monitoring and a stepwise management algorithm. Methods: Preterm infants with a gestational age (GA) ≤28 weeks or birth weight (BW) ≤1,000 g were prospectively enrolled in a bundle group subjected to NIRS for rcSO2, electrical cardiometry for cardiac output, and daily brain and cardiac echography during the first 72 hours of life. Monitoring was repeated weekly in the first month and then monthly until discharge or the term-equivalent age (TEA) was reached. We implemented a stepwise management algorithm for treating cerebral hypoxia. The primary outcome was a composite of mortality and adverse neurological events (structural abnormalities or electroencephalogram-confirmed seizures) before discharge. The secondary outcomes were the physiological pattern of rcSO2 within the initial 72 hours and up to discharge or TEA. Results: Thirty preterm infants (GA, 27.1±2.0 weeks; BW, 830±225 g) were enrolled in the bundle group. The mean time-averaged rcSO2 (66.8%±10.3%) was not associated with GA or BW. However, postnatal age appeared to influence physiological rcSO2 changes, given that rcSO2 values were higher during the initial 72 hours than at subsequent intervals. Seven infants (23.3%) had poor outcomes and significantly lower time-averaged rcSO2 (51.1% [50.0%–65.2%] vs. 71.8% [67.1%–73.1%], P=0.002). Multivariate regression indicated that a lower rcSO2 was an independent risk factor, and a 65% threshold showed an optimal predictive value for poor outcomes. Conclusion The neurocritical care bundle helped identify preterm infants at risk of cerebral hypoxia, and lower rcSO2 was an independent risk factor for composite mortality and adverse neurological outcomes.

The lack of clear definition and classification for “moderate ulcerative colitis (UC)” creates ambiguity regarding the suitability of step-up versus top-down treatment approaches. In this paper, experts address crucial gaps in assessing and managing moderate UC. The Asia-Pacific, Middle East, and Africa Inflammatory Bowel Disease Coalition comprised 24 experts who convened to share, discuss and vote electronically on management recommendations for moderate UC. Experts emphasized that the goal of treating UC is to attain clinical, biomarker, and endoscopic remission using cost-effective strategies such as 5-aminosalicylates (5-ASAs), well-tolerated therapy that can be optimized to improve outcomes. Experts agreed that 5-ASA therapy could be optimized by maximizing dosage (4 g/day for induction of remission), combining oral and topical administration, extending treatment duration beyond 8 weeks, and enhancing patient adherence through personalized counselling and reduced pill burden. Treatment escalation should ideally be reserved for patients with predictors of aggressive disease or those who do not respond to 5-ASA optimization. Premature treatment escalation to advanced therapies (including biologics and oral small molecules) may have long-term health and financial consequences. This paper provides consensus-based expert recommendations and a treatment algorithm, based on current evidence and practices, to assist decision-making in real-world settings.

The lack of clear definition and classification for “moderate ulcerative colitis (UC)” creates ambiguity regarding the suitability of step-up versus top-down treatment approaches. In this paper, experts address crucial gaps in assessing and managing moderate UC. The Asia-Pacific, Middle East, and Africa Inflammatory Bowel Disease Coalition comprised 24 experts who convened to share, discuss and vote electronically on management recommendations for moderate UC. Experts emphasized that the goal of treating UC is to attain clinical, biomarker, and endoscopic remission using cost-effective strategies such as 5-aminosalicylates (5-ASAs), well-tolerated therapy that can be optimized to improve outcomes. Experts agreed that 5-ASA therapy could be optimized by maximizing dosage (4 g/day for induction of remission), combining oral and topical administration, extending treatment duration beyond 8 weeks, and enhancing patient adherence through personalized counselling and reduced pill burden. Treatment escalation should ideally be reserved for patients with predictors of aggressive disease or those who do not respond to 5-ASA optimization. Premature treatment escalation to advanced therapies (including biologics and oral small molecules) may have long-term health and financial consequences. This paper provides consensus-based expert recommendations and a treatment algorithm, based on current evidence and practices, to assist decision-making in real-world settings.

Obesity presents significant challenges in spinal surgery, including higher rates of perioperative complications, prolonged operative times, and delayed recovery. Traditional open spine surgery often exacerbates these risks, particularly in patients with obesity, because of extensive tissue dissection and larger incisions. Endoscopic spine surgery (ESS) has emerged as a promising minimally invasive alternative, offering advantages such as reduced tissue trauma, minimal blood loss, lower infection rates, and faster recovery. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the safety, efficacy, and outcomes of ESS techniques, including fully endoscopic and biportal endoscopic lumbar discectomy and decompression, in patients with obesity and lumbar spine pathologies. A comprehensive literature search of the PubMed/Medline, Embase, and Scopus databases yielded 2,975 studies published between 2000 and 2024, of which 10 met the inclusion criteria. The meta-analysis revealed significant improvements in pain relief (Visual Analog Scale) and functional outcomes (Oswestry Disability Index), with comparable results between patients with and without obesity. Patients who are obese experienced longer operative times and have a slightly higher risk of symptom recurrence; however, ESS demonstrated lower rates of wound infections, shorter hospital stays, and faster recovery than traditional surgery. These findings position ESS as a viable and effective option for managing lumbar spine conditions in patients with obesity, addressing obesity-related surgical challenges while maintaining favorable clinical outcomes. However, limitations such as study heterogeneity and the lack of randomized controlled trials highlight the need for further high-quality research to refine ESS techniques and optimize patient care in this high-risk population.

Obesity presents significant challenges in spinal surgery, including higher rates of perioperative complications, prolonged operative times, and delayed recovery. Traditional open spine surgery often exacerbates these risks, particularly in patients with obesity, because of extensive tissue dissection and larger incisions. Endoscopic spine surgery (ESS) has emerged as a promising minimally invasive alternative, offering advantages such as reduced tissue trauma, minimal blood loss, lower infection rates, and faster recovery. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the safety, efficacy, and outcomes of ESS techniques, including fully endoscopic and biportal endoscopic lumbar discectomy and decompression, in patients with obesity and lumbar spine pathologies. A comprehensive literature search of the PubMed/Medline, Embase, and Scopus databases yielded 2,975 studies published between 2000 and 2024, of which 10 met the inclusion criteria. The meta-analysis revealed significant improvements in pain relief (Visual Analog Scale) and functional outcomes (Oswestry Disability Index), with comparable results between patients with and without obesity. Patients who are obese experienced longer operative times and have a slightly higher risk of symptom recurrence; however, ESS demonstrated lower rates of wound infections, shorter hospital stays, and faster recovery than traditional surgery. These findings position ESS as a viable and effective option for managing lumbar spine conditions in patients with obesity, addressing obesity-related surgical challenges while maintaining favorable clinical outcomes. However, limitations such as study heterogeneity and the lack of randomized controlled trials highlight the need for further high-quality research to refine ESS techniques and optimize patient care in this high-risk population.

The lack of clear definition and classification for “moderate ulcerative colitis (UC)” creates ambiguity regarding the suitability of step-up versus top-down treatment approaches. In this paper, experts address crucial gaps in assessing and managing moderate UC. The Asia-Pacific, Middle East, and Africa Inflammatory Bowel Disease Coalition comprised 24 experts who convened to share, discuss and vote electronically on management recommendations for moderate UC. Experts emphasized that the goal of treating UC is to attain clinical, biomarker, and endoscopic remission using cost-effective strategies such as 5-aminosalicylates (5-ASAs), well-tolerated therapy that can be optimized to improve outcomes. Experts agreed that 5-ASA therapy could be optimized by maximizing dosage (4 g/day for induction of remission), combining oral and topical administration, extending treatment duration beyond 8 weeks, and enhancing patient adherence through personalized counselling and reduced pill burden. Treatment escalation should ideally be reserved for patients with predictors of aggressive disease or those who do not respond to 5-ASA optimization. Premature treatment escalation to advanced therapies (including biologics and oral small molecules) may have long-term health and financial consequences. This paper provides consensus-based expert recommendations and a treatment algorithm, based on current evidence and practices, to assist decision-making in real-world settings.

Obesity presents significant challenges in spinal surgery, including higher rates of perioperative complications, prolonged operative times, and delayed recovery. Traditional open spine surgery often exacerbates these risks, particularly in patients with obesity, because of extensive tissue dissection and larger incisions. Endoscopic spine surgery (ESS) has emerged as a promising minimally invasive alternative, offering advantages such as reduced tissue trauma, minimal blood loss, lower infection rates, and faster recovery. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the safety, efficacy, and outcomes of ESS techniques, including fully endoscopic and biportal endoscopic lumbar discectomy and decompression, in patients with obesity and lumbar spine pathologies. A comprehensive literature search of the PubMed/Medline, Embase, and Scopus databases yielded 2,975 studies published between 2000 and 2024, of which 10 met the inclusion criteria. The meta-analysis revealed significant improvements in pain relief (Visual Analog Scale) and functional outcomes (Oswestry Disability Index), with comparable results between patients with and without obesity. Patients who are obese experienced longer operative times and have a slightly higher risk of symptom recurrence; however, ESS demonstrated lower rates of wound infections, shorter hospital stays, and faster recovery than traditional surgery. These findings position ESS as a viable and effective option for managing lumbar spine conditions in patients with obesity, addressing obesity-related surgical challenges while maintaining favorable clinical outcomes. However, limitations such as study heterogeneity and the lack of randomized controlled trials highlight the need for further high-quality research to refine ESS techniques and optimize patient care in this high-risk population.

Background: Adrenal venous sampling (AVS) is essential for diagnosing unilateral aldosterone oversecretion in primary aldosteronism (PA). Traditionally, AVS relies on radioimmunoassay (RIA) to measure plasma aldosterone concentration (PAC), although RIA has limited specificity and considerable variability. This study evaluated the role of liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) in AVS and its impact on clinical outcomes. Methods: Among 230 patients with PA (May 2020 to April 2023) who underwent AVS, successful sampling was achieved in 182 patients (79.1%) under unstimulated conditions and 206 patients (89.6%) under stimulated conditions. PAC levels from peripheral and adrenal veins measured by LC-MS/MS were compared with RIA results. Patient outcomes were categorized according to the Primary Aldosteronism Surgical Outcomes criteria. Results: LC-MS/MS showed significant correlations with PAC levels measured by RIA in AVS (r=0.40 [unstimulated] and r=0.56 [stimulated]; both P<0.001). However, lateralization concordance between RIA and LC-MS/MS was moderate, at only 57.7% (unstimulated) and 64.6% (stimulated). LC-MS/MS identified more unilateral disease than RIA under both unstimulated (61.5% vs. 37.4%, P<0.001) and stimulated conditions (36.4% vs. 9.7%, P<0.001). Patients achieving complete clinical success after adrenalectomy were more accurately identified by LC-MS/MS than RIA under stimulated (55.6% vs. 22.2%, P=0.035), but not in unstimulated conditions. Conclusion LC-MS/MS outperformed RIA in identifying unilateral disease, resulting in higher rates of complete clinical success in adrenalectomy patients when surgical decisions were based on LC-MS/MS lateralization results.