Background and Objectives: Clinical characteristics and outcomes in acute heart failure (AHF) vary by phenotype. We assessed phenotype-specific features, treatment patterns, and outcomes in a nationwide Korean cohort. Methods: The Korean Heart Failure III registry prospectively enrolled 7,351 AHF admissions at 47 hospitals. Among 6,777 patients with available left ventricular ejection fraction (EF), phenotypes were defined as heart failure with reduced EF (HFrEF, ≤40%), mildly reduced EF (HFmrEF,41–49%), or preserved EF (HFpEF, ≥50%). The primary endpoint was a 12-month composite of all-cause death or heart transplantation, evaluated from index admission and, among hospital survivors, from discharge. We used inverse probability weighting (multinomial generalized boosted models with stabilized, trimmed weights) and weighted Cox proportional-hazards models to estimate hazard ratios (HRs). Results: Phenotype distribution was 58.9% HFrEF, 13.6% HFmrEF, and 27.5% HFpEF. Crude 12-month composite rates from index admission were 13.4% (HFrEF), 12.7% (HFmrEF), and 16.8% (HFpEF). After weighting, from index admission, HFmrEF (HR, 0.892; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.731–1.088) and HFpEF (HR, 1.101; 95% CI, 0.939–1.291) did not differ from HFrEF; from discharge, HFpEF had modestly higher risk (HR, 1.207; 95% CI, 1.008–1.445) whereas HFmrEF did not (HR, 1.039; 95% CI, 0.844–1.279). Hyponatremia and chronic kidney disease were consistent adverse markers, while angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/ angiotensin II receptor blocker use at discharge was protective. Conclusions Across the EF spectrum, phenotypes showed distinct profiles and risk. Postdischarge risk was modestly higher in HFpEF, supporting phenotype-tailored care and systematic discharge optimization in Korean patients with AHF.

With advancements in both pharmacologic and non-pharmacologic treatments, significant changes have occurred in heart failure (HF) management. The previous Korean HF registries, namely the Korea Heart Failure Registry (KorHF-registry) and Korean Acute Heart Failure Registry (KorAHF-registry), no longer accurately reflect contemporary acute heart failure (AHF) patients. Our objective is to assess contemporary AHF patients through a nationwide registry encompassing various aspects, such as clinical characteristics, management approaches, hospital course, and long-term outcomes of individuals hospitalized for AHF in Korea. This prospective observational multicenter cohort study (KorHF III) is organized by the Korean Society of Heart Failure. We aim to prospectively enroll 7,000 or more patients hospitalized for AHF at 47 tertiary hospitals in Korea starting from March 2018. Eligible patients exhibit signs and symptoms of HF and demonstrate either lung congestion or objective evidence of structural or functional cardiac abnormalities in echocardiography, or isolated right-sided HF. Patients will be followed up for up to 5 years after enrollment in the registry to evaluate long-term clinical outcomes. KorHF III represents the nationwide AHF registry that will elucidate the clinical characteristics, management strategies, and outcomes of contemporary AHF patients in Korea.

Purpose: To investigate urine microbiome differences among healthy women, women with recurrent uncomplicated cystitis (rUC), and those with sporadic/single uncomplicated cystitis (sUC) to challenge traditional beliefs about origins of these infections. Materials and Methods: Patients who underwent both conventional urine culture and next-generation sequencing (NGS) of urine were retrospectively reviewed. Symptom-free women with normal urinalysis results as a control group were also studied. Samples were collected via transurethral catheterization. Results: In the control group, urine microbiome was detected on NGS in 83.3%, with Lactobacillus and Prevotella being the most abundant genera. The sensitivity of urine NGS was significantly higher than that of conventional urine culture in both the sUC group (91.2% vs. 32.4%) and the rUC group (82.4% vs. 16.4%). In urine NGS results, Enterobacterales, Prevotella, and Escherichia/ Shigella were additionally found in the sUC group, while the recurrent urinary tract infection (rUTI)/rUC group exhibited the presence of Lactobacillus, Prevotella, Enterobacterales, Escherichia/Shigella, and Propionibacterium. Moreover, distinct patterns of urine NGS were observed based on menopausal status and ingestion of antibiotics or probiotics prior to NGS test sampling. Conclusions Urine microbiomes in control, sUC, and rUTI/rUC groups exhibited distinct characteristics. Notably, sUC and rUC might represent entirely separate pathological processes, given their distinct urine microbiomes. Consequently, the use of urine NGS might be essential to enhancing sensitivity compared to conventional urine culture in both sUC and rUTI/rUC groups.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to assess the effectiveness of human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination administered to adolescent girls through Korea’s National Immunization Program. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included patients who were 12-13 years old, whether vaccinated or unvaccinated, between July 2016 and December 2017. The incidence of genital warts (GWs) was monitored through 2021. Time-stratified hazard ratios (HRs) were estimated, adjusting for birth year, socioeconomic status, and the level of urbanization of the region, and were presented with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Data were sourced from the Immunization Registry Integration System, linked with the National Health Information Database. RESULTS: The study included 332,062 adolescent girls, with an average follow-up period of approximately 4.6 years. Except for the first year, the HRs for the vaccinated group were lower than those for the unvaccinated group. The HRs for specific cut-off years were as follows: year 2, 0.62 (95% CI, 0.31 to 1.13); year 3, 0.58 (95% CI, 0.35 to 0.96); and year 4 and beyond, 0.39 (95% CI, 0.28 to 0.52). CONCLUSIONS Our findings indicate that HPV vaccination was associated with a reduction in the risk of GWs among adolescent girls. Notably, this reduction became significant as the incidence of GWs increased with age.

Purpose: This article was to collect data on the safety of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines in children with underlying medical conditions. Methods: We constructed a prospective cohort of children and adolescents aged 5 to 19 years who had received at least one dose of COVID-19 vaccine. Patients diagnosed with and treated for chronic kidney disease, autoimmune disease, or other chronic conditions at the Seoul National University Children’s Hospital were recruited from June to December 2022. A mobile survey questionnaire was sent to their guardians. The presence of adverse events on the day (day 0), 3 weeks (day 21), and 6 months (day 180) after the 1st dose of COVID-19 vaccine was recorded by the guardians. Results: A total of 73 children participated. The median age was 14 years, and 64.4% of the patients were male. On the day of immunization, 65.8% of the patients reported at least one adverse event. Pain at the injection site, fatigue, headache, arthralgia, and myalgia were the most common symptoms. The prevalence of adverse events decreased over time (65.8% on day 0, 27.4% between days 0 and 21, and 24.6% between days 21 and 180). Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection after the 1st dose occurred in 17 patients (23.3%) and one of the patients (5.88%) was hospitalized due to infection. Conclusions Adverse events after COVID-19 vaccination were generally mild in children and adolescents with underlying medical conditions. Our findings provide evidence for the safety of COVID-19 vaccination in the vulnerable pediatric population.

Background/Aims: We evaluated the role of next-generation sequencing (NGS)-based disease monitoring for elderly patients diagnosed with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) who received decitabine therapy. Methods: A total of 123 patients aged > 65 years with AML who received decitabine were eligible. We analyzed the dynamics of variant allele frequency (VAF) in 49 available follow-up samples after the fourth cycle of decitabine. The 58.6% VAF clearance (Δ, [VAF at diagnosis − VAF at follow-up] × 100 / VAF at diagnosis) was the optimal cut-off for predicting overall survival (OS). Results: The overall response rate was 34.1% (eight patients with complete remission [CR], six of CR with incomplete hematologic recovery, 22 with partial responses, and six with morphologic leukemia-free status). Responders (n = 42) had significantly better OS compared with non-responders (n = 42) (median, 15.3 months vs. 6.5 months; p < 0.001). Of the 49 patients available for follow-up targeted NGS analysis, 44 had trackable gene mutations. The median OS of patients with ΔVAF ≥ 58.6% (n=24) was significantly better than that of patients with ΔVAF < 58.6% (n = 19) (20.5 months vs. 9.8 months, p = 0.010). Moreover, responders with ΔVAF ≥ 58.6% (n = 20) had a significantly longer median OS compared with responders with VAF < 58.6% (n = 11) (22.5 months vs. 9.8 months, p = 0.004). Conclusions This study suggested that combining ΔVAF ≥ 58.6%, a molecular response, with morphologic and hematologic responses can more accurately predict OS in elderly AML patients after decitabine therapy.

Kidney matrix stones are a rare form of calculi, which are challenging to diagnose. Matrix stones consist of a proteinaceous material which has a radiolucent appearance that might be overlooked on imaging. Recently, endourological intervention has been the standard treatment method for matrix stones. We report a case of urinary matrix stones in a patient with type 1 diabetes mellitus and chronic kidney disease, in whom the stones formed into a pure matrix and were not visualized in the computed tomography scan. The stones were found after additional work-up, and they were managed using a transureteral stone basket, not through endourological intervention.

Background: One of the challenges neurosurgeons are facing in the global public health crisis caused by the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is to balance COVID-19 screening with timely surgery. We described a clinical pathway for patients who needed emergency brain surgery and determined whether differences in the surgery preparation process caused by COVID-19 screening affected clinical outcomes. Methods: During the COVID-19 period, patients in need of emergency brain surgery in our institution were managed using a novel standardized pathway designed for COVID-19 screening. We conducted a retrospective review of patients who were hospitalized through the emergency room and underwent emergency brain surgery. A total of 32 patients who underwent emergency brain surgery from February 1 to June 30, 2020 were included in the COVID-19 group, and 65 patients who underwent surgery from February 1 to June 30, 2019 were included in the pre-COVID-19 group. The baseline characteristics, disease severity indicators, time intervals of emergency processes, and clinical outcomes of the two groups were compared. Subgroup analysis was performed between the immediate surgery group and the semi-elective surgery group during the COVID-19 period. Results: There were no significant differences in baseline characteristics and severity indicators between the pre-COVID-19 group and COVID-19 group. The time interval to skin incision was significantly increased in the COVID-19 group (P = 0.027). However, there were no significant differences in the clinical outcomes between the two groups. In subgroup comparison, the time interval to skin incision was shorter in the immediate surgery group during the COVID-19 period compared with the pre-COVID-19 group (P = 0.040). The screening process did not significantly increase the time interval to classification and admission for immediate surgery.The time interval to surgery initiation was longer in the COVID-19 period due to the increased time interval in the semi-elective surgery group (P < 0.001). Conclusion We proposed a clinical pathway for the preoperative screening of COVID-19 in patients requiring emergency brain surgery. No significant differences were observed in the clinical outcomes before and after the COVID-19 pandemic. The protocol we described showed acceptable results during this pandemic.