Objective: This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of romosozumab, a bone anabolic agent, versus vertebroplasty, a conventional surgical intervention, in treating osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures (OVCFs). Methods: A retrospective analysis included 86 thoracic/lumbar compression fracture patients from 2014 to 2022 at a medical center. Forty-two patients received romosozumab (monthly injections for 1 year) followed by 1 year of denosumab, while 44 underwent vertebroplasty followed by denosumab injections biannually for 2 years. Outcomes were assessed using the Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) for pain, bone mineral density (BMD), vertebral compression ratio, and Cobb angle over 12 months. Results: At 12 months, the romosozumab group showed a greater reduction in NRS scores (4.90 ± 1.01 vs. 4.27 ± 1.34, p = 0.015) and a higher increase in lumbar BMD (0.8 ± 0.5 vs. 0.5 ± 0.3, p = 0.000) compared to the vertebroplasty group. There were no significant differences in changes in hip total BMD and femur neck BMD (p = 0.190, p = 0.167, respectively). Radiographic assessments showed no significant differences in vertebral compression ratio (14.7% vs. 14.8%; p = 0.960) or Cobb angle (4.2° vs. 4.9°; p = 0.302). The incidence of major osteoporotic fractures was lower in the romosozumab group (7.1% vs. 25.0%, p = 0.051), with similar rates of cardiovascular events in both groups (4.8% vs. 9.1%, p = 0.716). Conclusion Romosozumab has demonstrated superior pain reduction and lumbar BMD improvement compared to vertebroplasty at 12 months, with no significant differences in radiographic outcomes or adverse events, suggesting it as an alternative to vertebroplasty for OVCF.

Objective: This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of romosozumab, a bone anabolic agent, versus vertebroplasty, a conventional surgical intervention, in treating osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures (OVCFs). Methods: A retrospective analysis included 86 thoracic/lumbar compression fracture patients from 2014 to 2022 at a medical center. Forty-two patients received romosozumab (monthly injections for 1 year) followed by 1 year of denosumab, while 44 underwent vertebroplasty followed by denosumab injections biannually for 2 years. Outcomes were assessed using the Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) for pain, bone mineral density (BMD), vertebral compression ratio, and Cobb angle over 12 months. Results: At 12 months, the romosozumab group showed a greater reduction in NRS scores (4.90 ± 1.01 vs. 4.27 ± 1.34, p = 0.015) and a higher increase in lumbar BMD (0.8 ± 0.5 vs. 0.5 ± 0.3, p = 0.000) compared to the vertebroplasty group. There were no significant differences in changes in hip total BMD and femur neck BMD (p = 0.190, p = 0.167, respectively). Radiographic assessments showed no significant differences in vertebral compression ratio (14.7% vs. 14.8%; p = 0.960) or Cobb angle (4.2° vs. 4.9°; p = 0.302). The incidence of major osteoporotic fractures was lower in the romosozumab group (7.1% vs. 25.0%, p = 0.051), with similar rates of cardiovascular events in both groups (4.8% vs. 9.1%, p = 0.716). Conclusion Romosozumab has demonstrated superior pain reduction and lumbar BMD improvement compared to vertebroplasty at 12 months, with no significant differences in radiographic outcomes or adverse events, suggesting it as an alternative to vertebroplasty for OVCF.

Objective: This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of romosozumab, a bone anabolic agent, versus vertebroplasty, a conventional surgical intervention, in treating osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures (OVCFs). Methods: A retrospective analysis included 86 thoracic/lumbar compression fracture patients from 2014 to 2022 at a medical center. Forty-two patients received romosozumab (monthly injections for 1 year) followed by 1 year of denosumab, while 44 underwent vertebroplasty followed by denosumab injections biannually for 2 years. Outcomes were assessed using the Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) for pain, bone mineral density (BMD), vertebral compression ratio, and Cobb angle over 12 months. Results: At 12 months, the romosozumab group showed a greater reduction in NRS scores (4.90 ± 1.01 vs. 4.27 ± 1.34, p = 0.015) and a higher increase in lumbar BMD (0.8 ± 0.5 vs. 0.5 ± 0.3, p = 0.000) compared to the vertebroplasty group. There were no significant differences in changes in hip total BMD and femur neck BMD (p = 0.190, p = 0.167, respectively). Radiographic assessments showed no significant differences in vertebral compression ratio (14.7% vs. 14.8%; p = 0.960) or Cobb angle (4.2° vs. 4.9°; p = 0.302). The incidence of major osteoporotic fractures was lower in the romosozumab group (7.1% vs. 25.0%, p = 0.051), with similar rates of cardiovascular events in both groups (4.8% vs. 9.1%, p = 0.716). Conclusion Romosozumab has demonstrated superior pain reduction and lumbar BMD improvement compared to vertebroplasty at 12 months, with no significant differences in radiographic outcomes or adverse events, suggesting it as an alternative to vertebroplasty for OVCF.

Objective: This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of romosozumab, a bone anabolic agent, versus vertebroplasty, a conventional surgical intervention, in treating osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures (OVCFs). Methods: A retrospective analysis included 86 thoracic/lumbar compression fracture patients from 2014 to 2022 at a medical center. Forty-two patients received romosozumab (monthly injections for 1 year) followed by 1 year of denosumab, while 44 underwent vertebroplasty followed by denosumab injections biannually for 2 years. Outcomes were assessed using the Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) for pain, bone mineral density (BMD), vertebral compression ratio, and Cobb angle over 12 months. Results: At 12 months, the romosozumab group showed a greater reduction in NRS scores (4.90 ± 1.01 vs. 4.27 ± 1.34, p = 0.015) and a higher increase in lumbar BMD (0.8 ± 0.5 vs. 0.5 ± 0.3, p = 0.000) compared to the vertebroplasty group. There were no significant differences in changes in hip total BMD and femur neck BMD (p = 0.190, p = 0.167, respectively). Radiographic assessments showed no significant differences in vertebral compression ratio (14.7% vs. 14.8%; p = 0.960) or Cobb angle (4.2° vs. 4.9°; p = 0.302). The incidence of major osteoporotic fractures was lower in the romosozumab group (7.1% vs. 25.0%, p = 0.051), with similar rates of cardiovascular events in both groups (4.8% vs. 9.1%, p = 0.716). Conclusion Romosozumab has demonstrated superior pain reduction and lumbar BMD improvement compared to vertebroplasty at 12 months, with no significant differences in radiographic outcomes or adverse events, suggesting it as an alternative to vertebroplasty for OVCF.

Objective: This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of romosozumab, a bone anabolic agent, versus vertebroplasty, a conventional surgical intervention, in treating osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures (OVCFs). Methods: A retrospective analysis included 86 thoracic/lumbar compression fracture patients from 2014 to 2022 at a medical center. Forty-two patients received romosozumab (monthly injections for 1 year) followed by 1 year of denosumab, while 44 underwent vertebroplasty followed by denosumab injections biannually for 2 years. Outcomes were assessed using the Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) for pain, bone mineral density (BMD), vertebral compression ratio, and Cobb angle over 12 months. Results: At 12 months, the romosozumab group showed a greater reduction in NRS scores (4.90 ± 1.01 vs. 4.27 ± 1.34, p = 0.015) and a higher increase in lumbar BMD (0.8 ± 0.5 vs. 0.5 ± 0.3, p = 0.000) compared to the vertebroplasty group. There were no significant differences in changes in hip total BMD and femur neck BMD (p = 0.190, p = 0.167, respectively). Radiographic assessments showed no significant differences in vertebral compression ratio (14.7% vs. 14.8%; p = 0.960) or Cobb angle (4.2° vs. 4.9°; p = 0.302). The incidence of major osteoporotic fractures was lower in the romosozumab group (7.1% vs. 25.0%, p = 0.051), with similar rates of cardiovascular events in both groups (4.8% vs. 9.1%, p = 0.716). Conclusion Romosozumab has demonstrated superior pain reduction and lumbar BMD improvement compared to vertebroplasty at 12 months, with no significant differences in radiographic outcomes or adverse events, suggesting it as an alternative to vertebroplasty for OVCF.

Background: Primary cutaneous CD30+ lymphoproliferative disorders (pcCD30-LPDs) are a diseases with various clinical and prognostic characteristics. Objective: Increasing our knowledge of the clinical characteristics of pcCD30-LPDs and identifying potential prognostic variables in an Asian population. Methods: Clinicopathological features and survival data of pcCD30-LPD cases obtained from 22 hospitals in South Korea were examined. Results: A total of 413 cases of pcCD30-LPDs (lymphomatoid papulosis [LYP], n=237; primary cutaneous anaplastic large cell lymphoma [C-ALCL], n=176) were included. Ninety percent of LYP patients and roughly 50% of C-ALCL patients presented with multiple skin lesions. Both LYP and C-ALCL affected the lower limbs most frequently. Multiplicity and advanced T stage of LYP lesions were associated with a chronic course longer than 6 months. Clinical morphology with patch lesions and elevated serum lactate dehydrogenase were significantly associated with LPDs during follow-up in LYP patients. Extracutaneous involvement of C-ALCL occurred in 13.2% of patients. Lesions larger than 5 cm and increased serum lactate dehydrogenase were associated with a poor prognosis in C-ALCL. The survival of patients with C-ALCL was unaffected by the anatomical locations of skin lesions or other pathological factors. Conclusion The multiplicity or size of skin lesions was associated with a chronic course of LYP and survival among patients with C-ALCL.

Background: Humans are exposed to mercury primarily in its highly toxic form, methyl mercury, which is known to have adverse effects on various organs and systems. The negative impact of mercury exposure on the growth, development, and mental health of children, from infancy to adolescence, is well-documented. However, there are no internationally standardized safe limits for mercury exposure. This study investigated the impact of dietary habits and higher body mass index (BMI) on blood mercury levels in adolescents. Methods: This study analyzed the data from the 4th Korean National Environmental Health Survey (KoNEHS) 2018–2020. The focus was on 825 middle and high school students aged 13–18 years, whose blood mercury levels were measured. A survey on dietary and lifestyle habits was also conducted. Blood mercury levels were categorized by geometric median values, and associations with overweight status and seafood consumption were examined using a generalized linear model. Results: The geometric mean blood mercury level for the entire sample was 1.37 μg/L, with levels of 1.31 μg/L in normal-weight individuals and 1.43 μg/L in overweight individuals, showing a statistically significant difference between the two groups. After adjusting for other variables, blood mercury levels were significantly associated with overweight status (estimate: 0.084; p = 0.018; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.015–0.153), consumption of large fish and tuna more than once a week (estimate: 0.18; p = 0.001; 95% CI: 0.077–0.284), and consumption of fish once a week or more (estimate: 0.147; p = 0.004; 95% CI: 0.043–0.250). Conclusions In adolescents, a higher BMI and an increased consumption of large fish, tuna, and fish were associated with higher blood mercury levels. Notably, a stronger association was found between large fish consumption and blood mercury levels in the overweight group. These findings suggest the need to moderate seafood consumption and establish more proactive mercury exposure standards for adolescents.

Background: The incidence of epistaxis during nasotracheal intubation via the left nostril is more frequent than that during intubation via the right nostril. This study evaluated the effect of the reverse bevel and tip direction of the nasotracheal tube on the incidence of epistaxis during nasotracheal intubation via the left nostril. Methods: Patients undergoing right-sided maxillofacial surgery requiring left nasotracheal intubation were randomly allocated to the control (tracheal tube in the conventional direction) or reverse (a 180˚ reverse direction, with the tube bevel facing the nasal septum and the leading edge (i.e., the tip) of the bevel pointing away from the nasal septum) groups (n = 37 for both). The primary outcome was the incidence of epistaxis evaluated using videolaryngoscopy. Results: The incidence of epistaxis in the reverse group was significantly lower than that in the control group (9 [24.3%] vs. 20 [54.1%], P = 0.009; relative risk: 0.45, 95% CI [0.24, 0.85], absolute risk reduction: 29.8%, number needed to treat: 3). The severity of epistaxis was significantly lower in the reverse group (P = 0.002). The first attempt nasal passage (P = 0.027) was significantly higher in the reverse group. Postoperative nasal pain was lower (P < 0.001), and patient satisfaction was higher (P < 0.001) in the reverse group. Nasotracheal tube-related complications did not occur in either group. Conclusions The reverse bevel and tip direction of the nasotracheal tube reduced the incidence and severity of epistaxis and increased patient satisfaction among patients undergoing left nasotracheal intubation.

Background: The incidence of epistaxis during nasotracheal intubation via the left nostril is more frequent than that during intubation via the right nostril. This study evaluated the effect of the reverse bevel and tip direction of the nasotracheal tube on the incidence of epistaxis during nasotracheal intubation via the left nostril. Methods: Patients undergoing right-sided maxillofacial surgery requiring left nasotracheal intubation were randomly allocated to the control (tracheal tube in the conventional direction) or reverse (a 180˚ reverse direction, with the tube bevel facing the nasal septum and the leading edge (i.e., the tip) of the bevel pointing away from the nasal septum) groups (n = 37 for both). The primary outcome was the incidence of epistaxis evaluated using videolaryngoscopy. Results: The incidence of epistaxis in the reverse group was significantly lower than that in the control group (9 [24.3%] vs. 20 [54.1%], P = 0.009; relative risk: 0.45, 95% CI [0.24, 0.85], absolute risk reduction: 29.8%, number needed to treat: 3). The severity of epistaxis was significantly lower in the reverse group (P = 0.002). The first attempt nasal passage (P = 0.027) was significantly higher in the reverse group. Postoperative nasal pain was lower (P < 0.001), and patient satisfaction was higher (P < 0.001) in the reverse group. Nasotracheal tube-related complications did not occur in either group. Conclusions The reverse bevel and tip direction of the nasotracheal tube reduced the incidence and severity of epistaxis and increased patient satisfaction among patients undergoing left nasotracheal intubation.

Background: The incidence of epistaxis during nasotracheal intubation via the left nostril is more frequent than that during intubation via the right nostril. This study evaluated the effect of the reverse bevel and tip direction of the nasotracheal tube on the incidence of epistaxis during nasotracheal intubation via the left nostril. Methods: Patients undergoing right-sided maxillofacial surgery requiring left nasotracheal intubation were randomly allocated to the control (tracheal tube in the conventional direction) or reverse (a 180˚ reverse direction, with the tube bevel facing the nasal septum and the leading edge (i.e., the tip) of the bevel pointing away from the nasal septum) groups (n = 37 for both). The primary outcome was the incidence of epistaxis evaluated using videolaryngoscopy. Results: The incidence of epistaxis in the reverse group was significantly lower than that in the control group (9 [24.3%] vs. 20 [54.1%], P = 0.009; relative risk: 0.45, 95% CI [0.24, 0.85], absolute risk reduction: 29.8%, number needed to treat: 3). The severity of epistaxis was significantly lower in the reverse group (P = 0.002). The first attempt nasal passage (P = 0.027) was significantly higher in the reverse group. Postoperative nasal pain was lower (P < 0.001), and patient satisfaction was higher (P < 0.001) in the reverse group. Nasotracheal tube-related complications did not occur in either group. Conclusions The reverse bevel and tip direction of the nasotracheal tube reduced the incidence and severity of epistaxis and increased patient satisfaction among patients undergoing left nasotracheal intubation.