1.Pericapsular Nerve Group Block with Periarticular Injection for Pain Management after Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Randomized Controlled Trial
Hun Sik CHO ; Bo Ra LEE ; Hyuck Min KWON ; Jun Young PARK ; Hyeong Won HAM ; Woo-Suk LEE ; Kwan Kyu PARK ; Tae Sung LEE ; Yong Seon CHOI
Yonsei Medical Journal 2025;66(4):233-239
Purpose:
The purpose of this study was to compare the effectiveness of pericapsular nerve group (PENG) block with periarticular multimodal drug injection (PMDI) on postoperative pain management and surgical outcomes in patients who underwent total hip arthroplasty (THA). We hypothesized that PENG block with PMDI would exhibit superior effects on postoperative pain control after THA compared to PMDI alone.
Materials and Methods:
From April 2022 to February 2023, 58 patients who underwent THA were randomly assigned into two groups: PENG block with PMDI group (n=29) and PMDI-only group (n=29). Primary outcomes were postoperative numeric rating scale (NRS) at rest and during activity at 6, 24, and 48 hours postoperatively. Secondary outcomes were postoperative complications (nausea and vomiting), Richards-Campbell Sleep Questionnaire (RCSQ) score, length of hospital stay, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis (WOMAC) index, Harris Hip Score (HHS), and total morphine usage after surgery.
Results:
There was no significant difference in postoperative pain for either resting NRS or active NRS. Postoperative nausea and vomiting, RCSQ score, length of hospital stay, WOMAC index, HHS, and total morphine usage exhibited no significant differences between the two groups.
Conclusion
Both groups showed no significant differences in postoperative pain and clinical outcomes, indicating that the addition of PENG block to PMDI does not improve pain management after applying the posterolateral approach of THA. PMDI alone during THA would be an efficient, fast, and safe method for managing postoperative pain. This article was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (Gov ID: NCT05320913).
2.Pericapsular Nerve Group Block with Periarticular Injection for Pain Management after Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Randomized Controlled Trial
Hun Sik CHO ; Bo Ra LEE ; Hyuck Min KWON ; Jun Young PARK ; Hyeong Won HAM ; Woo-Suk LEE ; Kwan Kyu PARK ; Tae Sung LEE ; Yong Seon CHOI
Yonsei Medical Journal 2025;66(4):233-239
Purpose:
The purpose of this study was to compare the effectiveness of pericapsular nerve group (PENG) block with periarticular multimodal drug injection (PMDI) on postoperative pain management and surgical outcomes in patients who underwent total hip arthroplasty (THA). We hypothesized that PENG block with PMDI would exhibit superior effects on postoperative pain control after THA compared to PMDI alone.
Materials and Methods:
From April 2022 to February 2023, 58 patients who underwent THA were randomly assigned into two groups: PENG block with PMDI group (n=29) and PMDI-only group (n=29). Primary outcomes were postoperative numeric rating scale (NRS) at rest and during activity at 6, 24, and 48 hours postoperatively. Secondary outcomes were postoperative complications (nausea and vomiting), Richards-Campbell Sleep Questionnaire (RCSQ) score, length of hospital stay, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis (WOMAC) index, Harris Hip Score (HHS), and total morphine usage after surgery.
Results:
There was no significant difference in postoperative pain for either resting NRS or active NRS. Postoperative nausea and vomiting, RCSQ score, length of hospital stay, WOMAC index, HHS, and total morphine usage exhibited no significant differences between the two groups.
Conclusion
Both groups showed no significant differences in postoperative pain and clinical outcomes, indicating that the addition of PENG block to PMDI does not improve pain management after applying the posterolateral approach of THA. PMDI alone during THA would be an efficient, fast, and safe method for managing postoperative pain. This article was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (Gov ID: NCT05320913).
3.Pericapsular Nerve Group Block with Periarticular Injection for Pain Management after Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Randomized Controlled Trial
Hun Sik CHO ; Bo Ra LEE ; Hyuck Min KWON ; Jun Young PARK ; Hyeong Won HAM ; Woo-Suk LEE ; Kwan Kyu PARK ; Tae Sung LEE ; Yong Seon CHOI
Yonsei Medical Journal 2025;66(4):233-239
Purpose:
The purpose of this study was to compare the effectiveness of pericapsular nerve group (PENG) block with periarticular multimodal drug injection (PMDI) on postoperative pain management and surgical outcomes in patients who underwent total hip arthroplasty (THA). We hypothesized that PENG block with PMDI would exhibit superior effects on postoperative pain control after THA compared to PMDI alone.
Materials and Methods:
From April 2022 to February 2023, 58 patients who underwent THA were randomly assigned into two groups: PENG block with PMDI group (n=29) and PMDI-only group (n=29). Primary outcomes were postoperative numeric rating scale (NRS) at rest and during activity at 6, 24, and 48 hours postoperatively. Secondary outcomes were postoperative complications (nausea and vomiting), Richards-Campbell Sleep Questionnaire (RCSQ) score, length of hospital stay, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis (WOMAC) index, Harris Hip Score (HHS), and total morphine usage after surgery.
Results:
There was no significant difference in postoperative pain for either resting NRS or active NRS. Postoperative nausea and vomiting, RCSQ score, length of hospital stay, WOMAC index, HHS, and total morphine usage exhibited no significant differences between the two groups.
Conclusion
Both groups showed no significant differences in postoperative pain and clinical outcomes, indicating that the addition of PENG block to PMDI does not improve pain management after applying the posterolateral approach of THA. PMDI alone during THA would be an efficient, fast, and safe method for managing postoperative pain. This article was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (Gov ID: NCT05320913).
4.Pericapsular Nerve Group Block with Periarticular Injection for Pain Management after Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Randomized Controlled Trial
Hun Sik CHO ; Bo Ra LEE ; Hyuck Min KWON ; Jun Young PARK ; Hyeong Won HAM ; Woo-Suk LEE ; Kwan Kyu PARK ; Tae Sung LEE ; Yong Seon CHOI
Yonsei Medical Journal 2025;66(4):233-239
Purpose:
The purpose of this study was to compare the effectiveness of pericapsular nerve group (PENG) block with periarticular multimodal drug injection (PMDI) on postoperative pain management and surgical outcomes in patients who underwent total hip arthroplasty (THA). We hypothesized that PENG block with PMDI would exhibit superior effects on postoperative pain control after THA compared to PMDI alone.
Materials and Methods:
From April 2022 to February 2023, 58 patients who underwent THA were randomly assigned into two groups: PENG block with PMDI group (n=29) and PMDI-only group (n=29). Primary outcomes were postoperative numeric rating scale (NRS) at rest and during activity at 6, 24, and 48 hours postoperatively. Secondary outcomes were postoperative complications (nausea and vomiting), Richards-Campbell Sleep Questionnaire (RCSQ) score, length of hospital stay, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis (WOMAC) index, Harris Hip Score (HHS), and total morphine usage after surgery.
Results:
There was no significant difference in postoperative pain for either resting NRS or active NRS. Postoperative nausea and vomiting, RCSQ score, length of hospital stay, WOMAC index, HHS, and total morphine usage exhibited no significant differences between the two groups.
Conclusion
Both groups showed no significant differences in postoperative pain and clinical outcomes, indicating that the addition of PENG block to PMDI does not improve pain management after applying the posterolateral approach of THA. PMDI alone during THA would be an efficient, fast, and safe method for managing postoperative pain. This article was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (Gov ID: NCT05320913).
5.Pericapsular Nerve Group Block with Periarticular Injection for Pain Management after Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Randomized Controlled Trial
Hun Sik CHO ; Bo Ra LEE ; Hyuck Min KWON ; Jun Young PARK ; Hyeong Won HAM ; Woo-Suk LEE ; Kwan Kyu PARK ; Tae Sung LEE ; Yong Seon CHOI
Yonsei Medical Journal 2025;66(4):233-239
Purpose:
The purpose of this study was to compare the effectiveness of pericapsular nerve group (PENG) block with periarticular multimodal drug injection (PMDI) on postoperative pain management and surgical outcomes in patients who underwent total hip arthroplasty (THA). We hypothesized that PENG block with PMDI would exhibit superior effects on postoperative pain control after THA compared to PMDI alone.
Materials and Methods:
From April 2022 to February 2023, 58 patients who underwent THA were randomly assigned into two groups: PENG block with PMDI group (n=29) and PMDI-only group (n=29). Primary outcomes were postoperative numeric rating scale (NRS) at rest and during activity at 6, 24, and 48 hours postoperatively. Secondary outcomes were postoperative complications (nausea and vomiting), Richards-Campbell Sleep Questionnaire (RCSQ) score, length of hospital stay, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis (WOMAC) index, Harris Hip Score (HHS), and total morphine usage after surgery.
Results:
There was no significant difference in postoperative pain for either resting NRS or active NRS. Postoperative nausea and vomiting, RCSQ score, length of hospital stay, WOMAC index, HHS, and total morphine usage exhibited no significant differences between the two groups.
Conclusion
Both groups showed no significant differences in postoperative pain and clinical outcomes, indicating that the addition of PENG block to PMDI does not improve pain management after applying the posterolateral approach of THA. PMDI alone during THA would be an efficient, fast, and safe method for managing postoperative pain. This article was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (Gov ID: NCT05320913).
6.Korean Practice Guidelines for Gastric Cancer 2022: An Evidence-based, Multidisciplinary Approach
Tae-Han KIM ; In-Ho KIM ; Seung Joo KANG ; Miyoung CHOI ; Baek-Hui KIM ; Bang Wool EOM ; Bum Jun KIM ; Byung-Hoon MIN ; Chang In CHOI ; Cheol Min SHIN ; Chung Hyun TAE ; Chung sik GONG ; Dong Jin KIM ; Arthur Eung-Hyuck CHO ; Eun Jeong GONG ; Geum Jong SONG ; Hyeon-Su IM ; Hye Seong AHN ; Hyun LIM ; Hyung-Don KIM ; Jae-Joon KIM ; Jeong Il YU ; Jeong Won LEE ; Ji Yeon PARK ; Jwa Hoon KIM ; Kyoung Doo SONG ; Minkyu JUNG ; Mi Ran JUNG ; Sang-Yong SON ; Shin-Hoo PARK ; Soo Jin KIM ; Sung Hak LEE ; Tae-Yong KIM ; Woo Kyun BAE ; Woong Sub KOOM ; Yeseob JEE ; Yoo Min KIM ; Yoonjin KWAK ; Young Suk PARK ; Hye Sook HAN ; Su Youn NAM ; Seong-Ho KONG ;
Journal of Gastric Cancer 2023;23(1):3-106
Gastric cancer is one of the most common cancers in Korea and the world. Since 2004, this is the 4th gastric cancer guideline published in Korea which is the revised version of previous evidence-based approach in 2018. Current guideline is a collaborative work of the interdisciplinary working group including experts in the field of gastric surgery, gastroenterology, endoscopy, medical oncology, abdominal radiology, pathology, nuclear medicine, radiation oncology and guideline development methodology. Total of 33 key questions were updated or proposed after a collaborative review by the working group and 40 statements were developed according to the systematic review using the MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library and KoreaMed database. The level of evidence and the grading of recommendations were categorized according to the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation proposition. Evidence level, benefit, harm, and clinical applicability was considered as the significant factors for recommendation. The working group reviewed recommendations and discussed for consensus. In the earlier part, general consideration discusses screening, diagnosis and staging of endoscopy, pathology, radiology, and nuclear medicine. Flowchart is depicted with statements which is supported by meta-analysis and references. Since clinical trial and systematic review was not suitable for postoperative oncologic and nutritional follow-up, working group agreed to conduct a nationwide survey investigating the clinical practice of all tertiary or general hospitals in Korea. The purpose of this survey was to provide baseline information on follow up. Herein we present a multidisciplinary-evidence based gastric cancer guideline.
7.Prognostic Implication of Focal Breast Edema on Preoperative Breast Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Breast Cancer Patients
Pamela SUNG ; Jong Yoon LEE ; Jong-Ho CHEUN ; In Sil CHOI ; Jin Hyun PARK ; Jeong Hwan PARK ; Byoung Hyuck KIM ; Sohee OH ; A Jung CHU ; Ki-Tae HWANG
Journal of Breast Cancer 2023;26(5):479-491
Purpose:
In this study, we investigated the prognostic implications of focal breast edema on preoperative breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in patients with breast cancer.
Methods:
Data of 899 patients with breast cancer at a single institution were retrospectively analyzed. The patients were divided into an edema-positive group (EPG) and an edemanegative group (ENG) based on the presence of peritumoral, prepectoral, or subcutaneous edema. Two radiologists evaluated the presence or absence of focal edema and its subtypes on preoperative breast MRI. Clinicopathologic characteristics and survival outcomes were compared between the two groups and among the three subtypes using Pearson’s χ2 test, Kaplan–Meier estimator, and Cox proportional hazards model.
Results:
There were 399 (44.4%) and 500 (55.6%) patients in the EPG and ENG, respectively.The EPG showed significantly higher rates of axillary lymph node metastasis (55.6% vs.19.2%, p < 0.001) and lymphovascular invasion (LVI) (57.9% vs. 12.6%, p < 0.001) than the ENG. Patients in the EPG showed significantly worse overall survival (OS) rate (log-rank p < 0.001; hazard ratio [HR], 4.83; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.56–9.11) and recurrencefree survival rate (log-rank p < 0.001; HR, 3.00; 95% CI, 1.94–4.63) than those in the ENG.After adjusting for other variables, focal breast edema remained a significant factor affecting the OS rate, regardless of the edema type. Specifically, the presence of subcutaneous edema emerged as the strongest predictor for OS with the highest HR (p < 0.001; HR, 9.10; 95% CI, 3.05–27.15).
Conclusion
Focal breast edema on preoperative breast MRI implies a higher possibility of LVI and axillary lymph node metastasis, which can lead to a poor prognosis. A detailed description of focal breast edema, especially subcutaneous edema, on preoperative breast MRI may provide prognostic predictions. More intensive surveillance is required for patients with breast cancer and focal preoperative breast edema.
8.Erratum: Korean Practice Guidelines for Gastric Cancer 2022: An Evidencebased, Multidisciplinary Approach
Tae-Han KIM ; In-Ho KIM ; Seung Joo KANG ; Miyoung CHOI ; Baek-Hui KIM ; Bang Wool EOM ; Bum Jun KIM ; Byung-Hoon MIN ; Chang In CHOI ; Cheol Min SHIN ; Chung Hyun TAE ; Chung sik GONG ; Dong Jin KIM ; Arthur Eung-Hyuck CHO ; Eun Jeong GONG ; Geum Jong SONG ; Hyeon-Su IM ; Hye Seong AHN ; Hyun LIM ; Hyung-Don KIM ; Jae-Joon KIM ; Jeong Il YU ; Jeong Won LEE ; Ji Yeon PARK ; Jwa Hoon KIM ; Kyoung Doo SONG ; Minkyu JUNG ; Mi Ran JUNG ; Sang-Yong SON ; Shin-Hoo PARK ; Soo Jin KIM ; Sung Hak LEE ; Tae-Yong KIM ; Woo Kyun BAE ; Woong Sub KOOM ; Yeseob JEE ; Yoo Min KIM ; Yoonjin KWAK ; Young Suk PARK ; Hye Sook HAN ; Su Youn NAM ; Seong-Ho KONG
Journal of Gastric Cancer 2023;23(2):365-373
9.Impact of technical innovation on surgical outcome of laparoscopic major liver resection: 10 years' experience at a large-volume center.
Wontae CHO ; Choon Hyuck David KWON ; Jin Yong CHOI ; Seung Hwan LEE ; Jong Man KIM ; Gyu Seong CHOI ; Jae Won JOH ; Sung Joo KIM ; Gaab Soo KIM ; Kwang Chul KOH
Annals of Surgical Treatment and Research 2019;96(1):14-18
PURPOSE: Laparoscopic major liver resection (major LLR) remains a challenging procedure because of the technical difficulty. Several significant technical innovations have been applied in our center since 2012. They include routine application of bipolar electrocautery, initiation of temporary increase of intra-abdominal pressure during bleeding events from veins to balance the central venous pressure, and use of temporary inflow control of the Glissonean pedicle. This study evaluated the impact of these technique modifications in patients with major LLR. METHODS: Between January 2004 and February 2015, a total of 606 patients underwent LLR at Samsung Medical Center in Seoul, Korea. Major LLR was employed in 233 cases. All major LLR procedures were anatomical resections performed with a totally laparoscopic approach. We compared surgical parameters of right hepatectomy (RH), left hepatectomy (LH), and right posterior sectionectomy (RPS) before and after 2012. RESULTS: Open conversion rates of RH and LH and estimated blood loss in RPS significantly decreased after 2012. The postoperative complication rate of major LLR was 12.7% and was similar before and after 2012. Bile leakage was the most common complication (3.2%). CONCLUSION: The modifications of surgical techniques resulted in good outcomes for laparoscopic major LLR. We recommend routine application of these techniques to improve outcomes, especially in patients requiring major liver resection.
Bile
;
Central Venous Pressure
;
Electrocoagulation
;
Hemorrhage
;
Hepatectomy
;
Humans
;
Korea
;
Laparoscopy
;
Learning Curve
;
Liver*
;
Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures
;
Postoperative Complications
;
Seoul
;
Veins
10.Early Decline in Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction Can Predict Trastuzumab-Related Cardiotoxicity in Patients with Breast Cancer: A Study Using 13 Years of Registry Data
Eun Kyoung KIM ; Jinhyun CHO ; Ji Yeon KIM ; Sung A CHANG ; Sung Ji PARK ; Jin Oh CHOI ; Sang Chol LEE ; Jin Seok AHN ; Seung Woo PARK ; Young Hyuck IM ; Eun Seok JEON ; Yeon Hee PARK
Cancer Research and Treatment 2019;51(2):727-736
PURPOSE: While concerns regarding trastuzumab-related cardiac dysfunction (TRCD) in patients with breast cancer are increasing, there is a lack of evidence supporting the current recommendations for TRCD monitoring. We aimed to investigate the clinical predictors of TRCD in the adjuvant setting of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2–positive breast cancer patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From August 2003 to April 2016, consecutive 998 patients who were treated with adjuvant trastuzumab for breast cancer were retrospectively evaluated. TRCD was defined as a decrease ≥10% in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), with a decline below the normal limit or symptomatic heart failure. RESULTS: Among 787 eligible patients who had complete data sets consisting of both baseline and follow-up assessment of left ventricular systolic function by echocardiography (mean age, 49.9±9.5 years), 58 (7.4%) developed TRCD. TRCD patients had lower baseline LVEF (63% [59–66] vs. 65% [61–68], p=0.016) and more frequently administered Adriamycin (98% vs. 89%, p=0.022) than those without TRCD. On follow-up echocardiography, a drop in LVEF ≥5% within the first 3 months was more frequent in TRCD patients (78.3% vs. 38.4%, p<0.001). Regardless of baseline LVEF and Adriamycin treatment, a drop in LVEF ≥5% within the first 3 months of trastuzumab administration was strongly associated with the development of TRCD (adjusted hazard ratio, 45.1[17.0–127.6], p<0.001). CONCLUSION: The overall incidence of TRCD was 7.4% in Asian breast cancer patients treated with adjuvant trastuzumab. A decline in LVEF ≥5% within the first 3 months of trastuzumab initiation was strongly associated with TRCD development in patients with breast cancer.
Asian Continental Ancestry Group
;
Breast Neoplasms
;
Breast
;
Cardiotoxicity
;
Dataset
;
Doxorubicin
;
Echocardiography
;
Follow-Up Studies
;
Heart Failure
;
Humans
;
Incidence
;
Receptor, Epidermal Growth Factor
;
Retrospective Studies
;
Stroke Volume
;
Trastuzumab

Result Analysis
Print
Save
E-mail