Purpose: Several types of dermal fillers have been recently introduced and used for penile augmentation (PA). However, few studies have compared outcomes after the injection of different fillers. This study aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of hyaluronic acid (HLA), polylactic acid (PLA), and polymethyl methacrylate (PMA) filler injections, which are the most commonly used for aesthetic purposes. Materials and Methods: This prospective study was conducted for 24 weeks after a filler injection by a surgeon between March 2017 and December 2021. Healthy adult men complaining of small penis were enrolled. Penile girth, satisfaction, and injection-associated adverse events (AEs) were assessed at baseline and 4, 12, and 24 weeks after injection. Results: Of the 301 men who received filler injections, 125, 134, and 42 received HLA, PLA, and PMA fillers, respectively. The augmentation effect was in the order of PMA, HLA, and PLA, respectively, at 24 weeks (PMA vs. HLA, p<0.001; HLA vs. PLA, p=0.006). Satisfaction levels increased significantly at 24 weeks in all groups (each with p<0.001). However, the increase in satisfaction levels was smaller in the PMA group (PMA vs. HLA or PLA, p<0.05, for both penile appearance and sexual life). No serious or systemic AEs were recorded. Filler injection-associated local AEs in the HLA, PLA, and PMA groups occurred in 9 (7.2%), 16 (11.9%), and 6 (14.3%) men, respectively. There was no significant difference in AEs among the groups (p=0.299). Conclusions The augmentative effect was greater in the PMA group than in the HLA and PLA groups, whereas the increase in satisfaction levels was smaller in the PMA group. Our study demonstrated the clinical course of different types of fillers and suggests that the filler type should be selected after detailed counseling considering individual characteristics and preferences.

Purpose: Several types of dermal fillers have been recently introduced and used for penile augmentation (PA). However, few studies have compared outcomes after the injection of different fillers. This study aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of hyaluronic acid (HLA), polylactic acid (PLA), and polymethyl methacrylate (PMA) filler injections, which are the most commonly used for aesthetic purposes. Materials and Methods: This prospective study was conducted for 24 weeks after a filler injection by a surgeon between March 2017 and December 2021. Healthy adult men complaining of small penis were enrolled. Penile girth, satisfaction, and injection-associated adverse events (AEs) were assessed at baseline and 4, 12, and 24 weeks after injection. Results: Of the 301 men who received filler injections, 125, 134, and 42 received HLA, PLA, and PMA fillers, respectively. The augmentation effect was in the order of PMA, HLA, and PLA, respectively, at 24 weeks (PMA vs. HLA, p<0.001; HLA vs. PLA, p=0.006). Satisfaction levels increased significantly at 24 weeks in all groups (each with p<0.001). However, the increase in satisfaction levels was smaller in the PMA group (PMA vs. HLA or PLA, p<0.05, for both penile appearance and sexual life). No serious or systemic AEs were recorded. Filler injection-associated local AEs in the HLA, PLA, and PMA groups occurred in 9 (7.2%), 16 (11.9%), and 6 (14.3%) men, respectively. There was no significant difference in AEs among the groups (p=0.299). Conclusions The augmentative effect was greater in the PMA group than in the HLA and PLA groups, whereas the increase in satisfaction levels was smaller in the PMA group. Our study demonstrated the clinical course of different types of fillers and suggests that the filler type should be selected after detailed counseling considering individual characteristics and preferences.

Purpose: Several types of dermal fillers have been recently introduced and used for penile augmentation (PA). However, few studies have compared outcomes after the injection of different fillers. This study aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of hyaluronic acid (HLA), polylactic acid (PLA), and polymethyl methacrylate (PMA) filler injections, which are the most commonly used for aesthetic purposes. Materials and Methods: This prospective study was conducted for 24 weeks after a filler injection by a surgeon between March 2017 and December 2021. Healthy adult men complaining of small penis were enrolled. Penile girth, satisfaction, and injection-associated adverse events (AEs) were assessed at baseline and 4, 12, and 24 weeks after injection. Results: Of the 301 men who received filler injections, 125, 134, and 42 received HLA, PLA, and PMA fillers, respectively. The augmentation effect was in the order of PMA, HLA, and PLA, respectively, at 24 weeks (PMA vs. HLA, p<0.001; HLA vs. PLA, p=0.006). Satisfaction levels increased significantly at 24 weeks in all groups (each with p<0.001). However, the increase in satisfaction levels was smaller in the PMA group (PMA vs. HLA or PLA, p<0.05, for both penile appearance and sexual life). No serious or systemic AEs were recorded. Filler injection-associated local AEs in the HLA, PLA, and PMA groups occurred in 9 (7.2%), 16 (11.9%), and 6 (14.3%) men, respectively. There was no significant difference in AEs among the groups (p=0.299). Conclusions The augmentative effect was greater in the PMA group than in the HLA and PLA groups, whereas the increase in satisfaction levels was smaller in the PMA group. Our study demonstrated the clinical course of different types of fillers and suggests that the filler type should be selected after detailed counseling considering individual characteristics and preferences.

Purpose: Several types of dermal fillers have been recently introduced and used for penile augmentation (PA). However, few studies have compared outcomes after the injection of different fillers. This study aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of hyaluronic acid (HLA), polylactic acid (PLA), and polymethyl methacrylate (PMA) filler injections, which are the most commonly used for aesthetic purposes. Materials and Methods: This prospective study was conducted for 24 weeks after a filler injection by a surgeon between March 2017 and December 2021. Healthy adult men complaining of small penis were enrolled. Penile girth, satisfaction, and injection-associated adverse events (AEs) were assessed at baseline and 4, 12, and 24 weeks after injection. Results: Of the 301 men who received filler injections, 125, 134, and 42 received HLA, PLA, and PMA fillers, respectively. The augmentation effect was in the order of PMA, HLA, and PLA, respectively, at 24 weeks (PMA vs. HLA, p<0.001; HLA vs. PLA, p=0.006). Satisfaction levels increased significantly at 24 weeks in all groups (each with p<0.001). However, the increase in satisfaction levels was smaller in the PMA group (PMA vs. HLA or PLA, p<0.05, for both penile appearance and sexual life). No serious or systemic AEs were recorded. Filler injection-associated local AEs in the HLA, PLA, and PMA groups occurred in 9 (7.2%), 16 (11.9%), and 6 (14.3%) men, respectively. There was no significant difference in AEs among the groups (p=0.299). Conclusions The augmentative effect was greater in the PMA group than in the HLA and PLA groups, whereas the increase in satisfaction levels was smaller in the PMA group. Our study demonstrated the clinical course of different types of fillers and suggests that the filler type should be selected after detailed counseling considering individual characteristics and preferences.

Purpose: Several types of dermal fillers have been recently introduced and used for penile augmentation (PA). However, few studies have compared outcomes after the injection of different fillers. This study aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of hyaluronic acid (HLA), polylactic acid (PLA), and polymethyl methacrylate (PMA) filler injections, which are the most commonly used for aesthetic purposes. Materials and Methods: This prospective study was conducted for 24 weeks after a filler injection by a surgeon between March 2017 and December 2021. Healthy adult men complaining of small penis were enrolled. Penile girth, satisfaction, and injection-associated adverse events (AEs) were assessed at baseline and 4, 12, and 24 weeks after injection. Results: Of the 301 men who received filler injections, 125, 134, and 42 received HLA, PLA, and PMA fillers, respectively. The augmentation effect was in the order of PMA, HLA, and PLA, respectively, at 24 weeks (PMA vs. HLA, p<0.001; HLA vs. PLA, p=0.006). Satisfaction levels increased significantly at 24 weeks in all groups (each with p<0.001). However, the increase in satisfaction levels was smaller in the PMA group (PMA vs. HLA or PLA, p<0.05, for both penile appearance and sexual life). No serious or systemic AEs were recorded. Filler injection-associated local AEs in the HLA, PLA, and PMA groups occurred in 9 (7.2%), 16 (11.9%), and 6 (14.3%) men, respectively. There was no significant difference in AEs among the groups (p=0.299). Conclusions The augmentative effect was greater in the PMA group than in the HLA and PLA groups, whereas the increase in satisfaction levels was smaller in the PMA group. Our study demonstrated the clinical course of different types of fillers and suggests that the filler type should be selected after detailed counseling considering individual characteristics and preferences.

Background: and Purpose: Blood pressure (BP) control is strongly recommended, but BP control rate has not been well studied in patients with stroke. We evaluated the BP control rate with fimasartan-based antihypertensive therapy initiated in patients with recent cerebral ischemia. Methods: This multicenter, prospective, single-arm trial involved 27 centers in South Korea. Key inclusion criteria were recent cerebral ischemia within 90 days and high BP [systolic blood pressure (SBP) >140 mm Hg or diastolic blood pressure (DBP) >90 mm Hg]. BP lowering was initiated with fimasartan. BP management during the follow-up was at the discretion of the responsible investigators. The primary endpoint was the target BP goal achievement rate (<140/90 mm Hg) at 24 weeks. Key secondary endpoints included achieved BP and BP changes at each visit, and clinical events (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03231293). Results: Of 1,035 patients enrolled, 1,026 were included in the safety analysis, and 951 in the efficacy analysis. Their mean age was 64.1 years, 33% were female, the median time interval from onset to enrollment was 10 days, and the baseline SBP and DBP were 162.3±16.0 and 92.2±12.4 mm Hg (mean±SD). During the study period, 55.5% of patients were maintained on fimasartan monotherapy, and 44.5% received antihypertensive therapies other than fimasartan monotherapy at at least one visit. The target BP goal achievement rate at 24-week was 67.3% (48.6% at 4-week and 61.4% at 12-week). The mean BP was 139.0/81.8±18.3/11.7, 133.8/79.2±16.4/11.0, and 132.8/78.5±15.6/10.9 mm Hg at 4-, 12-, and 24-week. The treatment-emergent adverse event rate was 5.4%, including one serious adverse event. Conclusions Fimasartan-based BP lowering achieved the target BP in two-thirds of patients at 24 weeks, and was generally well tolerated.

Background: and Purpose We aimed to develop a model predicting early recanalization after intravenous tissue plasminogen activator (t-PA) treatment in large-vessel occlusion. Methods: Using data from two different multicenter prospective cohorts, we determined the factors associated with early recanalization immediately after t-PA in stroke patients with large-vessel occlusion, and developed and validated a prediction model for early recanalization. Clot volume was semiautomatically measured on thin-section computed tomography using software, and the degree of collaterals was determined using the Tan score. Follow-up angiographic studies were performed immediately after t-PA treatment to assess early recanalization. Results: Early recanalization, assessed 61.0±44.7 minutes after t-PA bolus, was achieved in 15.5% (15/97) in the derivation cohort and in 10.5% (8/76) in the validation cohort. Clot volume (odds ratio [OR], 0.979; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.961 to 0.997; P=0.020) and good collaterals (OR, 6.129; 95% CI, 1.592 to 23.594; P=0.008) were significant factors associated with early recanalization. The area under the curve (AUC) of the model including clot volume was 0.819 (95% CI, 0.720 to 0.917) and 0.842 (95% CI, 0.746 to 0.938) in the derivation and validation cohorts, respectively. The AUC improved when good collaterals were added (derivation cohort: AUC, 0.876; 95% CI, 0.802 to 0.950; P=0.164; validation cohort: AUC, 0.949; 95% CI, 0.886 to 1.000; P=0.036). The integrated discrimination improvement also showed significantly improved prediction (0.097; 95% CI, 0.009 to 0.185; P=0.032). Conclusions The model using clot volume and collaterals predicted early recanalization after intravenous t-PA and had a high performance. This model may aid in determining the recanalization treatment strategy in stroke patients with large-vessel occlusion.

Background and Objectives: Prior studies have shown that stroke patients treated with percutaneous left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) for non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) experience better outcomes than similar patients treated with warfarin. We investigated the impact of percutaneous left atrial appendage closure on post-stroke neurological outcomes in NVAF patients, compared with non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulant (NOAC) therapy. Methods: Medical records for 1,427 patients in multiple registries and for 1,792 consecutive patients at 6 Korean hospitals were reviewed with respect to LAAO or NOAC treatment.Stroke severity in patients who experienced ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack after either treatment was assessed with modified Rankin Scale (mRS) scoring at hospital discharge and at 3 and 12 months post-stroke. Results: mRS scores were significantly lower in LAAO patients at 3 (p<0.01) and 12 months (p<0.01) post-stroke, despite no significant differences in scores before the ischemic cerebrovascular event (p=0.22). The occurrences of disabling ischemic stroke in the LAAO and NOAC groups were 36.7% and 44.2% at discharge (p=0.47), 23.3% and 44.2% at 3 months post-stroke (p=0.04), and 13.3% and 43.0% at 12 months post-stroke (p=0.01), respectively.Recovery rates for disabling ischemic stroke at discharge to 12 months post-stroke were significantly higher for LAAO patients (50.0%) than for NOAC patients (5.6%) (p<0.01). Conclusions Percutaneous LAAO was associated with more favorable neurological outcomes after ischemic cerebrovascular event than NOAC treatment.

Background and Objectives: Prior studies have shown that stroke patients treated with percutaneous left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) for non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) experience better outcomes than similar patients treated with warfarin. We investigated the impact of percutaneous left atrial appendage closure on post-stroke neurological outcomes in NVAF patients, compared with non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulant (NOAC) therapy. Methods: Medical records for 1,427 patients in multiple registries and for 1,792 consecutive patients at 6 Korean hospitals were reviewed with respect to LAAO or NOAC treatment.Stroke severity in patients who experienced ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack after either treatment was assessed with modified Rankin Scale (mRS) scoring at hospital discharge and at 3 and 12 months post-stroke. Results: mRS scores were significantly lower in LAAO patients at 3 (p<0.01) and 12 months (p<0.01) post-stroke, despite no significant differences in scores before the ischemic cerebrovascular event (p=0.22). The occurrences of disabling ischemic stroke in the LAAO and NOAC groups were 36.7% and 44.2% at discharge (p=0.47), 23.3% and 44.2% at 3 months post-stroke (p=0.04), and 13.3% and 43.0% at 12 months post-stroke (p=0.01), respectively.Recovery rates for disabling ischemic stroke at discharge to 12 months post-stroke were significantly higher for LAAO patients (50.0%) than for NOAC patients (5.6%) (p<0.01). Conclusions Percutaneous LAAO was associated with more favorable neurological outcomes after ischemic cerebrovascular event than NOAC treatment.

Leptin is a type of adipokine mainly produced by adipocytes and reported to be overproduced in prostate cancer. However, it is not known whether it stimulates the proliferation of prostate cells. In this study, we investigated whether benign prostatic hyperplasia epithelial cells (BPH-1 cells) infected with Trichomonas vaginalis induced the proliferation of prostate cells via a leptin signaling pathway. To investigate the effect of crosstalk between adipocyte leptin and inflamed epithelial cell in proliferation of prostate cells, adipocytes 3T3-L1 cells were incubated in conditioned medium of BPH-1 cells infected with T. vaginalis (T. vaginalis-conditioned medium, TCM), and then the adipocyte-conditioned medium (ATCM) was identified to cause proliferation of prostate cells. BPH-1 cells incubated with live T. vaginalis released pro-inflammatory cytokines, and conditioned medium of these cells caused migration of adipocytes. When prostate stromal cells and BPH-1 cells were incubated with adipocyte conditioned medium containing leptin, their growth rates increased as did expression of the leptin receptor (known as OBR) and signaling molecules such as JAK2/STAT3, Notch and survivin. Moreover, blocking the OBR reduced this proliferation and the expression of leptin signaling molecules in response to ATCM. In conclusion, our findings show that inflamed BPH-1 cells infected with T. vaginalis induce the proliferation of prostate cells through leptin-OBR signaling. Therefore, it is likely that T. vaginalis contributes to prostate enlargement in BPH via adipocyte leptin released as a result of inflammation of the prostate.