1.Risk Factors for Emergency Room Visits Among Patients With Head and Neck Cancer: A Longitudinal Cohort Study Within the Korean Healthcare System
Heejun YI ; Hyojun KIM ; Younghac KIM ; Ye-Jin SUH ; Joo Hyun PARK ; Nayeon CHOI ; Han-Sin JEONG
Clinical and Experimental Otorhinolaryngology 2025;18(1):64-72
Objectives:
. A substantial proportion of patients with head and neck cancer (HNC) require emergency room (ER) visits or unplanned hospitalizations during or after treatment with various modalities. We investigated HNC cases that necessitated ER visitation after cancer treatment, aiming to identify potential risk factors in the context of the Korean healthcare system.
Methods:
. This single-center cohort study examined patients with HNC who received cancer treatments at Samsung Medical Center in 2019 (n=566). Treatment modalities included surgery alone (n=184), surgery and adjuvant therapy (n=138), curative non-surgical treatment such as radiation or chemoradiation (n=209), and palliative treatments (n=35). We followed these cases for up to 3 years, focusing on those who visited the ER during or after cancer treatment, and analyzed the primary reasons and risk factors associated with these visits.
Results:
. The ER visitation rate was 8.0% (n=45) among patients with HNC, with a total of 70 ER visits (12.4%; mean, 1.56; range, 1–4). The rate of treatment-related ER visitation was 4.6%. Common reasons for ER visits included surgical site or wound complications (31.1% of patients visiting the ER, 22.9% of ER visits) and issues with oral intake or feeding (22.2% of patients, 31.4% of visits). Significant risk factors for ER visits included tumor subsite (with hypopharyngeal cancer associated with a 17.9% rate of treatment-related ER visits), tumor stage (T2–4, 8.6%–12.2%; N+ status, 6.7%), and treatment modality (surgery with adjuvant chemoradiation, 19.4%). Patient age and comorbidities did not represent significant factors.
Conclusion
. The most frequent reasons for ER visits among patients with HNC included complications with wounds and feeding. Additionally, tumor characteristics and treatment modality were independent risk factors for ER visits. Adequate planning and management to address these issues could potentially decrease the number of ER visits, lower costs, and improve patient care.
2.2025 Seoul Consensus on Clinical Practice Guidelines for Irritable Bowel Syndrome
Yonghoon CHOI ; Young Hoon YOUN ; Seung Joo KANG ; Jeong Eun SHIN ; Young Sin CHO ; Yoon Suk JUNG ; Seung Yong SHIN ; Cheal Wung HUH ; Yoo Jin LEE ; Hoon Sup KOO ; Kwangwoo NAM ; Hong Sub LEE ; Dong Hyun KIM ; Ye Hyun PARK ; Min Cheol KIM ; Hyo Yeop SONG ; Sung-Hoon YOON ; Sang Yeol LEE ; Miyoung CHOI ; Moo-In PARK ; In-Kyung SUNG ;
Journal of Neurogastroenterology and Motility 2025;31(2):133-169
Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is a chronic, disabling, and functional bowel disorder that significantly affects social functioning and reduces quality of life and increases social costs. The Korean Society of Neurogastroenterology and Motility published clinical practice guidelines on the management of IBS based on a systematic review of the literature in 2017, and planned to revise these guidelines in light of new evidence on the pathophysiology, diagnosis, and management of IBS. The current revised version of the guidelines is consistent with the previous version and targets adults diagnosed with or suspected of having IBS. These guidelines were developed using a combination of de novo and adaptation methods, with analyses of existing guidelines and discussions within the committee, leading to the identification of key clinical questions. Finally, the guidelines consisted of 22 recommendations, including 3 concerning the definition and risk factors of IBS, 4 regarding diagnostic modalities and strategies, 2 regarding general management, and 13 regarding medical treatment. For each statement, the advantages, disadvantages, and precautions were thoroughly detailed. The modified Delphi method was used to achieve expert consensus to adopt the core recommendations of the guidelines. These guidelines serve as a reference for clinicians (including primary care physicians, general healthcare providers, medical students, residents, and other healthcare professionals) and patients, helping them to make informed decisions regarding IBS management.
3.Risk Factors for Emergency Room Visits Among Patients With Head and Neck Cancer: A Longitudinal Cohort Study Within the Korean Healthcare System
Heejun YI ; Hyojun KIM ; Younghac KIM ; Ye-Jin SUH ; Joo Hyun PARK ; Nayeon CHOI ; Han-Sin JEONG
Clinical and Experimental Otorhinolaryngology 2025;18(1):64-72
Objectives:
. A substantial proportion of patients with head and neck cancer (HNC) require emergency room (ER) visits or unplanned hospitalizations during or after treatment with various modalities. We investigated HNC cases that necessitated ER visitation after cancer treatment, aiming to identify potential risk factors in the context of the Korean healthcare system.
Methods:
. This single-center cohort study examined patients with HNC who received cancer treatments at Samsung Medical Center in 2019 (n=566). Treatment modalities included surgery alone (n=184), surgery and adjuvant therapy (n=138), curative non-surgical treatment such as radiation or chemoradiation (n=209), and palliative treatments (n=35). We followed these cases for up to 3 years, focusing on those who visited the ER during or after cancer treatment, and analyzed the primary reasons and risk factors associated with these visits.
Results:
. The ER visitation rate was 8.0% (n=45) among patients with HNC, with a total of 70 ER visits (12.4%; mean, 1.56; range, 1–4). The rate of treatment-related ER visitation was 4.6%. Common reasons for ER visits included surgical site or wound complications (31.1% of patients visiting the ER, 22.9% of ER visits) and issues with oral intake or feeding (22.2% of patients, 31.4% of visits). Significant risk factors for ER visits included tumor subsite (with hypopharyngeal cancer associated with a 17.9% rate of treatment-related ER visits), tumor stage (T2–4, 8.6%–12.2%; N+ status, 6.7%), and treatment modality (surgery with adjuvant chemoradiation, 19.4%). Patient age and comorbidities did not represent significant factors.
Conclusion
. The most frequent reasons for ER visits among patients with HNC included complications with wounds and feeding. Additionally, tumor characteristics and treatment modality were independent risk factors for ER visits. Adequate planning and management to address these issues could potentially decrease the number of ER visits, lower costs, and improve patient care.
4.2025 Seoul Consensus on Clinical Practice Guidelines for Irritable Bowel Syndrome
Yonghoon CHOI ; Young Hoon YOUN ; Seung Joo KANG ; Jeong Eun SHIN ; Young Sin CHO ; Yoon Suk JUNG ; Seung Yong SHIN ; Cheal Wung HUH ; Yoo Jin LEE ; Hoon Sup KOO ; Kwangwoo NAM ; Hong Sub LEE ; Dong Hyun KIM ; Ye Hyun PARK ; Min Cheol KIM ; Hyo Yeop SONG ; Sung-Hoon YOON ; Sang Yeol LEE ; Miyoung CHOI ; Moo-In PARK ; In-Kyung SUNG ;
Journal of Neurogastroenterology and Motility 2025;31(2):133-169
Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is a chronic, disabling, and functional bowel disorder that significantly affects social functioning and reduces quality of life and increases social costs. The Korean Society of Neurogastroenterology and Motility published clinical practice guidelines on the management of IBS based on a systematic review of the literature in 2017, and planned to revise these guidelines in light of new evidence on the pathophysiology, diagnosis, and management of IBS. The current revised version of the guidelines is consistent with the previous version and targets adults diagnosed with or suspected of having IBS. These guidelines were developed using a combination of de novo and adaptation methods, with analyses of existing guidelines and discussions within the committee, leading to the identification of key clinical questions. Finally, the guidelines consisted of 22 recommendations, including 3 concerning the definition and risk factors of IBS, 4 regarding diagnostic modalities and strategies, 2 regarding general management, and 13 regarding medical treatment. For each statement, the advantages, disadvantages, and precautions were thoroughly detailed. The modified Delphi method was used to achieve expert consensus to adopt the core recommendations of the guidelines. These guidelines serve as a reference for clinicians (including primary care physicians, general healthcare providers, medical students, residents, and other healthcare professionals) and patients, helping them to make informed decisions regarding IBS management.
5.Risk Factors for Emergency Room Visits Among Patients With Head and Neck Cancer: A Longitudinal Cohort Study Within the Korean Healthcare System
Heejun YI ; Hyojun KIM ; Younghac KIM ; Ye-Jin SUH ; Joo Hyun PARK ; Nayeon CHOI ; Han-Sin JEONG
Clinical and Experimental Otorhinolaryngology 2025;18(1):64-72
Objectives:
. A substantial proportion of patients with head and neck cancer (HNC) require emergency room (ER) visits or unplanned hospitalizations during or after treatment with various modalities. We investigated HNC cases that necessitated ER visitation after cancer treatment, aiming to identify potential risk factors in the context of the Korean healthcare system.
Methods:
. This single-center cohort study examined patients with HNC who received cancer treatments at Samsung Medical Center in 2019 (n=566). Treatment modalities included surgery alone (n=184), surgery and adjuvant therapy (n=138), curative non-surgical treatment such as radiation or chemoradiation (n=209), and palliative treatments (n=35). We followed these cases for up to 3 years, focusing on those who visited the ER during or after cancer treatment, and analyzed the primary reasons and risk factors associated with these visits.
Results:
. The ER visitation rate was 8.0% (n=45) among patients with HNC, with a total of 70 ER visits (12.4%; mean, 1.56; range, 1–4). The rate of treatment-related ER visitation was 4.6%. Common reasons for ER visits included surgical site or wound complications (31.1% of patients visiting the ER, 22.9% of ER visits) and issues with oral intake or feeding (22.2% of patients, 31.4% of visits). Significant risk factors for ER visits included tumor subsite (with hypopharyngeal cancer associated with a 17.9% rate of treatment-related ER visits), tumor stage (T2–4, 8.6%–12.2%; N+ status, 6.7%), and treatment modality (surgery with adjuvant chemoradiation, 19.4%). Patient age and comorbidities did not represent significant factors.
Conclusion
. The most frequent reasons for ER visits among patients with HNC included complications with wounds and feeding. Additionally, tumor characteristics and treatment modality were independent risk factors for ER visits. Adequate planning and management to address these issues could potentially decrease the number of ER visits, lower costs, and improve patient care.
6.2025 Seoul Consensus on Clinical Practice Guidelines for Irritable Bowel Syndrome
Yonghoon CHOI ; Young Hoon YOUN ; Seung Joo KANG ; Jeong Eun SHIN ; Young Sin CHO ; Yoon Suk JUNG ; Seung Yong SHIN ; Cheal Wung HUH ; Yoo Jin LEE ; Hoon Sup KOO ; Kwangwoo NAM ; Hong Sub LEE ; Dong Hyun KIM ; Ye Hyun PARK ; Min Cheol KIM ; Hyo Yeop SONG ; Sung-Hoon YOON ; Sang Yeol LEE ; Miyoung CHOI ; Moo-In PARK ; In-Kyung SUNG ;
Journal of Neurogastroenterology and Motility 2025;31(2):133-169
Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is a chronic, disabling, and functional bowel disorder that significantly affects social functioning and reduces quality of life and increases social costs. The Korean Society of Neurogastroenterology and Motility published clinical practice guidelines on the management of IBS based on a systematic review of the literature in 2017, and planned to revise these guidelines in light of new evidence on the pathophysiology, diagnosis, and management of IBS. The current revised version of the guidelines is consistent with the previous version and targets adults diagnosed with or suspected of having IBS. These guidelines were developed using a combination of de novo and adaptation methods, with analyses of existing guidelines and discussions within the committee, leading to the identification of key clinical questions. Finally, the guidelines consisted of 22 recommendations, including 3 concerning the definition and risk factors of IBS, 4 regarding diagnostic modalities and strategies, 2 regarding general management, and 13 regarding medical treatment. For each statement, the advantages, disadvantages, and precautions were thoroughly detailed. The modified Delphi method was used to achieve expert consensus to adopt the core recommendations of the guidelines. These guidelines serve as a reference for clinicians (including primary care physicians, general healthcare providers, medical students, residents, and other healthcare professionals) and patients, helping them to make informed decisions regarding IBS management.
7.Efficacy and Safety of Metformin and Atorvastatin Combination Therapy vs. Monotherapy with Either Drug in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus and Dyslipidemia Patients (ATOMIC): Double-Blinded Randomized Controlled Trial
Jie-Eun LEE ; Seung Hee YU ; Sung Rae KIM ; Kyu Jeung AHN ; Kee-Ho SONG ; In-Kyu LEE ; Ho-Sang SHON ; In Joo KIM ; Soo LIM ; Doo-Man KIM ; Choon Hee CHUNG ; Won-Young LEE ; Soon Hee LEE ; Dong Joon KIM ; Sung-Rae CHO ; Chang Hee JUNG ; Hyun Jeong JEON ; Seung-Hwan LEE ; Keun-Young PARK ; Sang Youl RHEE ; Sin Gon KIM ; Seok O PARK ; Dae Jung KIM ; Byung Joon KIM ; Sang Ah LEE ; Yong-Hyun KIM ; Kyung-Soo KIM ; Ji A SEO ; Il Seong NAM-GOONG ; Chang Won LEE ; Duk Kyu KIM ; Sang Wook KIM ; Chung Gu CHO ; Jung Han KIM ; Yeo-Joo KIM ; Jae-Myung YOO ; Kyung Wan MIN ; Moon-Kyu LEE
Diabetes & Metabolism Journal 2024;48(4):730-739
Background:
It is well known that a large number of patients with diabetes also have dyslipidemia, which significantly increases the risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD). This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of combination drugs consisting of metformin and atorvastatin, widely used as therapeutic agents for diabetes and dyslipidemia.
Methods:
This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group and phase III multicenter study included adults with glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) levels >7.0% and <10.0%, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) >100 and <250 mg/dL. One hundred eighty-five eligible subjects were randomized to the combination group (metformin+atorvastatin), metformin group (metformin+atorvastatin placebo), and atorvastatin group (atorvastatin+metformin placebo). The primary efficacy endpoints were the percent changes in HbA1c and LDL-C levels from baseline at the end of the treatment.
Results:
After 16 weeks of treatment compared to baseline, HbA1c showed a significant difference of 0.94% compared to the atorvastatin group in the combination group (0.35% vs. −0.58%, respectively; P<0.0001), whereas the proportion of patients with increased HbA1c was also 62% and 15%, respectively, showing a significant difference (P<0.001). The combination group also showed a significant decrease in LDL-C levels compared to the metformin group (−55.20% vs. −7.69%, P<0.001) without previously unknown adverse drug events.
Conclusion
The addition of atorvastatin to metformin improved HbA1c and LDL-C levels to a significant extent compared to metformin or atorvastatin alone in diabetes and dyslipidemia patients. This study also suggested metformin’s preventive effect on the glucose-elevating potential of atorvastatin in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and dyslipidemia, insufficiently controlled with exercise and diet. Metformin and atorvastatin combination might be an effective treatment in reducing the CVD risk in patients with both diabetes and dyslipidemia because of its lowering effect on LDL-C and glucose.
8.Financial Benefits of Renal Dose-Adjusted Dipeptidyl Peptidase-4 Inhibitors for Patients with Type 2 Diabetes and Chronic Kidney Disease
Hun Jee CHOE ; Yeh-Hee KO ; Sun Joon MOON ; Chang Ho AHN ; Kyoung Hwa HA ; Hyeongsuk LEE ; Jae Hyun BAE ; Hyung Joon JOO ; Hyejin LEE ; Jang Wook SON ; Dae Jung KIM ; Sin Gon KIM ; Kwangsoo KIM ; Young Min CHO
Endocrinology and Metabolism 2024;39(4):622-631
Background:
Dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP4) inhibitors are frequently prescribed for patients with type 2 diabetes; however, their cost can pose a significant barrier for those with impaired kidney function. This study aimed to estimate the economic benefits of substituting non-renal dose-adjusted (NRDA) DPP4 inhibitors with renal dose-adjusted (RDA) DPP4 inhibitors in patients with both impaired kidney function and type 2 diabetes.
Methods:
This retrospective cohort study was conducted from January 1, 2012 to December 31, 2018, using data obtained from common data models of five medical centers in Korea. Model 1 applied the prescription pattern of participants with preserved kidney function to those with impaired kidney function. In contrast, model 2 replaced all NRDA DPP4 inhibitors with RDA DPP4 inhibitors, adjusting the doses of RDA DPP4 inhibitors based on individual kidney function. The primary outcome was the cost difference between the two models.
Results:
In total, 67,964,996 prescription records were analyzed. NRDA DPP4 inhibitors were more frequently prescribed to patients with impaired kidney function than in those with preserved kidney function (25.7%, 51.3%, 64.3%, and 71.6% in patients with estimated glomerular filtration rates [eGFRs] of ≥60, <60, <45, and <30 mL/min/1.73 m2, respectively). When model 1 was applied, the cost savings per year were 7.6% for eGFR <60 mL/min/1.73 m2 and 30.4% for eGFR <30 mL/min/1.73 m2. According to model 2, 15.4% to 51.2% per year could be saved depending on kidney impairment severity.
Conclusion
Adjusting the doses of RDA DPP4 inhibitors based on individual kidney function could alleviate the economic burden associated with medical expenses.
9.Short-Term Effectiveness of Oral Nirmatrelvir/Ritonavir Against the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron Variant and Culture-Positive Viral Shedding
Eunyoung LEE ; Sehee PARK ; Jae-Phil CHOI ; Min-Kyung KIM ; Eunmi YANG ; Sin Young HAM ; Seungjae LEE ; Bora LEE ; Jeong-Sun YANG ; Byoung Kwon PARK ; Da Sol KIM ; So-Young LEE ; Joo-Yeon LEE ; Hee-Chang JANG ; Jaehyun JEON ; Sang-Won PARK
Journal of Korean Medical Science 2023;38(8):e59-
Background:
Information on the effectiveness of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir against the omicron is limited. The clinical response and viral kinetics to therapy in the real world need to be evaluated.
Methods:
Mild to moderate coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients with risk factors for severe illness were prospectively enrolled as a treatment group with nirmatrelvir/ritonavir therapy versus a control group with supportive care. Serial viral load and culture from the upper respiratory tract were evaluated for seven days, and clinical responses and adverse reactions were evaluated for 28 days.
Results:
A total of 51 patients were analyzed including 40 in the treatment group and 11 in the control group. Faster symptom resolution during hospitalization (P= 0.048) was observed in the treatment group. Only minor adverse reactions were reported in 27.5% of patients. The viral load on Day 7 was lower in the treatment group (P = 0.002). The viral culture showed a positivity of 67.6% (25/37) vs. 100% (6/6) on Day 1, 0% (0/37) vs. 16.7 (1/6) on Day 5, and 0% (0/16) vs. 50.0% (2/4) on Day 7 in the treatment and control groups, respectively.
Conclusions
Nirmatrelvir/ritonavir against the omicron was safe and resulted in negative viral culture conversion after Day 5 of treatment with better symptomatic resolution.
10.Catastrophizing Maladaptive Coping Affects the Association Between Viral Anxiety and Fear of Progression in Cancer Patients During COVID-19 Pandemic
Hyuk Joo LEE ; Cheolkyung SIN ; Hyeyeong KIM ; Hyeon-Su IM ; Jae-Cheol JO ; Yoo Jin LEE ; Youjin KIM ; Junseok AHN ; Soyoung YOO ; Su-Jin KOH ; Seockhoon CHUNG
Psychiatry Investigation 2023;20(12):1204-1210
Objective:
The aim of the present study was to explore whether or not cancer patients’ viral anxiety and depression during the coronavirus-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic were associated with a fear of cancer progression. We also assessed whether coping strategies affected the relationship.
Methods:
The present cross-sectional survey included cancer patients who visited Ulsan University Hospital in Ulsan, Korea. The participants’ demographic information and responses to the following symptoms rating scales were collected: Stress and Anxiety to Viral Epidemic–6; Patient Health Questionnaire–9; Cognitive Emotion Regulation Questionnaire-short version; or Fear of Progression Questionnaire-short version.
Results:
Of the 558 cancer patients surveyed, 25 (4.5%) reported that their treatment schedule was delayed during the COVID-19 pandemic. The patients’ fear of progression was found to be related to age (β=-0.08; p=0.011), viral anxiety (β=0.40; p<0.001), depression (β=0.26; p<0.001), and catastrophizing coping strategies (β=0.15; p=0.004), for an overall adjusted R2 of 0.46 (F=66.8; p<0.001). Mediation analysis showed that viral anxiety and depression were directly associated with fear of progression, while catastrophizing mediated this relationship.
Conclusion
Fear of progression in cancer patients was associated with viral anxiety, depression, and maladaptive coping techniques, such as catastrophizing, during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Result Analysis
Print
Save
E-mail