Purpose: Finasteride and dutasteride are used to treat benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) and reduce the risk of developing prostate cancer. Finasteride blocks only the type 2 form of 5-alpha-reductase, whereas dutasteride blocks both type 1 and 2 forms of the enzyme. Previous studies suggest the possibility that dutasteride may be superior to finasteride in preventing prostate cancer. We directly compared the effects of finasteride and dutasteride on the risk of prostate cancer in patients with BPH using a pooled analysis of 15 real-world databases. Materials and Methods: We conducted a multicenter, cohort study of new-users of finasteride and dutasteride. We include patients who were prescribed 5 mg finasteride or dutasteride for the first time to treat BPH and had at least 180 days of prescription. We excluded patients with a history of prostate cancer or a prostate-specific antigen level ≥ 4 ng/mL before the study drug prescription. Cox regression analysis was performed to examine the hazard ratio (HR) for prostate cancer after propensity score (PS) matching. Results: A total of 8,284 patients of new-users of finasteride and 8,670 patients of new-users of dutasteride were included across the 15 databases. In the overall population, compared to dutasteride, finasteride was associated with a lower risk of prostate cancer in both on-treatment and intent-to-treat time-at-risk periods. After 1:1 PS matching, 4,897 patients using finasteride and 4,897 patients using dutasteride were enrolled in the present study. No significant differences were observed for risk of prostate cancer between finasteride and dutasteride both on-treatment (HR=0.66, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.44–1.00; p=0.051) and intent-to-treat time-at-risk periods (HR=0.87, 95% CI: 0.67–1.14; p=0.310). Conclusions Using real-world databases, the present study demonstrated that dutasteride was not associated with a lower risk of prostate cancer than finasteride in patients with BPH.

Background: The development of frailty at hospital discharge affects the clinical outcomes in severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) survivors who had no frailty before hospitalization. We aimed to describe the prevalence of new frailty using the clinical frailty scale (CFS) and evaluate its associated factors in patients with severe COVID-19 without pre-existing frailty before hospitalization. Methods: We performed a secondary analysis of clinical data from a nationwide retrospective cohort collected from 22 hospitals between January 1, 2020 and August 31, 2021. The patients were at least 19 years old and survived until discharge after admission to the intensive care unit (ICU) because of severe COVID-19. Development of new frailty was defined as a CFS score ≥5 at hospital discharge. Results: Among 669 severe COVID-19 survivors without pre-existing frailty admitted to the ICU, the mean age was 65.2±12.8 years, 62.5% were male, and 50.2% received mechanical ventilation (MV). The mean CFS score at admission was 2.4±0.9, and new frailty developed in 27.8% (186/483). In multivariate analysis, older age, cardiovascular disease, CFS score of 3–4 before hospitalization, increased C-reactive protein level, longer duration of corticosteroid treatment, and use of MV and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation were identified as factors associated with new-onset frailty. Conclusion Our study suggests that new frailty is not uncommon and is associated with diverse factors in survivors of severe COVID-19 without pre-existing frailty.

Purpose: Emphysematous pyelonephritis (EPN) is a life-threatening disease requiring immediate treatment. This multicenter retrospective cohort study aimed to analyze the mortality rate and risk factors associated with EPN. Materials and Methods: Between January 2011 and February 2021, 217 patients diagnosed with EPN via computed tomography who visited 14 teaching hospitals were retrospectively analyzed. Clinical data, including age, sex, comorbidities, Huang and Tseng classification, hydronephrosis, acute kidney injury, blood and urine tests, surgical interventions, percutaneous drainage, and conservative treatments, were compared between the survival and death groups. Risk factors for mortality due to EPN were analyzed using univariate and multivariate methods. Results: The mean age of survivors and deceased patients was 67.8 and 69.0 years, respectively (p=0.136). The sex distribution (male/female) was 48/146 and 8/15, respectively (p=0.298). Of the 217 patients, 23 died, resulting in a mortality rate of 10.6%. In univariate analysis, the Huang and Tseng classification (p=0.004), platelet count (p=0.005), and acute kidney injury (p=0.007) were significantly associated with mortality from EPN. In multivariate analysis, only the Huang and Tseng classification (p=0.029) was identified as a risk factor. Mortality rates according to the Huang and Tseng classification were as follows: class I (5.88%), class II (7.50%), class IIIa (14.28%), class IIIb (25.00%), and class IV (23.07%). Conclusions EPN is associated with a high mortality rate. Among various clinical factors, the Huang and Tseng classification was the most significant indicator for predicting mortality.

Purpose: This study aimed to evaluate the prognosis of the not evaluated (NE) group by comparing it with the lost to follow-up (LTFU) group among patients with multidrug/rifampin-resistant tuberculosis (MDR/RR-TB). Materials and Methods: This was a retrospective longitudinal follow-up study using an integrated database constructed by data linkage of the three national databases. This database included 7226 cases of MDR/RR-TB notified between 2011 and 2017 in South Korea. Results: Among the 7226 MDR/RR-TB cases, 730 (10.1%) were classified as LTFU group, and 353 (4.9%) as NE group. When comparing NE group with LTFU group, there were no significant differences in the all-cause mortality rate (18.1% vs. 13.8%, p=0.065), median time to death [404 days (interquartile range, IQR 46–850) vs. 443 days (IQR 185–1157), p=0.140], and retreatment rate (26.9% vs.22.2%, p=0.090). After adjusting for potential confounders, the adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) for all-cause mortality (aHR 1.11; 95% confidence interval 0.80-1.53; p=0.531) in NE group was not significantly different than that in LTFU group. Among retreated cases, NE group had a higher treatment success rate (57.9% vs 43.8%, p=0.029) and a lower LTFU rate (11.6% vs 38.3%, p<0.001) compared to LTFU group. Conclusion NE group had an unfavorable outcome comparable to LTFU group, suggesting undetected cases of LTFU or deaths during the referral process. Establishing an efficient patient referral system would contribute to reducing the incidence of NE cases.

Purpose: The immunological response and adverse effects of antineutrophil cytoplasmic antibody-associated vasculitis (AAV) in patients receiving coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) vaccines remain unclear. We aimed to evaluate the effects of these vaccines on AAV disease activity. Materials and Methods: We reviewed the medical records of 52 patients with AAV who had received at least second doses of the COVID-19 vaccine and evaluated their immunogenicity by measuring the anti-spike (S) antibody (Ab) titer levels using the Roche Elecsys® immunoassay. Responses to the Birmingham Vasculitis Activity Score (BVAS) tool and 36-Item Short Form Survey before and after vaccination were obtained to assess AAV disease activity. Vaccine reactivity was measured using a standardized questionnaire. Results: We enrolled 52 patients with AAV. No differences were found between those who received second and third doses of vaccination in terms of AAV type, disease activity, vaccine type, or the use of immunosuppressive agents, including steroids. The median anti-S Ab titer was 3967.0 after third doses compared to 419.0 after second doses (p=0.001). Except for mycophenolate mofetil (MMF), when immunosuppressants were administered in conjunction with steroids, the Ab titer was higher after the third vaccination than that after the second dose. The BVAS remained unchanged before and after second and third doses. No life-threatening adverse events were reported. Conclusion Although COVID-19 vaccine may not produce sufficient antibodies in patients taking MMF, the vaccine did not exacerbate disease activity or cause severe side effects. Therefore, COVID-19 vaccines should be considered in patients with AAV.

There is no established treatment for severe fever with thrombocytopenia syndrome (SFTS). However, the potential role of tocilizumab (TCZ) in cytokine storm modulation warrants further investigation. In this study, we aimed to investigate the therapeutic potential of TCZ in adult patients with SFTS and provide valuable insights into the development of effective treatment strategies for this challenging infectious disease by assessing the impact of TCZ on cytokine dynamics and patient outcomes. This prospective longitudinal observational study included adult patients with SFTS at a teaching hospital in Korea between April 2013 and December 2023. Patients with SFTS and interleukin (IL)-6 levels ≥30 ng/mL received TCZ. The 14- and 28-day mortality rates were compared between the TCZ and therapeutic plasma exchange (TPE) groups during the study period. Among the total of 97 patients, the clinical characteristics showed no significant differences between the TCZ (n=10) and TPE groups (n=30). Compared with TPE, TCZ treatment showed a trend towards lower mortality rate (14-day mortality rate: 10.0% vs. 16.7%, p=0.608; 28-day mortality rate:10.0% vs. 20.0%, p=0.480). Both treatments showed the potential to reduce the viral load and IL-6 levels, indicating their efficacy in managing the disease course. TCZ is a potential therapeutic option for SFTS as it modulates IL-6 levels and improves clinical outcomes.

Background: s/Aims: Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) is widely employed for managing recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) following transarterial chemoembolization (TACE). However, local tumor progression (LTP) after treatment remains a significant challenge. This study evaluates the efficacy of saline-perfused bipolar RFA using twin internally cooled-perfusion (TICP) electrodes in managing recurrent HCC post-TACE. Methods: Between September 2017 and January 2019, 100 patients with 105 nodules (mean diameter, 1.6±0.5 cm) were prospectively enrolled. Bipolar RFA with TICP electrodes was performed under ultrasound-computed tomography/magnetic resonance fusion guidance. The primary outcome was the 2-year cumulative incidence of LTP. Results: The technical success and technique efficacy rates were 100% and 97%, respectively. During a median follow-up period of 34.0 months (range, 3-41), the estimated LTP rates were 13.3% at 1 year and 17.7% at 2 years. Progression-free survival rates were 37.8% and 27.7% at 1 year and 2 years, respectively. Conclusions Saline-perfused bipolar RFA using TICP electrodes demonstrates promising results for recurrent HCC after TACE, achieving high technical success and effective local tumor control rates.

Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is a chronic, disabling, and functional bowel disorder that significantly affects social functioning and reduces quality of life and increases social costs. The Korean Society of Neurogastroenterology and Motility published clinical practice guidelines on the management of IBS based on a systematic review of the literature in 2017, and planned to revise these guidelines in light of new evidence on the pathophysiology, diagnosis, and management of IBS. The current revised version of the guidelines is consistent with the previous version and targets adults diagnosed with or suspected of having IBS. These guidelines were developed using a combination of de novo and adaptation methods, with analyses of existing guidelines and discussions within the committee, leading to the identification of key clinical questions. Finally, the guidelines consisted of 22 recommendations, including 3 concerning the definition and risk factors of IBS, 4 regarding diagnostic modalities and strategies, 2 regarding general management, and 13 regarding medical treatment. For each statement, the advantages, disadvantages, and precautions were thoroughly detailed. The modified Delphi method was used to achieve expert consensus to adopt the core recommendations of the guidelines. These guidelines serve as a reference for clinicians (including primary care physicians, general healthcare providers, medical students, residents, and other healthcare professionals) and patients, helping them to make informed decisions regarding IBS management.