1.Outcomes of Deferring Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Without Physiologic Assessment for Intermediate Coronary Lesions
Jihoon KIM ; Seong-Hoon LIM ; Joo-Yong HAHN ; Jin-Ok JEONG ; Yong Hwan PARK ; Woo Jung CHUN ; Ju Hyeon OH ; Dae Kyoung CHO ; Yu Jeong CHOI ; Eul-Soon IM ; Kyung-Heon WON ; Sung Yun LEE ; Sang-Wook KIM ; Ki Hong CHOI ; Joo Myung LEE ; Taek Kyu PARK ; Jeong Hoon YANG ; Young Bin SONG ; Seung-Hyuk CHOI ; Hyeon-Cheol GWON
Korean Circulation Journal 2025;55(3):185-195
Background and Objectives:
Outcomes of deferring percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) without invasive physiologic assessment for intermediate coronary lesions is uncertain.We sought to compare long-term outcomes between medical treatment and PCI of intermediate lesions without invasive physiologic assessment.
Methods:
A total of 899 patients with intermediate coronary lesions between 50% and 70% diameter-stenosis were randomized to the conservative group (n=449) or the aggressive group (n=450). For intermediate lesions, PCI was performed in the aggressive group, but was deferred in the conservative group. The primary endpoint was major adverse cardiac events (MACE, a composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction [MI], or ischemia-driven any revascularization) at 3 years.
Results:
The number of treated lesions per patient was 0.8±0.9 in the conservative group and 1.7±0.9 in the aggressive group (p=0.001). At 3 years, the conservative group had a significantly higher incidence of MACE than the aggressive group (13.8% vs. 9.3%; hazard ratio [HR], 1.49; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.00–2.21; p=0.049), mainly driven by revascularization of target intermediate lesion (6.5% vs. 1.1%; HR, 5.69; 95% CI, 2.20–14.73;p<0.001). Between 1 and 3 years after the index procedure, compared to the aggressive group, the conservative group had significantly higher incidence of cardiac death or MI (3.2% vs.0.7%; HR, 4.34; 95% CI, 1.24–15.22; p=0.022) and ischemia-driven any revascularization.
Conclusions
For intermediate lesions, medical therapy alone, guided only by angiography, was associated with a higher risk of MACE at 3 years compared with performing PCI, mainly due to increased revascularization.
2.Outcomes of Deferring Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Without Physiologic Assessment for Intermediate Coronary Lesions
Jihoon KIM ; Seong-Hoon LIM ; Joo-Yong HAHN ; Jin-Ok JEONG ; Yong Hwan PARK ; Woo Jung CHUN ; Ju Hyeon OH ; Dae Kyoung CHO ; Yu Jeong CHOI ; Eul-Soon IM ; Kyung-Heon WON ; Sung Yun LEE ; Sang-Wook KIM ; Ki Hong CHOI ; Joo Myung LEE ; Taek Kyu PARK ; Jeong Hoon YANG ; Young Bin SONG ; Seung-Hyuk CHOI ; Hyeon-Cheol GWON
Korean Circulation Journal 2025;55(3):185-195
Background and Objectives:
Outcomes of deferring percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) without invasive physiologic assessment for intermediate coronary lesions is uncertain.We sought to compare long-term outcomes between medical treatment and PCI of intermediate lesions without invasive physiologic assessment.
Methods:
A total of 899 patients with intermediate coronary lesions between 50% and 70% diameter-stenosis were randomized to the conservative group (n=449) or the aggressive group (n=450). For intermediate lesions, PCI was performed in the aggressive group, but was deferred in the conservative group. The primary endpoint was major adverse cardiac events (MACE, a composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction [MI], or ischemia-driven any revascularization) at 3 years.
Results:
The number of treated lesions per patient was 0.8±0.9 in the conservative group and 1.7±0.9 in the aggressive group (p=0.001). At 3 years, the conservative group had a significantly higher incidence of MACE than the aggressive group (13.8% vs. 9.3%; hazard ratio [HR], 1.49; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.00–2.21; p=0.049), mainly driven by revascularization of target intermediate lesion (6.5% vs. 1.1%; HR, 5.69; 95% CI, 2.20–14.73;p<0.001). Between 1 and 3 years after the index procedure, compared to the aggressive group, the conservative group had significantly higher incidence of cardiac death or MI (3.2% vs.0.7%; HR, 4.34; 95% CI, 1.24–15.22; p=0.022) and ischemia-driven any revascularization.
Conclusions
For intermediate lesions, medical therapy alone, guided only by angiography, was associated with a higher risk of MACE at 3 years compared with performing PCI, mainly due to increased revascularization.
3.Outcomes of Deferring Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Without Physiologic Assessment for Intermediate Coronary Lesions
Jihoon KIM ; Seong-Hoon LIM ; Joo-Yong HAHN ; Jin-Ok JEONG ; Yong Hwan PARK ; Woo Jung CHUN ; Ju Hyeon OH ; Dae Kyoung CHO ; Yu Jeong CHOI ; Eul-Soon IM ; Kyung-Heon WON ; Sung Yun LEE ; Sang-Wook KIM ; Ki Hong CHOI ; Joo Myung LEE ; Taek Kyu PARK ; Jeong Hoon YANG ; Young Bin SONG ; Seung-Hyuk CHOI ; Hyeon-Cheol GWON
Korean Circulation Journal 2025;55(3):185-195
Background and Objectives:
Outcomes of deferring percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) without invasive physiologic assessment for intermediate coronary lesions is uncertain.We sought to compare long-term outcomes between medical treatment and PCI of intermediate lesions without invasive physiologic assessment.
Methods:
A total of 899 patients with intermediate coronary lesions between 50% and 70% diameter-stenosis were randomized to the conservative group (n=449) or the aggressive group (n=450). For intermediate lesions, PCI was performed in the aggressive group, but was deferred in the conservative group. The primary endpoint was major adverse cardiac events (MACE, a composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction [MI], or ischemia-driven any revascularization) at 3 years.
Results:
The number of treated lesions per patient was 0.8±0.9 in the conservative group and 1.7±0.9 in the aggressive group (p=0.001). At 3 years, the conservative group had a significantly higher incidence of MACE than the aggressive group (13.8% vs. 9.3%; hazard ratio [HR], 1.49; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.00–2.21; p=0.049), mainly driven by revascularization of target intermediate lesion (6.5% vs. 1.1%; HR, 5.69; 95% CI, 2.20–14.73;p<0.001). Between 1 and 3 years after the index procedure, compared to the aggressive group, the conservative group had significantly higher incidence of cardiac death or MI (3.2% vs.0.7%; HR, 4.34; 95% CI, 1.24–15.22; p=0.022) and ischemia-driven any revascularization.
Conclusions
For intermediate lesions, medical therapy alone, guided only by angiography, was associated with a higher risk of MACE at 3 years compared with performing PCI, mainly due to increased revascularization.
4.Outcomes of Deferring Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Without Physiologic Assessment for Intermediate Coronary Lesions
Jihoon KIM ; Seong-Hoon LIM ; Joo-Yong HAHN ; Jin-Ok JEONG ; Yong Hwan PARK ; Woo Jung CHUN ; Ju Hyeon OH ; Dae Kyoung CHO ; Yu Jeong CHOI ; Eul-Soon IM ; Kyung-Heon WON ; Sung Yun LEE ; Sang-Wook KIM ; Ki Hong CHOI ; Joo Myung LEE ; Taek Kyu PARK ; Jeong Hoon YANG ; Young Bin SONG ; Seung-Hyuk CHOI ; Hyeon-Cheol GWON
Korean Circulation Journal 2025;55(3):185-195
Background and Objectives:
Outcomes of deferring percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) without invasive physiologic assessment for intermediate coronary lesions is uncertain.We sought to compare long-term outcomes between medical treatment and PCI of intermediate lesions without invasive physiologic assessment.
Methods:
A total of 899 patients with intermediate coronary lesions between 50% and 70% diameter-stenosis were randomized to the conservative group (n=449) or the aggressive group (n=450). For intermediate lesions, PCI was performed in the aggressive group, but was deferred in the conservative group. The primary endpoint was major adverse cardiac events (MACE, a composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction [MI], or ischemia-driven any revascularization) at 3 years.
Results:
The number of treated lesions per patient was 0.8±0.9 in the conservative group and 1.7±0.9 in the aggressive group (p=0.001). At 3 years, the conservative group had a significantly higher incidence of MACE than the aggressive group (13.8% vs. 9.3%; hazard ratio [HR], 1.49; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.00–2.21; p=0.049), mainly driven by revascularization of target intermediate lesion (6.5% vs. 1.1%; HR, 5.69; 95% CI, 2.20–14.73;p<0.001). Between 1 and 3 years after the index procedure, compared to the aggressive group, the conservative group had significantly higher incidence of cardiac death or MI (3.2% vs.0.7%; HR, 4.34; 95% CI, 1.24–15.22; p=0.022) and ischemia-driven any revascularization.
Conclusions
For intermediate lesions, medical therapy alone, guided only by angiography, was associated with a higher risk of MACE at 3 years compared with performing PCI, mainly due to increased revascularization.
5.Factors affecting health-related quality of life for older adults living alone in rural areas in Korea: A cross-sectional descriptive study
Chan Mi PARK ; Hyeon Ok KIM ; Eun Jee LEE
Journal of Korean Gerontological Nursing 2025;27(3):328-337
This study aimed to investigate factors influencing the health-related quality of life (HRQOL) of older adults aged 65 years and older, living alone in rural areas in Korea. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional survey with 136 older adults living alone in rural areas from January 26 to February 15, 2024. We collected data through interviews conducted by trained surveyors with each older adult. Data were analyzed using t-tests, one-way ANOVA, Pearson’s correlation, and hierarchical logistic-regression analysis with SPSS/WIN version 27.0. Results: Factors influencing the HRQOL of older adults living alone in rural areas were depression (β=-.38, p<.001), the number of diagnosed diseases (β=-.22, p=.001), and subjective health perception (β=.18, p=.014), with an explanatory power of 57.0%. Conclusion: Managing depression, preventing and treating diseases, and improving subjective health perceptions could enhance the HRQOL of older adults living alone in rural areas.
6.The impact of an integrated care program implemented by a public health sub-center on the health and quality of life of older adults living alone in a rural area: One-group pretest-posttest pre-experimental design
Chan Mi PARK ; Hyeon Ok KIM ; Eun Jee LEE
Journal of Korean Gerontological Nursing 2025;27(4):414-426
This study aimed to examine the impact of an integrated care program implemented by a public health sub-center on the health and quality of life of older adults living alone in a rural area. The integrated care program included art therapy, craft therapy, horticultural therapy, recreational activities, yoga, walking exercises, health screening & health education. Methods: This study was conducted as one-group pretest-posttest pre-experimental design with 32 participants. Data were analyzed using SPSS Statistics 27.0 and G*Power 3.1.9.7. Data were analyzed using frequency, percentages, minimum, maximum, mean, standard deviation, paired t-test, and one-tailed Wilcoxon sign ranked test. Results: Participants in the integrated care program showed significant improvements cognitive function (z=-2.25, p=.012), depression (z=-2.87, p=.001), health-related quality of life (t=3.21, p<.001), but systolic blood pressure was elevated (t=4.62, p<.001). Conclusion: It is necessary to expand the role of public health sub-center as providers of integrated care programs to improve cognitive function in elderly individuals living alone in rural area, reduce depression, and enhance health-related quality of life.
7.A comprehensive analysis of the role of stem cell transplantation in mantle cell lymphoma:real‑world data from the Korean Society of Blood and Marrow Transplantation registry:Stem cell transplantation outcomes in mantle cell lymphoma
Dong Won BAEK ; Joon Ho MOON ; Jae Hoon LEE ; Ka‑Won KANG ; Ho Sup LEE ; Hyeon‑Seok EOM ; Eunyoung LEE ; Ji Hyun LEE ; Jeong‑Ok LEE ; Seong Kyu PARK ; Seok Jin KIM ; Youngil KOH ; Jong‑Ho WON ; Jung‑Hee LEE ; Joon Seong PARK ; Jae‑Cheol JO ; Yeung‑Chul MUN ; Deok‑Hwan YANG ; Ga‑Young SONG ; Sung‑Nam LIM ; Sang Kyun SOHN ;
Blood Research 2025;60():44-
Purpose:
Stem cell transplantation (SCT) has historically played a major role in the long-term remission of mantle cell lymphoma (MCL), an incurable hematological malignancy. Using data from the Korean Society of Bone and Marrow Transplantation registry, we retrospectively analyzed the role of autologous (auto) and allogeneic (allo) SCT in longterm MCL survival.
Methods:
This study analyzed data from 188 patients (age ≥ 19 years at the time of transplantation) who underwent a transplant for MCL from 2011 to 2020. Progression-free survival (PFS) was defined as the time from transplantation to disease progression, relapse, or death from any cause. Overall survival (OS) was defined as the time from transplan‑ tation to death from any cause or the last follow-up.
Results:
In total, 109 patients underwent consolidative SCT after first-line chemotherapy. The 3-year PFS and OS rates were 65.4% and 78.5%, respectively, in the auto-SCT group, and 66.7% and 71.4%, respectively, in the allo-SCT group. The PFS and OS did not differ significantly between the auto- and allo-SCT groups. As part of salvage treatment, 52 patients with relapsed or refractory disease underwent auto- or allo-SCT. Patients who underwent auto-SCT with complete remis‑ sion/partial remission status reported better outcomes. In patients with refractory status, allogeneic transplantation using human leukocyte antigen (HLA) fully matched donors was a significantly favorable factor for PFS and OS.
Conclusion
The long-term survival of patients who underwent consolidative transplantation was similar to that reported in previous studies. Auto-SCT may be beneficial in patients who respond to salvage therapy, whereas allo-SCT with HLA-matched donors may be an alternative for patients with refractory disease.
8.Comparison of Statin With Ezetimibe Combination Therapy Versus Statin Monotherapy for Primary Prevention in Middle-Aged Adults
Jung-Joon CHA ; Soon Jun HONG ; Subin LIM ; Ju Hyeon KIM ; Hyung Joon JOO ; Jae Hyoung PARK ; Cheol Woong YU ; Do-Sun LIM ; Jang Young KIM ; Jin-Ok JEONG ; Jeong-Hun SHIN ; Chi Young SHIM ; Jong-Young LEE ; Young-Hyo LIM ; Sung Ha PARK ; Eun Joo CHO ; Hasung KIM ; Jungkuk LEE ; Ki-Chul SUNG ;
Korean Circulation Journal 2024;54(9):534-544
Background and Objectives:
Lipid lowering therapy is essential to reduce the risk of major cardiovascular events; however, limited evidence exists regarding the use of statin with ezetimibe as primary prevention strategy for middle-aged adults. We aimed to investigate the impact of single pill combination therapy on clinical outcomes in relatively healthy middleaged patients when compared with statin monotherapy.
Methods:
Using the Korean National Health Insurance Service database, a propensity score match analysis was performed for baseline characteristics of 92,156 patients categorized into combination therapy (n=46,078) and statin monotherapy (n=46,078) groups. Primary outcome was composite outcomes, including death, coronary artery disease, and ischemic stroke. And secondary outcome was all-cause death. The mean follow-up duration was 2.9±0.3 years.
Results:
The 3-year composite outcomes of all-cause death, coronary artery disease, and ischemic stroke demonstrated no significant difference between the 2 groups (10.3% vs.10.1%; hazard ratio [HR], 1.022; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.980–1.064; p=0.309).Meanwhile, the 3-year all-cause death rate was lower in the combination therapy group than in the statin monotherapy group (0.2% vs. 0.4%; p<0.001), with a significant HR of 0.595 (95% CI, 0.460–0.769; p<0.001). Single pill combination therapy exhibited consistently lower mortality rates across various subgroups.
Conclusions
Compared to the statin monotherapy, the combination therapy for primary prevention showed no difference in composite outcomes but may reduce mortality risk in relatively healthy middle-aged patients. However, since the study was observational, further randomized clinical trials are needed to confirm these findings.
9.Comparison of Statin With Ezetimibe Combination Therapy Versus Statin Monotherapy for Primary Prevention in Middle-Aged Adults
Jung-Joon CHA ; Soon Jun HONG ; Subin LIM ; Ju Hyeon KIM ; Hyung Joon JOO ; Jae Hyoung PARK ; Cheol Woong YU ; Do-Sun LIM ; Jang Young KIM ; Jin-Ok JEONG ; Jeong-Hun SHIN ; Chi Young SHIM ; Jong-Young LEE ; Young-Hyo LIM ; Sung Ha PARK ; Eun Joo CHO ; Hasung KIM ; Jungkuk LEE ; Ki-Chul SUNG ;
Korean Circulation Journal 2024;54(9):534-544
Background and Objectives:
Lipid lowering therapy is essential to reduce the risk of major cardiovascular events; however, limited evidence exists regarding the use of statin with ezetimibe as primary prevention strategy for middle-aged adults. We aimed to investigate the impact of single pill combination therapy on clinical outcomes in relatively healthy middleaged patients when compared with statin monotherapy.
Methods:
Using the Korean National Health Insurance Service database, a propensity score match analysis was performed for baseline characteristics of 92,156 patients categorized into combination therapy (n=46,078) and statin monotherapy (n=46,078) groups. Primary outcome was composite outcomes, including death, coronary artery disease, and ischemic stroke. And secondary outcome was all-cause death. The mean follow-up duration was 2.9±0.3 years.
Results:
The 3-year composite outcomes of all-cause death, coronary artery disease, and ischemic stroke demonstrated no significant difference between the 2 groups (10.3% vs.10.1%; hazard ratio [HR], 1.022; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.980–1.064; p=0.309).Meanwhile, the 3-year all-cause death rate was lower in the combination therapy group than in the statin monotherapy group (0.2% vs. 0.4%; p<0.001), with a significant HR of 0.595 (95% CI, 0.460–0.769; p<0.001). Single pill combination therapy exhibited consistently lower mortality rates across various subgroups.
Conclusions
Compared to the statin monotherapy, the combination therapy for primary prevention showed no difference in composite outcomes but may reduce mortality risk in relatively healthy middle-aged patients. However, since the study was observational, further randomized clinical trials are needed to confirm these findings.
10.Comparison of Statin With Ezetimibe Combination Therapy Versus Statin Monotherapy for Primary Prevention in Middle-Aged Adults
Jung-Joon CHA ; Soon Jun HONG ; Subin LIM ; Ju Hyeon KIM ; Hyung Joon JOO ; Jae Hyoung PARK ; Cheol Woong YU ; Do-Sun LIM ; Jang Young KIM ; Jin-Ok JEONG ; Jeong-Hun SHIN ; Chi Young SHIM ; Jong-Young LEE ; Young-Hyo LIM ; Sung Ha PARK ; Eun Joo CHO ; Hasung KIM ; Jungkuk LEE ; Ki-Chul SUNG ;
Korean Circulation Journal 2024;54(9):534-544
Background and Objectives:
Lipid lowering therapy is essential to reduce the risk of major cardiovascular events; however, limited evidence exists regarding the use of statin with ezetimibe as primary prevention strategy for middle-aged adults. We aimed to investigate the impact of single pill combination therapy on clinical outcomes in relatively healthy middleaged patients when compared with statin monotherapy.
Methods:
Using the Korean National Health Insurance Service database, a propensity score match analysis was performed for baseline characteristics of 92,156 patients categorized into combination therapy (n=46,078) and statin monotherapy (n=46,078) groups. Primary outcome was composite outcomes, including death, coronary artery disease, and ischemic stroke. And secondary outcome was all-cause death. The mean follow-up duration was 2.9±0.3 years.
Results:
The 3-year composite outcomes of all-cause death, coronary artery disease, and ischemic stroke demonstrated no significant difference between the 2 groups (10.3% vs.10.1%; hazard ratio [HR], 1.022; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.980–1.064; p=0.309).Meanwhile, the 3-year all-cause death rate was lower in the combination therapy group than in the statin monotherapy group (0.2% vs. 0.4%; p<0.001), with a significant HR of 0.595 (95% CI, 0.460–0.769; p<0.001). Single pill combination therapy exhibited consistently lower mortality rates across various subgroups.
Conclusions
Compared to the statin monotherapy, the combination therapy for primary prevention showed no difference in composite outcomes but may reduce mortality risk in relatively healthy middle-aged patients. However, since the study was observational, further randomized clinical trials are needed to confirm these findings.

Result Analysis
Print
Save
E-mail