Background: s/Aims: Non-invasive models stratifying clinically significant portal hypertension (CSPH) are limited. Herein, we developed a new non-invasive model for predicting CSPH in patients with compensated cirrhosis and investigated whether carvedilol can prevent hepatic decompensation in patients with high-risk CSPH stratified using the new model. Methods: Non-invasive risk factors of CSPH were identified via systematic review and meta-analysis of studies involving patients with hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG). A new non-invasive model was validated for various performance aspects in three cohorts, i.e., a multicenter HVPG cohort, a follow-up cohort, and a carvediloltreating cohort. Results: In the meta-analysis with six studies (n=819), liver stiffness measurement and platelet count were identified as independent risk factors for CSPH and were used to develop the new “CSPH risk” model. In the HVPG cohort (n=151), the new model accurately predicted CSPH with cutoff values of 0 and –0.68 for ruling in and out CSPH, respectively. In the follow-up cohort (n=1,102), the cumulative incidences of decompensation events significantly differed using the cutoff values of <–0.68 (low-risk), –0.68 to 0 (medium-risk), and >0 (high-risk). In the carvediloltreated cohort, patients with high-risk CSPH treated with carvedilol (n=81) had lower rates of decompensation events than non-selective beta-blockers untreated patients with high-risk CSPH (n=613 before propensity score matching [PSM], n=162 after PSM). Conclusions Treatment with carvedilol significantly reduces the risk of hepatic decompensation in patients with high-risk CSPH stratified by the new model.

Background: s/Aims: Non-invasive models stratifying clinically significant portal hypertension (CSPH) are limited. Herein, we developed a new non-invasive model for predicting CSPH in patients with compensated cirrhosis and investigated whether carvedilol can prevent hepatic decompensation in patients with high-risk CSPH stratified using the new model. Methods: Non-invasive risk factors of CSPH were identified via systematic review and meta-analysis of studies involving patients with hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG). A new non-invasive model was validated for various performance aspects in three cohorts, i.e., a multicenter HVPG cohort, a follow-up cohort, and a carvediloltreating cohort. Results: In the meta-analysis with six studies (n=819), liver stiffness measurement and platelet count were identified as independent risk factors for CSPH and were used to develop the new “CSPH risk” model. In the HVPG cohort (n=151), the new model accurately predicted CSPH with cutoff values of 0 and –0.68 for ruling in and out CSPH, respectively. In the follow-up cohort (n=1,102), the cumulative incidences of decompensation events significantly differed using the cutoff values of <–0.68 (low-risk), –0.68 to 0 (medium-risk), and >0 (high-risk). In the carvediloltreated cohort, patients with high-risk CSPH treated with carvedilol (n=81) had lower rates of decompensation events than non-selective beta-blockers untreated patients with high-risk CSPH (n=613 before propensity score matching [PSM], n=162 after PSM). Conclusions Treatment with carvedilol significantly reduces the risk of hepatic decompensation in patients with high-risk CSPH stratified by the new model.

Background: s/Aims: Non-invasive models stratifying clinically significant portal hypertension (CSPH) are limited. Herein, we developed a new non-invasive model for predicting CSPH in patients with compensated cirrhosis and investigated whether carvedilol can prevent hepatic decompensation in patients with high-risk CSPH stratified using the new model. Methods: Non-invasive risk factors of CSPH were identified via systematic review and meta-analysis of studies involving patients with hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG). A new non-invasive model was validated for various performance aspects in three cohorts, i.e., a multicenter HVPG cohort, a follow-up cohort, and a carvediloltreating cohort. Results: In the meta-analysis with six studies (n=819), liver stiffness measurement and platelet count were identified as independent risk factors for CSPH and were used to develop the new “CSPH risk” model. In the HVPG cohort (n=151), the new model accurately predicted CSPH with cutoff values of 0 and –0.68 for ruling in and out CSPH, respectively. In the follow-up cohort (n=1,102), the cumulative incidences of decompensation events significantly differed using the cutoff values of <–0.68 (low-risk), –0.68 to 0 (medium-risk), and >0 (high-risk). In the carvediloltreated cohort, patients with high-risk CSPH treated with carvedilol (n=81) had lower rates of decompensation events than non-selective beta-blockers untreated patients with high-risk CSPH (n=613 before propensity score matching [PSM], n=162 after PSM). Conclusions Treatment with carvedilol significantly reduces the risk of hepatic decompensation in patients with high-risk CSPH stratified by the new model.

Objectives: In this functional magnetic resonance imaging study, we aimed to investigate the differences in brain activation between individuals with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and typically developing (TD) individuals during perspective taking. We also examined the association between brain activation and empathic and interoceptive abilities. Methods: During scanning, participants from the ASD (n=17) and TD (n=22) groups were shown pain stimuli and asked to rate the level of the observed pain from both self- and other-perspectives. Empathic abilities, including perspective taking, were measured using an empathic questionnaire, and three dimensions of interoception were assessed: interoceptive accuracy, interoceptive sensibility, and interoceptive trait prediction errors. Results: During self-perspective taking, the ASD group exhibited greater activation in the left precuneus than the TD group. During other-perspective taking, relative hyperactivation extended to areas including the right precuneus, right superior frontal gyrus, left caudate nucleus, and left amygdala. Brain activation levels in the right superior frontal gyrus while taking other-perspective were negatively correlated with interoceptive accuracy, and those in the left caudate were negatively correlated with perspective taking ability in the ASD group. Conclusion Individuals with ASD show atypical brain activation during perspective taking. Notably, their brain regions associated with stress reactions and escape responses are overactivated when taking other-perspective. This overactivity is related to poor interoceptive accuracy, suggesting that individuals with ASD may experience difficulties with the self-other distinction or atypical embodiment when considering another person’s perspective.

Background and Objectives: Fractional flow reserve (FFR) is an invasive standard method to identify ischemia-causing coronary artery disease (CAD). With the advancement of technology, FFR can be noninvasively computed from coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA). Recently, a novel simpler method has been developed to calculate onsite CCTA-derived FFR (CT-FFR) with a commercially available workstation. Methods: A total of 319 CAD patients who underwent CCTA, invasive coronary angiography, and FFR measurement were included. The primary outcome was the accuracy of CT-FFR for defining myocardial ischemia evaluated with an invasive FFR as a reference. The presence of ischemia was defined as FFR ≤0.80. Anatomical obstructive stenosis was defined as diameter stenosis on CCTA ≥50%, and the diagnostic performance of CT-FFR and CCTA stenosis for ischemia was compared. Results: Among participants (mean age 64.7±9.4 years, male 77.7%), mean FFR was 0.82±0.10, and 126 (39.5%) patients had an invasive FFR value of ≤0.80. The diagnostic accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of CT-FFR were 80.6% (95% confidence interval [CI], 80.5–80.7%), 88.1% (95% CI, 82.4–93.7%), 75.6% (95% CI, 69.6–81.7%), 70.3% (95% CI, 63.1–77.4%), and 90.7% (95% CI, 86.2–95.2%), respectively. CT-FFR had higher diagnostic accuracy (80.6% vs. 59.1%, p<0.001) and discriminant ability (area under the curve from receiver operating characteristic curve 0.86 vs. 0.64, p<0.001), compared with anatomical obstructive stenosis on CCTA. Conclusions This novel CT-FFR obtained from an on-site workstation demonstrated clinically acceptable diagnostic performance and provided better diagnostic accuracy and discriminant ability for identifying hemodynamically significant lesions than CCTA alone.

Background and Objectives: Lipid lowering therapy is essential to reduce the risk of major cardiovascular events; however, limited evidence exists regarding the use of statin with ezetimibe as primary prevention strategy for middle-aged adults. We aimed to investigate the impact of single pill combination therapy on clinical outcomes in relatively healthy middleaged patients when compared with statin monotherapy. Methods: Using the Korean National Health Insurance Service database, a propensity score match analysis was performed for baseline characteristics of 92,156 patients categorized into combination therapy (n=46,078) and statin monotherapy (n=46,078) groups. Primary outcome was composite outcomes, including death, coronary artery disease, and ischemic stroke. And secondary outcome was all-cause death. The mean follow-up duration was 2.9±0.3 years. Results: The 3-year composite outcomes of all-cause death, coronary artery disease, and ischemic stroke demonstrated no significant difference between the 2 groups (10.3% vs.10.1%; hazard ratio [HR], 1.022; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.980–1.064; p=0.309).Meanwhile, the 3-year all-cause death rate was lower in the combination therapy group than in the statin monotherapy group (0.2% vs. 0.4%; p<0.001), with a significant HR of 0.595 (95% CI, 0.460–0.769; p<0.001). Single pill combination therapy exhibited consistently lower mortality rates across various subgroups. Conclusions Compared to the statin monotherapy, the combination therapy for primary prevention showed no difference in composite outcomes but may reduce mortality risk in relatively healthy middle-aged patients. However, since the study was observational, further randomized clinical trials are needed to confirm these findings.

Purpose: We present a case of central anticholinergic syndrome following the administration of atropine eye drops.Case summary: A 60-year-old male presented with decreased visual acuity in his left eye and was diagnosed with intraocular lens dislocation. Preoperatively, Isopto atropine® eye drops (1 drop at 15-minutes intervals) were used for pupil dilation. Within an hour of the first instillation, the patient exhibited drowsiness, disorientation, agitation, and urinary retention. Laboratory tests and computed tomography of the brain were unremarkable. Considering the recent administration of atropine eye drops, a diagnosis of central anticholinergic syndrome was made. The surgery was postponed and the patient recovered fully after 3 hours of observation. He remained asymptomatic during an additional day of hospitalization. Conclusions A small dose of atropine eye drops even at a therapeutic dose can induce central anticholinergic syndrome. Therefore, ophthalmologists should be aware of this rare and severe complication.

Background and Objectives: Lipid lowering therapy is essential to reduce the risk of major cardiovascular events; however, limited evidence exists regarding the use of statin with ezetimibe as primary prevention strategy for middle-aged adults. We aimed to investigate the impact of single pill combination therapy on clinical outcomes in relatively healthy middleaged patients when compared with statin monotherapy. Methods: Using the Korean National Health Insurance Service database, a propensity score match analysis was performed for baseline characteristics of 92,156 patients categorized into combination therapy (n=46,078) and statin monotherapy (n=46,078) groups. Primary outcome was composite outcomes, including death, coronary artery disease, and ischemic stroke. And secondary outcome was all-cause death. The mean follow-up duration was 2.9±0.3 years. Results: The 3-year composite outcomes of all-cause death, coronary artery disease, and ischemic stroke demonstrated no significant difference between the 2 groups (10.3% vs.10.1%; hazard ratio [HR], 1.022; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.980–1.064; p=0.309).Meanwhile, the 3-year all-cause death rate was lower in the combination therapy group than in the statin monotherapy group (0.2% vs. 0.4%; p<0.001), with a significant HR of 0.595 (95% CI, 0.460–0.769; p<0.001). Single pill combination therapy exhibited consistently lower mortality rates across various subgroups. Conclusions Compared to the statin monotherapy, the combination therapy for primary prevention showed no difference in composite outcomes but may reduce mortality risk in relatively healthy middle-aged patients. However, since the study was observational, further randomized clinical trials are needed to confirm these findings.

Purpose: We present a case of central anticholinergic syndrome following the administration of atropine eye drops.Case summary: A 60-year-old male presented with decreased visual acuity in his left eye and was diagnosed with intraocular lens dislocation. Preoperatively, Isopto atropine® eye drops (1 drop at 15-minutes intervals) were used for pupil dilation. Within an hour of the first instillation, the patient exhibited drowsiness, disorientation, agitation, and urinary retention. Laboratory tests and computed tomography of the brain were unremarkable. Considering the recent administration of atropine eye drops, a diagnosis of central anticholinergic syndrome was made. The surgery was postponed and the patient recovered fully after 3 hours of observation. He remained asymptomatic during an additional day of hospitalization. Conclusions A small dose of atropine eye drops even at a therapeutic dose can induce central anticholinergic syndrome. Therefore, ophthalmologists should be aware of this rare and severe complication.

Background and Objectives: Lipid lowering therapy is essential to reduce the risk of major cardiovascular events; however, limited evidence exists regarding the use of statin with ezetimibe as primary prevention strategy for middle-aged adults. We aimed to investigate the impact of single pill combination therapy on clinical outcomes in relatively healthy middleaged patients when compared with statin monotherapy. Methods: Using the Korean National Health Insurance Service database, a propensity score match analysis was performed for baseline characteristics of 92,156 patients categorized into combination therapy (n=46,078) and statin monotherapy (n=46,078) groups. Primary outcome was composite outcomes, including death, coronary artery disease, and ischemic stroke. And secondary outcome was all-cause death. The mean follow-up duration was 2.9±0.3 years. Results: The 3-year composite outcomes of all-cause death, coronary artery disease, and ischemic stroke demonstrated no significant difference between the 2 groups (10.3% vs.10.1%; hazard ratio [HR], 1.022; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.980–1.064; p=0.309).Meanwhile, the 3-year all-cause death rate was lower in the combination therapy group than in the statin monotherapy group (0.2% vs. 0.4%; p<0.001), with a significant HR of 0.595 (95% CI, 0.460–0.769; p<0.001). Single pill combination therapy exhibited consistently lower mortality rates across various subgroups. Conclusions Compared to the statin monotherapy, the combination therapy for primary prevention showed no difference in composite outcomes but may reduce mortality risk in relatively healthy middle-aged patients. However, since the study was observational, further randomized clinical trials are needed to confirm these findings.