Background and Objectives: The aim of this study was to confirm the effect of intralesional triamcinolone acetonide injections (TRIAM) to treat granulomatous tissue surrounding the tracheostomy stoma.Subjects and Method We reviewed and documented the medical charts of 20 patients who were administered with TRIAM to treat granulomatous tissue surrounding the tracheostomy stoma from January 2018 to June 2019 were. The surface area of the granulomatous tissue was measured using Image J. The differences between the area of the granulomatous tissue after conventional treatment and after TRIAM on the same patient were compared. Results: A total of 20 patients consisting of 12 males and 8 females were included, with the patients’ average age being 60.0±14.3 years. The initial surface area of granulation tissue was 1.266±0.449 cm2, and 1.243±0.432 cm2 after conventional treatment, showing no statistically significant difference in the tissue area (p=0.143). The pre-injection surface area of granulation tissue was 1.243±0.432 cm2, and the area on the 7th day after the third injection was 0.477±0.217 cm2, showing a significant difference (p<0.001). Conclusion Compared to the conventional treatment, the surface area of granulomatous tissue surrounding the tracheostomy stoma significantly decreased after being treating with TRIAM. This finding suggests the effectiveness of TRIAM as a treatment of granulomatous tissue surrounding the tracheostomy stoma without complications such as bleeding.

Background: Although an appropriate weight management strategy is essential for obese individuals, weight loss can have adverse effects on bone mineral density (BMD). We conducted a systematic review of randomized controlled trials to evaluate changes in BMD after the implementation of various weight loss strategies. Methods: The PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases were searched to find articles published from database inception until June 2023. Randomized controlled trials of various treatments for obese patients that reported changes in BMD were selected. The primary outcome was BMD of the whole body, lumbar spine, and total hip, measured using dual X-ray absorptiometry. Results: Eighteen randomized controlled trials involving 2,510 participants with obesity were included in the analysis. At follow-up examination, the BMD of the lumbar spine decreased significantly after metabolic surgery (mean difference [MD]= –0.40 g/cm2 ; 95% confidence interval [CI], –0.73 to –0.07; I2 = 0%); lifestyle and pharmacological interventions did not result in a significant decrease in BMD at any location. Metabolic surgery also produced the most substantial difference in weight, with an MD of –3.14 (95% CI, –3.82 to –2.47). Conclusion This meta-analysis is the first to examine the effects of all categories of anti-obesity strategies, including the use of anti-obesity medications, on BMD. Bariatric metabolic surgery can have adverse effects on BMD. Moreover, medications can be used as a treatment for weight loss without compromising bone quality.

Background and Objectives: The aim of this study was to confirm the effect of intralesional triamcinolone acetonide injections (TRIAM) to treat granulomatous tissue surrounding the tracheostomy stoma.Subjects and Method We reviewed and documented the medical charts of 20 patients who were administered with TRIAM to treat granulomatous tissue surrounding the tracheostomy stoma from January 2018 to June 2019 were. The surface area of the granulomatous tissue was measured using Image J. The differences between the area of the granulomatous tissue after conventional treatment and after TRIAM on the same patient were compared. Results: A total of 20 patients consisting of 12 males and 8 females were included, with the patients’ average age being 60.0±14.3 years. The initial surface area of granulation tissue was 1.266±0.449 cm2, and 1.243±0.432 cm2 after conventional treatment, showing no statistically significant difference in the tissue area (p=0.143). The pre-injection surface area of granulation tissue was 1.243±0.432 cm2, and the area on the 7th day after the third injection was 0.477±0.217 cm2, showing a significant difference (p<0.001). Conclusion Compared to the conventional treatment, the surface area of granulomatous tissue surrounding the tracheostomy stoma significantly decreased after being treating with TRIAM. This finding suggests the effectiveness of TRIAM as a treatment of granulomatous tissue surrounding the tracheostomy stoma without complications such as bleeding.

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.

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 and Objectives: The aim of this study was to confirm the effect of intralesional triamcinolone acetonide injections (TRIAM) to treat granulomatous tissue surrounding the tracheostomy stoma.Subjects and Method We reviewed and documented the medical charts of 20 patients who were administered with TRIAM to treat granulomatous tissue surrounding the tracheostomy stoma from January 2018 to June 2019 were. The surface area of the granulomatous tissue was measured using Image J. The differences between the area of the granulomatous tissue after conventional treatment and after TRIAM on the same patient were compared. Results: A total of 20 patients consisting of 12 males and 8 females were included, with the patients’ average age being 60.0±14.3 years. The initial surface area of granulation tissue was 1.266±0.449 cm2, and 1.243±0.432 cm2 after conventional treatment, showing no statistically significant difference in the tissue area (p=0.143). The pre-injection surface area of granulation tissue was 1.243±0.432 cm2, and the area on the 7th day after the third injection was 0.477±0.217 cm2, showing a significant difference (p<0.001). Conclusion Compared to the conventional treatment, the surface area of granulomatous tissue surrounding the tracheostomy stoma significantly decreased after being treating with TRIAM. This finding suggests the effectiveness of TRIAM as a treatment of granulomatous tissue surrounding the tracheostomy stoma without complications such as bleeding.

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 and Objectives: The aim of this study was to confirm the effect of intralesional triamcinolone acetonide injections (TRIAM) to treat granulomatous tissue surrounding the tracheostomy stoma.Subjects and Method We reviewed and documented the medical charts of 20 patients who were administered with TRIAM to treat granulomatous tissue surrounding the tracheostomy stoma from January 2018 to June 2019 were. The surface area of the granulomatous tissue was measured using Image J. The differences between the area of the granulomatous tissue after conventional treatment and after TRIAM on the same patient were compared. Results: A total of 20 patients consisting of 12 males and 8 females were included, with the patients’ average age being 60.0±14.3 years. The initial surface area of granulation tissue was 1.266±0.449 cm2, and 1.243±0.432 cm2 after conventional treatment, showing no statistically significant difference in the tissue area (p=0.143). The pre-injection surface area of granulation tissue was 1.243±0.432 cm2, and the area on the 7th day after the third injection was 0.477±0.217 cm2, showing a significant difference (p<0.001). Conclusion Compared to the conventional treatment, the surface area of granulomatous tissue surrounding the tracheostomy stoma significantly decreased after being treating with TRIAM. This finding suggests the effectiveness of TRIAM as a treatment of granulomatous tissue surrounding the tracheostomy stoma without complications such as bleeding.

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: Although an appropriate weight management strategy is essential for obese individuals, weight loss can have adverse effects on bone mineral density (BMD). We conducted a systematic review of randomized controlled trials to evaluate changes in BMD after the implementation of various weight loss strategies. Methods: The PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases were searched to find articles published from database inception until June 2023. Randomized controlled trials of various treatments for obese patients that reported changes in BMD were selected. The primary outcome was BMD of the whole body, lumbar spine, and total hip, measured using dual X-ray absorptiometry. Results: Eighteen randomized controlled trials involving 2,510 participants with obesity were included in the analysis. At follow-up examination, the BMD of the lumbar spine decreased significantly after metabolic surgery (mean difference [MD]= –0.40 g/cm2 ; 95% confidence interval [CI], –0.73 to –0.07; I2 = 0%); lifestyle and pharmacological interventions did not result in a significant decrease in BMD at any location. Metabolic surgery also produced the most substantial difference in weight, with an MD of –3.14 (95% CI, –3.82 to –2.47). Conclusion This meta-analysis is the first to examine the effects of all categories of anti-obesity strategies, including the use of anti-obesity medications, on BMD. Bariatric metabolic surgery can have adverse effects on BMD. Moreover, medications can be used as a treatment for weight loss without compromising bone quality.