Background and Objectives: The medications preferred by patients for allergic rhinitis and their usage remain unclear. This study investigated treatment-seeking behaviors in patients with allergic rhinitis, including medical treatments, environmental controls, and surgical treatments. Methods: In this study, a cross-sectional survey was conducted by internal medicine, pediatric, or otorhinolaryngology physicians at university hospitals from January 2022 to April 2022. A questionnaire was administered to patients with confirmed allergic rhinitis to collect information regarding medical treatments (prescription and over-the-counter medication use patterns, comorbid asthma, and allergen-specific immunotherapy), environmental controls (usage of air purifiers and pet avoidance), and experiences with surgical treatments. Results: We included 51 patients with allergic rhinitis with a mean age of 31.6±16.0 years. Among them, 47 (92.2%) and 6 (11.8%) patients had pollen allergies and asthma, respectively. Furthermore, 41 (80.4%) patients took prescribed medicines, while 39 (76.5%) patients only used the medication when experiencing symptoms. Thirty patients (58.8%) reported concurrent use of intranasal sprays and oral medications. Thirty-three patients (64.7%) reported awareness of immunotherapy, and there were no preferential differences between subcutaneous (52%) and sublingual immunotherapy (48%). Of the 36 patients (70.6%) who reported using an air purifier, 38.9% considered it helpful in preventing allergic rhinitis symptoms. Fourteen patients (27.5%) currently or previously had a companion animal, with half experiencing worsening of symptoms. Twelve patients had received surgical treatment and reported high satisfaction levels (41.6%, very satisfied; 41.6%, satisfied). Conclusion Patients with allergic rhinitis showed similar preferences for oral and spray medications. They also showed satisfaction with surgical treatments and an interest in the environmental management of allergic rhinitis.

Background and Objectives: The medications preferred by patients for allergic rhinitis and their usage remain unclear. This study investigated treatment-seeking behaviors in patients with allergic rhinitis, including medical treatments, environmental controls, and surgical treatments. Methods: In this study, a cross-sectional survey was conducted by internal medicine, pediatric, or otorhinolaryngology physicians at university hospitals from January 2022 to April 2022. A questionnaire was administered to patients with confirmed allergic rhinitis to collect information regarding medical treatments (prescription and over-the-counter medication use patterns, comorbid asthma, and allergen-specific immunotherapy), environmental controls (usage of air purifiers and pet avoidance), and experiences with surgical treatments. Results: We included 51 patients with allergic rhinitis with a mean age of 31.6±16.0 years. Among them, 47 (92.2%) and 6 (11.8%) patients had pollen allergies and asthma, respectively. Furthermore, 41 (80.4%) patients took prescribed medicines, while 39 (76.5%) patients only used the medication when experiencing symptoms. Thirty patients (58.8%) reported concurrent use of intranasal sprays and oral medications. Thirty-three patients (64.7%) reported awareness of immunotherapy, and there were no preferential differences between subcutaneous (52%) and sublingual immunotherapy (48%). Of the 36 patients (70.6%) who reported using an air purifier, 38.9% considered it helpful in preventing allergic rhinitis symptoms. Fourteen patients (27.5%) currently or previously had a companion animal, with half experiencing worsening of symptoms. Twelve patients had received surgical treatment and reported high satisfaction levels (41.6%, very satisfied; 41.6%, satisfied). Conclusion Patients with allergic rhinitis showed similar preferences for oral and spray medications. They also showed satisfaction with surgical treatments and an interest in the environmental management of allergic rhinitis.

Background and Objectives: The medications preferred by patients for allergic rhinitis and their usage remain unclear. This study investigated treatment-seeking behaviors in patients with allergic rhinitis, including medical treatments, environmental controls, and surgical treatments. Methods: In this study, a cross-sectional survey was conducted by internal medicine, pediatric, or otorhinolaryngology physicians at university hospitals from January 2022 to April 2022. A questionnaire was administered to patients with confirmed allergic rhinitis to collect information regarding medical treatments (prescription and over-the-counter medication use patterns, comorbid asthma, and allergen-specific immunotherapy), environmental controls (usage of air purifiers and pet avoidance), and experiences with surgical treatments. Results: We included 51 patients with allergic rhinitis with a mean age of 31.6±16.0 years. Among them, 47 (92.2%) and 6 (11.8%) patients had pollen allergies and asthma, respectively. Furthermore, 41 (80.4%) patients took prescribed medicines, while 39 (76.5%) patients only used the medication when experiencing symptoms. Thirty patients (58.8%) reported concurrent use of intranasal sprays and oral medications. Thirty-three patients (64.7%) reported awareness of immunotherapy, and there were no preferential differences between subcutaneous (52%) and sublingual immunotherapy (48%). Of the 36 patients (70.6%) who reported using an air purifier, 38.9% considered it helpful in preventing allergic rhinitis symptoms. Fourteen patients (27.5%) currently or previously had a companion animal, with half experiencing worsening of symptoms. Twelve patients had received surgical treatment and reported high satisfaction levels (41.6%, very satisfied; 41.6%, satisfied). Conclusion Patients with allergic rhinitis showed similar preferences for oral and spray medications. They also showed satisfaction with surgical treatments and an interest in the environmental management of allergic rhinitis.

Background: and Purpose The influence of imaging features of brain frailty on outcomes were investigated in acute ischemic stroke patients with minor symptoms and large-vessel occlusion (LVO). Methods: This was a retrospective analysis of a prospective, multicenter, nationwide registry of consecutive patients with acute (within 24 h) minor (National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score=0–5) ischemic stroke with anterior circulation LVO (acute minor LVO). Brain frailty was stratified according to the presence of an advanced white-matter hyperintensity (WMH) (Fazekas grade 2 or 3), silent/old brain infarct, or cerebral microbleeds. The primary outcome was a composite of stroke, myocardial infarction, and all-cause mortality within 1 year. Results: In total, 1,067 patients (age=67.2±13.1 years [mean±SD], 61.3% males) were analyzed. The proportions of patients according to the numbers of brain frailty burdens were as follows: no burden in 49.2%, one burden in 30.0%, two burdens in 17.3%, and three burdens in 3.5%. In the Cox proportional-hazards analysis, the presence of more brain frailty burdens was associated with a higher risk of 1-year primary outcomes, but after adjusting for clinically relevant variables there were no significant associations between burdens of brain frailty and 1-year vascular outcomes. For individual components of brain frailty, an advanced WMH was independently associated with an increased risk of 1-year primary outcomes (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR]=1.33, 95% confidence interval [CI]=1.03–1.71) and stroke (aHR=1.32, 95% CI=1.00–1.75). Conclusions The baseline imaging markers of brain frailty were common in acute minor ischemic stroke patients with LVO. An advanced WMH was the only frailty marker associated with an increased risk of vascular events. Further research is needed into the association between brain frailty and prognosis in patients with acute minor LVO.

Background: Bladder cancer is characterized by frequent mutations, which provide potential therapeutic targets for most patients. The effectiveness of emerging personalized therapies depends on an accurate molecular diagnosis, for which the accurate estimation of the neoplastic cell percentage (NCP) is a crucial initial step. However, the established method for determining the NCP, manual counting by a pathologist, is time-consuming and not easily executable. Methods: To address this, artificial intelligence (AI) models were developed to estimate the NCP using nine convolutional neural networks and the scanned images of 39 cases of urinary tract cancer. The performance of the AI models was compared to that of six pathologists for 119 cases in the validation cohort. The ground truth value was obtained through multiplexed immunofluorescence. The AI model was then applied to 41 cases in the application cohort that underwent next-generation sequencing testing, and its impact on the copy number variation (CNV) was analyzed. Results: Each AI model demonstrated high reliability, with intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) ranging from 0.82 to 0.88. These values were comparable or better to those of pathologists, whose ICCs ranged from 0.78 to 0.91 in urothelial carcinoma cases, both with and without divergent differentiation/ subtypes. After applying AI-driven NCP, 190 CNV (24.2%) were reclassified with 66 (8.4%) and 78 (9.9%) moved to amplification and loss, respectively, from neutral/minor CNV. The neutral/minor CNV proportion decreased by 6%. Conclusions These results suggest that AI models could assist human pathologists in repetitive and cumbersome NCP calculations.

Inverted papillomas are benign but invasive tumors with malignant potential characterized by a high recurrence rate. Although most cases arise from the nasal wall and paranasal sinuses, inverted papillomas originating from the nasolacrimal system have been rarely reported. We describe a rare case of an inverted papilloma in the left nasal cavity, which originated from the lacrimal sac in a 40-year-old female who had a medical history of endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy at the department of ophthalmology. At first, it was believed to be an inverted papilloma simply occurring in the nasal cavity, but after several recurrences, it was found to originate from the lacrimal sac. All intranasal lesions and the involved lacrimal sac were removed through cooperative surgery between department of otolaryngology and ophthalmology. This case illustrates the importance of including nasolacrimal system in differentiating the origin of inverted papilloma.

Cutaneous papillomas or acrochorda usually appear after the 4th decade of life in areas with skin folds. Conventional methods of removal are associated with bleeding problems, pain and prolonged sequelae. Thus, acrochorda removal with lasers has gained attention. In this study, we compared the efficacy of two popular laser types with different wavelengths and pulse widths for removal of skin tags. A 60-year-old Korean male noticed skin tags on his neck bilaterally. All tags were treated in a single session, on one side with a picosecond (ps)-domain 532 nm Nd:YAG laser and on the contralateral side with a long-pulsed (LP) 755 nm alexandrite laser. The endpoint for the ps-532 laser was immediate whitening, while that for the LP and quasi-LP (QLP) 755 lasers were visible changes on the surface of the lesion. Antibiotic ointment was applied, dressing was done and clinical photographs were taken. Both lasers effectively removed the skin tags at all settings in a single session without bleeding and with minimal discomfort. Crust formation occurred on both sides with natural shedding within 1 to 2 weeks. Transient erythema lasted longer in the tags treated with the ps-532 laser. At the 5th month of follow-up, residual lesions were detected on the field treated with the ps-532 laser. No persistent side effects such as scarring or postinflammatory hyperpigmentation (PIH) were observed. In conclusion, both the ps-532 nm Nd:YAG and the 755 nm alexandrite lasers ensured safe and effective removal of skin tags in a single session without adverse sequelae.

Allergic rhinitis is the most common chronic disease worldwide. Various upper airway symptoms lower quality of life, and due to the recurrent symptoms, multiple treatments are usually attempted rather than one definitive treatment. There are alternatives to medical (medication-based) and nonmedical treatments. A guideline is needed to understand allergic rhinitis and develop an appropriate treatment plan. We have developed guidelines for medical treatment based on previous reports. The current guidelines herein are associated with the “KAAACI Evidence-Based Guidelines for Allergic Rhinitis in Korea, Part 1: Update in pharmacotherapy” in which we aimed to provide evidence-based recommendations for the medical treatment of allergic rhinitis. Part 2 focuses on nonpharmacological management, including allergen-specific immunotherapy, subcutaneous or sublingual immunotherapy, nasal saline irrigation, environmental management strategies, companion animal management, and nasal turbinate surgery. The evidence to support the treatment efficacy, safety, and selection has been systematically reviewed. However, larger controlled studies are needed to elevate the level of evidence to select rational non-medical therapeutic options for patients with allergic rhinitis.

The prevalence of allergic rhinitis (AR) and the socioeconomic burden associated with the medical cost and quality of life of AR have progressively increased. Therefore, practical guidelines for the appropriate management of AR need to be developed based on scientific evidence considering the real-world environment, values, and preferences of patients and physicians. The Korean Academy of Asthma, Allergy and Clinical Immunology revised clinical guidelines for AR to address key clinical questions of the management of AR. Part 1 of the revised guideline covers the pharmacological management of patients with AR in Korea. Through a meta-analysis and a systematic review, we made 4 recommendations for AR pharmacotherapy, including intranasal corticosteroid (INCS)/intranasal antihistamine combination therapy, oral antihistamine/INCS combination therapy, leukotriene receptor antagonist treatment in AR patients with asthma, and prophylactic treatment for patients with pollen-induced AR. However, all recommendations are conditional because of the low or very low evidence of certainty. Well-designed and strictly executed randomized controlled trials are needed to measure and report appropriate outcomes.