This study explores the development, roles, and key initiatives of the Regional Environmental Health Centers in Korea, detailing their evolution through four distinct phases and their impact on environmental health policy and local governance. It chronicles the establishment and transformation of these centers from their inception in May 2007, through four developmental stages. Originally named Environmental Disease Research Centers, they were subsequently renamed Environmental Health Centers following legislative changes. The analysis includes the expansion in the number of centers, the transfer of responsibilities to local governments, and the launch of significant projects such as the Korean Children’s Environmental Health Study (Ko-CHENS ). During the initial phase (May 2007–February 2009), the 10 centers concentrated on research-driven activities, shifting from a media-centered to a receptor-centered approach. In the second phase, prompted by the enactment of the Environmental Health Act, six additional centers were established, broadening their scope to address national environmental health issues. The third phase introduced Ko-CHENS, a 20-year national cohort project designed to influence environmental health policy by integrating research findings into policy frameworks. The fourth phase marked a decentralization of authority, empowering local governments and redefining the centers' roles to focus on regional environmental health challenges. The Regional Environmental Health Centers have significantly evolved and now play a crucial role in addressing local environmental health issues and supporting local government policies. Their capacity to adapt and respond to region-specific challenges is essential for the effective implementation of environmental health policies, reflecting geographical, socioeconomic, and demographic differences.

Background: This study evaluated adherence to the Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) and Korean guidelines in the prescription patterns of respiratory specialists for stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) management. Methods: Data were collected on medications from 2011 to 2022 using the Korea COPD Subtype Study (KOCOSS) cohort. Patients were divided into two groups: those registered before and after 2019, and we analyzed the percentage of patients meeting the recommended treatment criteria established by each guideline. Results: Among 3,477 patients, 85.6% received pharmacological therapy, and 81.6% utilized inhaled medications. Compared to patients enrolled before 2019, there was an increase in inhaler prescriptions among those registered after 2019 (79.7% vs. 86.7%), with dual bronchodilators being the predominant therapy prescribed. Of the patients receiving treatment, 56.9% adhered to the Korean 2018 guideline. Compliance with the GOLD 2019 and GOLD 2023 guidelines was observed in 31.3% and 28.0% of cases, respectively. When analyzing inhaler prescription patterns according to both subgroups and considering the Korean 2018, GOLD 2019, and GOLD 2023 guidelines concurrently, the adherence rates were as follows: (56.6%, 37.8%, 24.0%) and (57.7%, 14.0%, 38.6%). Conclusion Adherence rates were higher for the Korean guideline compared to the GOLD recommendations. Furthermore, alignment with both the Korean 2018 and GOLD 2023 guidelines increased among patients enrolled after 2019, compared to those registered earlier. These findings suggest that physicians are modifying their therapeutic strategies to align with both domestic and recent international guidelines.

Purpose: To investigate the outcomes of brolucizumab reinjection after intraocular inflammation (IOI) development. Methods: This retrospective study analyzed patients with brolucizumab injections from April 2021 to January 2024. Patients who developed IOI after brolucizumab were included and categorized into subgroups depending on reinjection, discontinuation, and further IOI development. Results: A total of 472 eyes of 432 patients received brolucizumab injections. Thirty-eight cases developed IOI at least once, and 25 continued brolucizumab. Sixteen cases had no more IOI events, and nine experienced a second or more IOI events. Among the nine cases, three maintained brolucizumab injections despite IOI recurrence. The incidence of IOI was 8.1% based on the number of eyes (38 of 472 eyes) and 2.0% based on the number of brolucizumab injections (50 of 2,468 injections). The incidence of occlusive retinal vasculitis was 0.2% (1 of 472 eyes). The recurrence rate was 23.7% (9 of 38 eyes). The average number of injections between the first brolucizumab injection and the injection date on which IOI first developed was 2.15 times in the no-reinjection group, 3.44 times in the no-IOI-recurrence group, and 2.0 times in the second-IOI-episode group. Time to IOI occurrence in cases with first IOI episode was 18.60 ± 16.73 days, with 15 cases developing IOI within 1 week. Conclusions This study elucidates the real-world incidence of brolucizumab associated IOIs, with a description of information related to reinjections after the IOI episodes. A comprehensive understanding of brolucizumab reinjection is essential for its optimal utilization.

Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) is a minimally invasive treatment modality used as an alternative to surgery in patients with benign thyroid nodules, recurrent thyroid cancers (RTCs), and primary thyroid microcarcinomas. The Korean Society of Thyroid Radiology (KSThR) initially developed recommendations for the optimal use of RFA for thyroid tumors in 2009 and revised them in 2012 and 2017. As new meaningful evidence has accumulated since 2017 and in response to a growing global interest in the use of RFA for treating malignant thyroid lesions, the task force committee members of the KSThR decided to update the guidelines on the use of RFA for the management of RTCs based on a comprehensive analysis of current literature and expert consensus.

Objective: To assess the performance of novel qualitative diagnostic criteria using dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to identify the pathologic complete response (pCR) of primary tumors in esophageal cancer after neoadjuvant chemoradiation (nCRT). Materials and Methods: Patients who underwent nCRT, subsequent MRI, positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT), endoscopy, or esophagectomy for esophageal cancer between October 2021 and October 2023 were retrospectively analyzed. The DCE-MRI response of primary tumors was interpreted using five grades by thoracic radiologists as follows: G1 (compatible with CR), G2 (probable CR), G3 (probable partial response [PR]), G4 (compatible with PR), and G5 (stable or progressive disease). The performances of MRI, PET/CT, endoscopy, and their combinations in diagnosing pCR in primary tumors were calculated. Results: A total of 52 patients (male:female, 46:6; age, 61.2 ± 8.0 years) were included. Surgical specimens revealed pCR (ypT0) in 34 patients. G1 as the MRI criterion for pCR of primary tumors yielded a positive predictive value (PPV), specificity of 100% (18/18), and low sensitivity (23.5% [8/34]). Combining G1 and G2 as the MRI criteria increased the sensitivity to 73.5% (25/34), with a specificity of 88.9% (16/18), accuracy of 78.8% (41/52), and PPV of 92.6% (25/27). Adding the DCEMRI results (G1-2) significantly improved accuracy for both PET/CT (from 65.4% [34/52] to 80.8% [42/52], P = 0.03) and endoscopy (from 55.8% [29/52] to 76.9% [40/52], P = 0.005), with increase in sensitivity (from 55.9% [19/34] to 82.4% [28/34] for PET/CT-based evaluation [P = 0.008] and from 47.1% [16/34] to 82.4% [28/34] for endoscopy-based evaluation [P = 0.001]). Conclusion DCE-MRI-based grading shows high diagnostic performance for identifying pCR in primary tumors, particularly in terms of PPV and specificity, and enhances response evaluation when combined with PET/CT and endoscopy.

Objective: To analyze costs and cost-effectiveness of transforaminal endoscopic thoracic discectomy (TETD) for the treatment of symptomatic thoracic disc herniation (TDH) and compare it with open microdiscectomy (MD). Methods: This retrospective cohort study included patients who underwent TETD or MD for symptomatic TDH and had a minimum follow-up of 1 year. Cost analysis included direct costs (primary and secondary hospital costs), indirect costs (lost wages due to work absence), total costs (direct + indirect), and cost-effectiveness (cost per quality-adjusted life year [QALY] and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio [ICER]). Clinical outcomes included patient-reported outcome measures (Oswestry Disability Index [ODI], 36-item Short Form health survey [SF-36]), QALY gained, and reoperation and readmission rates at 1 year. TETD and MD groups were compared for outcome measures. Results: A total of 111 patients (57 TETD, 54 MD) were included. The direct ($6,270 TETD vs. $7,410 MD, p < 0.01), indirect costs ($1,250 TETD vs. $1,450 MD, p < 0.01), total costs ($7,520 TETD vs. $8,860 MD, p < 0.01), and cost per QALY ($31,333 TETD vs. $44,300 MD, p < 0.01) were significantly lower for TETD compared to MD. ICER of TETD was found to be -$33,500. At 1 year, TETD group showed significantly greater improvement in ODI (46% vs. 36%, p < 0.01) and SF-36 (64% vs. 53%, p < 0.01) and significantly greater QALY gained (0.24 vs. 0.2, p < 0.01) compared to MD group. No significant difference was found in reoperation and readmission rates. Conclusion TETD demonstrated significantly better clinical outcomes, lower overall costs, and better cost-effectiveness than MD in appropriately selected patients of symptomatic TDH.

This study explores the development, roles, and key initiatives of the Regional Environmental Health Centers in Korea, detailing their evolution through four distinct phases and their impact on environmental health policy and local governance. It chronicles the establishment and transformation of these centers from their inception in May 2007, through four developmental stages. Originally named Environmental Disease Research Centers, they were subsequently renamed Environmental Health Centers following legislative changes. The analysis includes the expansion in the number of centers, the transfer of responsibilities to local governments, and the launch of significant projects such as the Korean Children’s Environmental Health Study (Ko-CHENS ). During the initial phase (May 2007–February 2009), the 10 centers concentrated on research-driven activities, shifting from a media-centered to a receptor-centered approach. In the second phase, prompted by the enactment of the Environmental Health Act, six additional centers were established, broadening their scope to address national environmental health issues. The third phase introduced Ko-CHENS, a 20-year national cohort project designed to influence environmental health policy by integrating research findings into policy frameworks. The fourth phase marked a decentralization of authority, empowering local governments and redefining the centers' roles to focus on regional environmental health challenges. The Regional Environmental Health Centers have significantly evolved and now play a crucial role in addressing local environmental health issues and supporting local government policies. Their capacity to adapt and respond to region-specific challenges is essential for the effective implementation of environmental health policies, reflecting geographical, socioeconomic, and demographic differences.

Background: This study evaluated adherence to the Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) and Korean guidelines in the prescription patterns of respiratory specialists for stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) management. Methods: Data were collected on medications from 2011 to 2022 using the Korea COPD Subtype Study (KOCOSS) cohort. Patients were divided into two groups: those registered before and after 2019, and we analyzed the percentage of patients meeting the recommended treatment criteria established by each guideline. Results: Among 3,477 patients, 85.6% received pharmacological therapy, and 81.6% utilized inhaled medications. Compared to patients enrolled before 2019, there was an increase in inhaler prescriptions among those registered after 2019 (79.7% vs. 86.7%), with dual bronchodilators being the predominant therapy prescribed. Of the patients receiving treatment, 56.9% adhered to the Korean 2018 guideline. Compliance with the GOLD 2019 and GOLD 2023 guidelines was observed in 31.3% and 28.0% of cases, respectively. When analyzing inhaler prescription patterns according to both subgroups and considering the Korean 2018, GOLD 2019, and GOLD 2023 guidelines concurrently, the adherence rates were as follows: (56.6%, 37.8%, 24.0%) and (57.7%, 14.0%, 38.6%). Conclusion Adherence rates were higher for the Korean guideline compared to the GOLD recommendations. Furthermore, alignment with both the Korean 2018 and GOLD 2023 guidelines increased among patients enrolled after 2019, compared to those registered earlier. These findings suggest that physicians are modifying their therapeutic strategies to align with both domestic and recent international guidelines.