Objective: To survey experts’ opinions in abdominal radiology (radiologists) and pancreas-specialized gastroenterology (pancreatologists) in South Korea regarding diagnosing and managing pancreatic cystic neoplasms (PCNs). Materials and Methods: Between August 25, 2023, and October 5, 2023, an online survey was conducted among members of the Korean Society of Abdominal Radiology and the Korean Pancreatobiliary Association via email invitation. Results: The responses from 100 radiologists and 41 pancreatologists were analyzed. Of the respondents, 55.3% (78/141) reported seeing more than 50 patients or reading more than 50 exams related to PCN each month. The most common and preferred diagnostic modality for PCN was contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CECT), favored by 87.8% (36/41) of pancreatologists. When discrepancies arose between CECT or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and endoscopic ultrasound, 31.2% (44/141) of the respondents opted for multidisciplinary team discussion, whereas 29.1% (41/141) chose short-term follow-up using CECT or MRI. A total of 88.7% (125/141) of the respondents adhered to the 2017 International Association of Pancreatology (IAP) guidelines in their practice. Among the radiologists, 51.0% (51/100) endorsed a cut-off value of 5 mm for enhancing mural nodules, and 22.0% (22/100) supported a 5 mm/2 yr growth rate in the IAP guidelines v.2017.Additionally, 73.0% (73/100) of radiologists favored discontinuing surveillance, whereas 41.5% (17/41) of pancreatologists disagreed with stopping surveillance. Conclusion The survey underscores the clinical burden PCN poses and identifies CECT as the foremost diagnostic tool.Variability was noted in the terminology, differential diagnosis, approaches for resolving discrepancies between imaging examinations, and opinions on surveillance discontinuation among the respondents as a whole, as well as between radiologists and pancreatologists. Although the 2017 IAP guidelines are primarily followed, there remains a level of dissatisfaction with risk stratification among radiologists. This highlights the need for more standardized diagnostic algorithms and improved consensus among specialists to address these challenges.

Objective: To survey experts’ opinions in abdominal radiology (radiologists) and pancreas-specialized gastroenterology (pancreatologists) in South Korea regarding diagnosing and managing pancreatic cystic neoplasms (PCNs). Materials and Methods: Between August 25, 2023, and October 5, 2023, an online survey was conducted among members of the Korean Society of Abdominal Radiology and the Korean Pancreatobiliary Association via email invitation. Results: The responses from 100 radiologists and 41 pancreatologists were analyzed. Of the respondents, 55.3% (78/141) reported seeing more than 50 patients or reading more than 50 exams related to PCN each month. The most common and preferred diagnostic modality for PCN was contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CECT), favored by 87.8% (36/41) of pancreatologists. When discrepancies arose between CECT or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and endoscopic ultrasound, 31.2% (44/141) of the respondents opted for multidisciplinary team discussion, whereas 29.1% (41/141) chose short-term follow-up using CECT or MRI. A total of 88.7% (125/141) of the respondents adhered to the 2017 International Association of Pancreatology (IAP) guidelines in their practice. Among the radiologists, 51.0% (51/100) endorsed a cut-off value of 5 mm for enhancing mural nodules, and 22.0% (22/100) supported a 5 mm/2 yr growth rate in the IAP guidelines v.2017.Additionally, 73.0% (73/100) of radiologists favored discontinuing surveillance, whereas 41.5% (17/41) of pancreatologists disagreed with stopping surveillance. Conclusion The survey underscores the clinical burden PCN poses and identifies CECT as the foremost diagnostic tool.Variability was noted in the terminology, differential diagnosis, approaches for resolving discrepancies between imaging examinations, and opinions on surveillance discontinuation among the respondents as a whole, as well as between radiologists and pancreatologists. Although the 2017 IAP guidelines are primarily followed, there remains a level of dissatisfaction with risk stratification among radiologists. This highlights the need for more standardized diagnostic algorithms and improved consensus among specialists to address these challenges.

Background: The pathophysiological mechanisms underlying the post-acute sequelae of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection (PASC) are not well understood.Our study aimed to investigate various aspects of theses mechanisms, including viral persistence, immunological responses, and laboratory parameters in patients with and without PASC. Methods: We prospectively enrolled adults aged ≥ 18 years diagnosed with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) between August 2022 and July 2023. Blood samples were collected at three time-points: within one month of diagnosis (acute phase) and at 1 month, and 3 months post-diagnosis. Following a recent well-designed definition of PASC, PASC patients were defined as those with a questionnaire-based PASC score ≥ 12 persisting for at least 4 weeks after the initial COVID-19 diagnosis. Results: Of 57 eligible COVID-19 patients, 29 (51%) had PASC, and 28 (49%) did not. The PASC group had significantly higher nucleocapsid protein (NP) antigenemia 3 months after COVID-19 diagnosis (P = 0.022). Furthermore, several cytokines, including IL-2, IL-17A, VEGF, RANTES, sCD40L, IP-10, I-TAC, and granzyme A, were markedly elevated in the PASC group 1 and/or 3 month(s) after COVID-19 diagnosis. In contrast, the median values of several serological markers, including thyroid markers, autoimmune indicators, and stress-related hormones, were within the normal range. Conclusion Levels of NP antigen and of various cytokines involved in immune responses become significantly elevated over time after COVID-19 diagnosis in PASC patients compared to non-PASC patients. This suggests that PASC is associated with prolonged immune dysregulation resulting from heightened antigenic stimulation.

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to investigate the accuracy of image merging of an intraoral scan of an edentulous arch to a facial scan using wax rim and markers. . Materials and Methods: For registration of oral scan to face scan, a wax rim with markers wasmade. The markers were cuboid and divided into four groups according to size (5, 10 mm) and attachment location (midline, canine region). The evaluation of registration accuracy was compared with a standard created using cone-beam computed tomographydata. Anterior linear variation of the edentulous arch and the 3D variation of the overall arch were measured. Kruskal-Wallis test and Mann-Whitney U test were used for statistics, and the significance level was set at 0.05 and evaluated under Bonferroni correction (0.05/6 = 0.083). Results: In the anterior deviation and global deviation results, there was no statistically significant difference in the oral scan position displacement values between the 5 mm and 10 mm groups. When the midline marker was used, the intraoral scan position displacement value was significantly lower than when only the canine marker was used. Conclusion Marker attached wax rim can be used for image matching between facial and intraoral scans of the edentulous arch. Marker location at the middle area increases the accuracy of image matching.

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to investigate the accuracy of image merging of an intraoral scan of an edentulous arch to a facial scan using wax rim and markers. . Materials and Methods: For registration of oral scan to face scan, a wax rim with markers wasmade. The markers were cuboid and divided into four groups according to size (5, 10 mm) and attachment location (midline, canine region). The evaluation of registration accuracy was compared with a standard created using cone-beam computed tomographydata. Anterior linear variation of the edentulous arch and the 3D variation of the overall arch were measured. Kruskal-Wallis test and Mann-Whitney U test were used for statistics, and the significance level was set at 0.05 and evaluated under Bonferroni correction (0.05/6 = 0.083). Results: In the anterior deviation and global deviation results, there was no statistically significant difference in the oral scan position displacement values between the 5 mm and 10 mm groups. When the midline marker was used, the intraoral scan position displacement value was significantly lower than when only the canine marker was used. Conclusion Marker attached wax rim can be used for image matching between facial and intraoral scans of the edentulous arch. Marker location at the middle area increases the accuracy of image matching.

Objective: To survey experts’ opinions in abdominal radiology (radiologists) and pancreas-specialized gastroenterology (pancreatologists) in South Korea regarding diagnosing and managing pancreatic cystic neoplasms (PCNs). Materials and Methods: Between August 25, 2023, and October 5, 2023, an online survey was conducted among members of the Korean Society of Abdominal Radiology and the Korean Pancreatobiliary Association via email invitation. Results: The responses from 100 radiologists and 41 pancreatologists were analyzed. Of the respondents, 55.3% (78/141) reported seeing more than 50 patients or reading more than 50 exams related to PCN each month. The most common and preferred diagnostic modality for PCN was contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CECT), favored by 87.8% (36/41) of pancreatologists. When discrepancies arose between CECT or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and endoscopic ultrasound, 31.2% (44/141) of the respondents opted for multidisciplinary team discussion, whereas 29.1% (41/141) chose short-term follow-up using CECT or MRI. A total of 88.7% (125/141) of the respondents adhered to the 2017 International Association of Pancreatology (IAP) guidelines in their practice. Among the radiologists, 51.0% (51/100) endorsed a cut-off value of 5 mm for enhancing mural nodules, and 22.0% (22/100) supported a 5 mm/2 yr growth rate in the IAP guidelines v.2017.Additionally, 73.0% (73/100) of radiologists favored discontinuing surveillance, whereas 41.5% (17/41) of pancreatologists disagreed with stopping surveillance. Conclusion The survey underscores the clinical burden PCN poses and identifies CECT as the foremost diagnostic tool.Variability was noted in the terminology, differential diagnosis, approaches for resolving discrepancies between imaging examinations, and opinions on surveillance discontinuation among the respondents as a whole, as well as between radiologists and pancreatologists. Although the 2017 IAP guidelines are primarily followed, there remains a level of dissatisfaction with risk stratification among radiologists. This highlights the need for more standardized diagnostic algorithms and improved consensus among specialists to address these challenges.

Objective: To survey experts’ opinions in abdominal radiology (radiologists) and pancreas-specialized gastroenterology (pancreatologists) in South Korea regarding diagnosing and managing pancreatic cystic neoplasms (PCNs). Materials and Methods: Between August 25, 2023, and October 5, 2023, an online survey was conducted among members of the Korean Society of Abdominal Radiology and the Korean Pancreatobiliary Association via email invitation. Results: The responses from 100 radiologists and 41 pancreatologists were analyzed. Of the respondents, 55.3% (78/141) reported seeing more than 50 patients or reading more than 50 exams related to PCN each month. The most common and preferred diagnostic modality for PCN was contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CECT), favored by 87.8% (36/41) of pancreatologists. When discrepancies arose between CECT or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and endoscopic ultrasound, 31.2% (44/141) of the respondents opted for multidisciplinary team discussion, whereas 29.1% (41/141) chose short-term follow-up using CECT or MRI. A total of 88.7% (125/141) of the respondents adhered to the 2017 International Association of Pancreatology (IAP) guidelines in their practice. Among the radiologists, 51.0% (51/100) endorsed a cut-off value of 5 mm for enhancing mural nodules, and 22.0% (22/100) supported a 5 mm/2 yr growth rate in the IAP guidelines v.2017.Additionally, 73.0% (73/100) of radiologists favored discontinuing surveillance, whereas 41.5% (17/41) of pancreatologists disagreed with stopping surveillance. Conclusion The survey underscores the clinical burden PCN poses and identifies CECT as the foremost diagnostic tool.Variability was noted in the terminology, differential diagnosis, approaches for resolving discrepancies between imaging examinations, and opinions on surveillance discontinuation among the respondents as a whole, as well as between radiologists and pancreatologists. Although the 2017 IAP guidelines are primarily followed, there remains a level of dissatisfaction with risk stratification among radiologists. This highlights the need for more standardized diagnostic algorithms and improved consensus among specialists to address these challenges.

Objective: To survey experts’ opinions in abdominal radiology (radiologists) and pancreas-specialized gastroenterology (pancreatologists) in South Korea regarding diagnosing and managing pancreatic cystic neoplasms (PCNs). Materials and Methods: Between August 25, 2023, and October 5, 2023, an online survey was conducted among members of the Korean Society of Abdominal Radiology and the Korean Pancreatobiliary Association via email invitation. Results: The responses from 100 radiologists and 41 pancreatologists were analyzed. Of the respondents, 55.3% (78/141) reported seeing more than 50 patients or reading more than 50 exams related to PCN each month. The most common and preferred diagnostic modality for PCN was contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CECT), favored by 87.8% (36/41) of pancreatologists. When discrepancies arose between CECT or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and endoscopic ultrasound, 31.2% (44/141) of the respondents opted for multidisciplinary team discussion, whereas 29.1% (41/141) chose short-term follow-up using CECT or MRI. A total of 88.7% (125/141) of the respondents adhered to the 2017 International Association of Pancreatology (IAP) guidelines in their practice. Among the radiologists, 51.0% (51/100) endorsed a cut-off value of 5 mm for enhancing mural nodules, and 22.0% (22/100) supported a 5 mm/2 yr growth rate in the IAP guidelines v.2017.Additionally, 73.0% (73/100) of radiologists favored discontinuing surveillance, whereas 41.5% (17/41) of pancreatologists disagreed with stopping surveillance. Conclusion The survey underscores the clinical burden PCN poses and identifies CECT as the foremost diagnostic tool.Variability was noted in the terminology, differential diagnosis, approaches for resolving discrepancies between imaging examinations, and opinions on surveillance discontinuation among the respondents as a whole, as well as between radiologists and pancreatologists. Although the 2017 IAP guidelines are primarily followed, there remains a level of dissatisfaction with risk stratification among radiologists. This highlights the need for more standardized diagnostic algorithms and improved consensus among specialists to address these challenges.

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to investigate the accuracy of image merging of an intraoral scan of an edentulous arch to a facial scan using wax rim and markers. . Materials and Methods: For registration of oral scan to face scan, a wax rim with markers wasmade. The markers were cuboid and divided into four groups according to size (5, 10 mm) and attachment location (midline, canine region). The evaluation of registration accuracy was compared with a standard created using cone-beam computed tomographydata. Anterior linear variation of the edentulous arch and the 3D variation of the overall arch were measured. Kruskal-Wallis test and Mann-Whitney U test were used for statistics, and the significance level was set at 0.05 and evaluated under Bonferroni correction (0.05/6 = 0.083). Results: In the anterior deviation and global deviation results, there was no statistically significant difference in the oral scan position displacement values between the 5 mm and 10 mm groups. When the midline marker was used, the intraoral scan position displacement value was significantly lower than when only the canine marker was used. Conclusion Marker attached wax rim can be used for image matching between facial and intraoral scans of the edentulous arch. Marker location at the middle area increases the accuracy of image matching.