Ischemic monomelic neuropathy (IMN) is an uncommon complication of arteriovenous fistula (AVF) surgery that presents with pain, motor weakness, and sensory changes without critical ischemia. This report describes a rare case of successful IMN treatment after AVF surgery. A 61-year-old man with diabetic end-stage kidney disease was admitted for left brachiocephalic AVF surgery. Postoperatively, the patient complained of pain, motor weakness, and numbness in the left hand. However, the radial pulse remained palpable, and the overlying skin remained intact. A nerve conduction study above the wrist revealed reduced compound muscle action potential (CMAP) of the left ulnar nerve and no CMAP of the left median nerve. This study also showed the absence of sensory amplitude in both the left median and left ulnar nerves. Therefore, the patient was diagnosed with IMN. Proximalization of the arterial inflow surgery was performed to redistribute blood flow while maintaining the AVF. The patient’s neurological symptoms resolved postoperatively. Various conditions can cause hand pain after AVF surgery; however, IMN has rarely been reported. A multidisciplinary approach is needed to avoid this rare complication in patients presenting with hand pain after AVF surgery.

Ischemic monomelic neuropathy (IMN) is an uncommon complication of arteriovenous fistula (AVF) surgery that presents with pain, motor weakness, and sensory changes without critical ischemia. This report describes a rare case of successful IMN treatment after AVF surgery. A 61-year-old man with diabetic end-stage kidney disease was admitted for left brachiocephalic AVF surgery. Postoperatively, the patient complained of pain, motor weakness, and numbness in the left hand. However, the radial pulse remained palpable, and the overlying skin remained intact. A nerve conduction study above the wrist revealed reduced compound muscle action potential (CMAP) of the left ulnar nerve and no CMAP of the left median nerve. This study also showed the absence of sensory amplitude in both the left median and left ulnar nerves. Therefore, the patient was diagnosed with IMN. Proximalization of the arterial inflow surgery was performed to redistribute blood flow while maintaining the AVF. The patient’s neurological symptoms resolved postoperatively. Various conditions can cause hand pain after AVF surgery; however, IMN has rarely been reported. A multidisciplinary approach is needed to avoid this rare complication in patients presenting with hand pain after AVF surgery.

Ischemic monomelic neuropathy (IMN) is an uncommon complication of arteriovenous fistula (AVF) surgery that presents with pain, motor weakness, and sensory changes without critical ischemia. This report describes a rare case of successful IMN treatment after AVF surgery. A 61-year-old man with diabetic end-stage kidney disease was admitted for left brachiocephalic AVF surgery. Postoperatively, the patient complained of pain, motor weakness, and numbness in the left hand. However, the radial pulse remained palpable, and the overlying skin remained intact. A nerve conduction study above the wrist revealed reduced compound muscle action potential (CMAP) of the left ulnar nerve and no CMAP of the left median nerve. This study also showed the absence of sensory amplitude in both the left median and left ulnar nerves. Therefore, the patient was diagnosed with IMN. Proximalization of the arterial inflow surgery was performed to redistribute blood flow while maintaining the AVF. The patient’s neurological symptoms resolved postoperatively. Various conditions can cause hand pain after AVF surgery; however, IMN has rarely been reported. A multidisciplinary approach is needed to avoid this rare complication in patients presenting with hand pain after AVF surgery.

Ischemic monomelic neuropathy (IMN) is an uncommon complication of arteriovenous fistula (AVF) surgery that presents with pain, motor weakness, and sensory changes without critical ischemia. This report describes a rare case of successful IMN treatment after AVF surgery. A 61-year-old man with diabetic end-stage kidney disease was admitted for left brachiocephalic AVF surgery. Postoperatively, the patient complained of pain, motor weakness, and numbness in the left hand. However, the radial pulse remained palpable, and the overlying skin remained intact. A nerve conduction study above the wrist revealed reduced compound muscle action potential (CMAP) of the left ulnar nerve and no CMAP of the left median nerve. This study also showed the absence of sensory amplitude in both the left median and left ulnar nerves. Therefore, the patient was diagnosed with IMN. Proximalization of the arterial inflow surgery was performed to redistribute blood flow while maintaining the AVF. The patient’s neurological symptoms resolved postoperatively. Various conditions can cause hand pain after AVF surgery; however, IMN has rarely been reported. A multidisciplinary approach is needed to avoid this rare complication in patients presenting with hand pain after AVF surgery.

Purpose: This study aims to analyze the learning curve of hand-assisted laparoscopic living donor nephrectomy (HLDN) conducted by a trained gastrointestinal surgeon. Methods: A retrospective analysis was performed on the perioperative clinical data of 96 consecutive patients who underwent HLDN from May 2013 to March 2023. The learning curve was evaluated using the cumulative sum (CUSUM) test based on operation time and risk-adjusted CUSUM for postoperative complications. Patients were divided into three groups (novice, development, and competency phases) based on changes in operation time. Patient demographics and perioperative outcomes were compared between each group. Results: Among the patients, 35 were male, with a mean age of 48.9 ± 11.3 years and a mean body mass index (BMI) of 24.5 ± 3.2 kg/m 2 . The novice phase (phase 1) included the first 30 cases, with the development phase (phase 2) up to the 65th case. Operation times were significantly different across phases, averaging 263.2 ± 33.4, 211.1 ± 34.4, and 161.1 ± 31.3 minutes for phases 1, 2, and 3, respectively (P < 0.001). Blood loss decreased gradually across phases (phase 1, 264.7 ± 144.4 mL; phase 2, 239.7 ± 166.3 mL; phase 3, 198.8 ± 103.5 mL), though not statistically significant. BMI impacted operation time only in phase 1. Overall postoperative complications occurred in 13 cases (Clavien-Dindo grade I, 4 cases;grade II, 9 cases), with no significant differences across phases. Conclusion HLDN can be safely performed by a trained gastrointestinal surgeon, with approximately 30 cases needed to achieve proficiency.

Purpose: The original eCura system was designed to stratify the risk of lymph node metastasis (LNM) after endoscopic resection (ER) in patients with early gastric cancer (EGC).We assessed the effectiveness of a modified eCura system for reflecting the characteristics of undifferentiated-type (UD)-EGC. Materials and Methods: Six hundred thirty-four patients who underwent non-curative ER for UD-EGC and received either additional surgery (radical surgery group; n=270) or no further treatment (no additional treatment group; n=364) from 18 institutions between 2005 and 2015 were retrospectively included in this study. The eCuraU system assigned 1 point each for tumors >20 mm in size, ulceration, positive vertical margin, and submucosal invasion <500 µm; 2 points for submucosal invasion ≥500 µm; and 3 points for lymphovascular invasion. Results: LNM rates in the radical surgery group were 1.1%, 5.4%, and 13.3% for the low-(0–1 point), intermediate- (2–3 points), and high-risk (4–8 points), respectively (P-fortrend<0.001). The eCuraU system showed a significantly higher probability of identifying patients with LNM as high-risk than the eCura system (66.7% vs. 22.2%; McNemar P<0.001).In the no additional treatment group, overall survival (93.4%, 87.2%, and 67.6% at 5 years) and cancer-specific survival (99.6%, 98.9%, and 92.9% at 5 years) differed significantly among the low-, intermediate-, and high-risk categories, respectively (both P<0.001). In the high-risk category, surgery outperformed no treatment in terms of overall mortality (hazard ratio, 3.26; P=0.015). Conclusions The eCuraU system stratified the risk of LNM in patients with UD-EGC after ER. It is strongly recommended that high-risk patients undergo additional surgery.

Background: The benefits of transradial access (TRA) over transfemoral access (TFA) for bifurcation percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) are uncertain because of the limited availability of device selection. This study aimed to compare the procedural differences and the in-hospital and long-term outcomes of TRA and TFA for bifurcation PCI using secondgeneration drug-eluting stents (DESs). Methods: Based on data from the Coronary Bifurcation Stenting Registry III, a retrospective registry of 2,648 patients undergoing bifurcation PCI with second-generation DES from 21 centers in South Korea, patients were categorized into the TRA group (n = 1,507) or the TFA group (n = 1,141). After propensity score matching (PSM), procedural differences, in-hospital outcomes, and device-oriented composite outcomes (DOCOs; a composite of cardiac death, target vessel-related myocardial infarction, and target lesion revascularization) were compared between the two groups (772 matched patients each group). Results: Despite well-balanced baseline clinical and lesion characteristics after PSM, the use of the two-stent strategy (14.2% vs. 23.7%, P = 0.001) and the incidence of in-hospital adverse outcomes, primarily driven by access site complications (2.2% vs. 4.4%, P = 0.015), were significantly lower in the TRA group than in the TFA group. At the 5-year follow-up, the incidence of DOCOs was similar between the groups (6.3% vs. 7.1%, P = 0.639). Conclusion The findings suggested that TRA may be safer than TFA for bifurcation PCI using second-generation DESs. Despite differences in treatment strategy, TRA was associated with similar long-term clinical outcomes as those of TFA. Therefore, TRA might be the preferred access for bifurcation PCI using second-generation DES.

Background/Aims: The eCura system, a scoring model for stratifying the lymph node metastasis risk after noncurative endoscopic resection for early gastric cancer (EGC), has been internally validated, primarily for differentiated-type EGC. We aimed to externally validate this model for undifferentiated-type EGC. Methods: This multicenter, retrospective cohort study included 634 patients who underwent additional surgery (radical surgery group, n=270) or were followed up without additional treatment (no additional treatment group, n=364) after noncurative endoscopic resection for undifferentiated-type EGC between 2005 and 2015. The lymph node metastasis and survival rates were compared according to the risk categories. Results: For the radical surgery group, the lymph node metastasis rates were 2.6%, 10.9%, and 14.8% for the low-, intermediate-, and high-risk eCura categories, respectively (p for trend=0.003). For the low-, intermediate-, and high-risk categories in the no additional treatment group, the overall survival (92.7%, 68.9%, and 80.0% at 5 years, respectively, p<0.001) and cancer-specific survival rates (99.7%, 94.7%, and 80.0% at 5 years, respectively, p<0.001) differed significantly. In the multivariate analysis, the hazard ratios (95% confidence interval) in the no additional treatment group relative to the radical surgery group were 3.18 (1.41 to 7.17; p=0.005) for overall mortality and 2.60 (0.46 to 14.66; p=0.280) for cancer-specific mortality in the intermediate-tohigh risk category. No such differences were noted in the low-risk category. Conclusions The eCura system can be applied to undifferentiated-type EGC. Close follow-up without additional treatment might be considered for low-risk patients, while additional surgery is recommended for intermediate- and high-risk patients.

Objective: This phase IV, multicenter, randomized controlled, open-label, and parallel clinical trial aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of ezetimibe and moderate intensity rosuvastatin combination therapy to that of high intensity rosuvastatin monotherapy in patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). Methods: This study enrolled patients with ASCVD and after a four-week screening period, patients were randomly assigned to receive either rosuvastatin and ezetimibe (RE 10/10 group) or high-intensity rosuvastatin (R20 group) only in a 1:1 ratio. The primary outcome was the difference in the percent change in the mean low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) level from baseline to 12 weeks between two groups after treatment. Results: The study found that after 12 and 24 weeks of treatment, the RE10/10 group had a greater reduction in LDL-C level compared to the R20 group (−22.9±2.6% vs. −15.6 ± 2.5% [p=0.041] and −24.2±2.5% vs. −12.9±2.4% [p=0.001] at 12 and 24 weeks, respectively). Moreover, a greater number of patients achieved the target LDL-C level of ≤70 mg/dL after the treatment period in the combination group (74.6% vs. 59.9% [p=0.012] and 76.2% vs. 50.8% [p<0.001] at 12 and 24 weeks, respectively). Importantly, there were no significant differences in the occurrence of overall adverse events and adverse drug reactions between two groups. Conclusion Moderate-intensity rosuvastatin and ezetimibe combination therapy had better efficacy in lowering LDL-C levels without increasing adverse effects in patients with ASCVD than high-intensity rosuvastatin monotherapy.