Objective: : In degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis, interbody fusion surgery (IFS) has long been recommended as the gold standard of surgical management. However, IFS is less recommended for high-risk patients such as the elderly because it involves extensive surgery, with a long operation time and high volumes of blood loss, which lead to marked perioperative morbidity. We report an alternative primary and salvage treatment technique for high-risk lumbar spondylolisthesis through posterior lumbar element reinforcement using interspinous fixation and decompression alone without interbody fusion. Methods: : Plain radiographs, computed tomography scans, and magnetic resonance imaging, taken at different intervals, were used to measure local disc height (DH), vertebral body slippage (BS), and segmental motion angle (SMA). A Visual analogue scale and the Oswestry disability index (ODI) were applied pre-operation and at the last follow-up. Results: : The local SMA decreased significantly by 3.46°±3.07°, from 10.61°±3.42° preoperatively to 7.15±3.70 at the last follow-up (p<0.001). The DH decreased from 8.61±2.88 mm preoperatively to 8.41±2.48 mm at the last follow-up (p=0.074). The BS decreased from 3.49±4.29 mm preoperatively to 3.41±4.91 mm at the last follow-up (p=0.092). None of the patients reported worsening pain or an increased ODI after surgery, and there were no surgery-related complications. Conclusion : Posterior lumbar element reinforcement by decompression alone with SPIRE™ fixation is an alternative primary and salvage treatment option for select patients with spondylolisthesis.

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.

Purpose: Cancer poses a significant global health challenge, demanding precise genomic testing for individualized treatment strategies. Targeted-panel sequencing (TPS) has improved personalized oncology but often lacks comprehensive coverage of crucial cancer alterations. Whole-genome sequencing (WGS) addresses this gap, offering extensive genomic testing. This study demonstrates the medical potential of WGS. Materials and Methods: This study evaluates target-enhanced WGS (TE-WGS), a clinical-grade WGS method sequencing both cancer and matched normal tissues. Forty-nine patients with various solid cancer types underwent both TE-WGS and TruSight Oncology 500 (TSO500), one of the mainstream TPS approaches. Results: TE-WGS detected all variants reported by TSO500 (100%, 498/498). A high correlation in variant allele fractions was observed between TE-WGS and TSO500 (r=0.978). Notably, 223 variants (44.8%) within the common set were discerned exclusively by TE-WGS in peripheral blood, suggesting their germline origin. Conversely, the remaining subset of 275 variants (55.2%) were not detected in peripheral blood using the TE-WGS, signifying them as bona fide somatic variants. Further, TE-WGS provided accurate copy number profiles, fusion genes, microsatellite instability, and homologous recombination deficiency scores, which were essential for clinical decision-making. Conclusion TE-WGS is a comprehensive approach in personalized oncology, matching TSO500’s key biomarker detection capabilities. It uniquely identifies germline variants and genomic instability markers, offering additional clinical actions. Its adaptability and cost-effectiveness underscore its clinical utility, making TE-WGS a valuable tool in personalized cancer treatment.

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: : In degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis, interbody fusion surgery (IFS) has long been recommended as the gold standard of surgical management. However, IFS is less recommended for high-risk patients such as the elderly because it involves extensive surgery, with a long operation time and high volumes of blood loss, which lead to marked perioperative morbidity. We report an alternative primary and salvage treatment technique for high-risk lumbar spondylolisthesis through posterior lumbar element reinforcement using interspinous fixation and decompression alone without interbody fusion. Methods: : Plain radiographs, computed tomography scans, and magnetic resonance imaging, taken at different intervals, were used to measure local disc height (DH), vertebral body slippage (BS), and segmental motion angle (SMA). A Visual analogue scale and the Oswestry disability index (ODI) were applied pre-operation and at the last follow-up. Results: : The local SMA decreased significantly by 3.46°±3.07°, from 10.61°±3.42° preoperatively to 7.15±3.70 at the last follow-up (p<0.001). The DH decreased from 8.61±2.88 mm preoperatively to 8.41±2.48 mm at the last follow-up (p=0.074). The BS decreased from 3.49±4.29 mm preoperatively to 3.41±4.91 mm at the last follow-up (p=0.092). None of the patients reported worsening pain or an increased ODI after surgery, and there were no surgery-related complications. Conclusion : Posterior lumbar element reinforcement by decompression alone with SPIRE™ fixation is an alternative primary and salvage treatment option for select patients with spondylolisthesis.

Objective: : In degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis, interbody fusion surgery (IFS) has long been recommended as the gold standard of surgical management. However, IFS is less recommended for high-risk patients such as the elderly because it involves extensive surgery, with a long operation time and high volumes of blood loss, which lead to marked perioperative morbidity. We report an alternative primary and salvage treatment technique for high-risk lumbar spondylolisthesis through posterior lumbar element reinforcement using interspinous fixation and decompression alone without interbody fusion. Methods: : Plain radiographs, computed tomography scans, and magnetic resonance imaging, taken at different intervals, were used to measure local disc height (DH), vertebral body slippage (BS), and segmental motion angle (SMA). A Visual analogue scale and the Oswestry disability index (ODI) were applied pre-operation and at the last follow-up. Results: : The local SMA decreased significantly by 3.46°±3.07°, from 10.61°±3.42° preoperatively to 7.15±3.70 at the last follow-up (p<0.001). The DH decreased from 8.61±2.88 mm preoperatively to 8.41±2.48 mm at the last follow-up (p=0.074). The BS decreased from 3.49±4.29 mm preoperatively to 3.41±4.91 mm at the last follow-up (p=0.092). None of the patients reported worsening pain or an increased ODI after surgery, and there were no surgery-related complications. Conclusion : Posterior lumbar element reinforcement by decompression alone with SPIRE™ fixation is an alternative primary and salvage treatment option for select patients with spondylolisthesis.

Background: and Purpose Treatments for neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorder (NMOSD) such as eculizumab, ravulizumab, satralizumab, and inebilizumab have significantly advanced relapse prevention, but they remain expensive. Rituximab is an off-label yet popular alternative that offers a cost-effective solution, but its real-world efficacy needs better quantification for guiding the application of newer approved NMOSD treatments (ANTs). This study aimed to determine real-world rituximab failure rates to anticipate the demand for ANTs and aid in resource allocation. Methods: We conducted a nationwide retrospective study involving 605 aquaporin-4-antibody-positive NMOSD patients from 22 centers in South Korea that assessed the efficacy and safety of rituximab over a median follow-up of 47 months. Results: The 605 patients treated with rituximab included 525 (87%) who received continuous therapy throughout the follow-up period (median=47 months, interquartile range=15–87 months). During this period, 117 patients (19%) experienced at least 1 relapse. Notably, 68 of these patients (11% of the total cohort) experienced multiple relapses or at least 1 severe relapse.Additionally, 2% of the patients discontinued rituximab due to adverse events, which included severe infusion reactions, neutropenia, and infections. Conclusions This study has confirmed the efficacy of rituximab in treating NMOSD, as evidenced by an 87% continuation rate among patients over a 4-year follow-up period. Nevertheless, the occurrence of at least one relapse in 19% of the cohort, including 11% who experienced multiple or severe relapses, and a 2% discontinuation rate due to adverse events highlight the urgent need for alternative therapeutic options.

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.