1.Clinical Practice Guidelines for Dementia: Recommendations for Cholinesterase Inhibitors and Memantine
Yeshin KIM ; Dong Woo KANG ; Geon Ha KIM ; Ko Woon KIM ; Hee-Jin KIM ; Seunghee NA ; Kee Hyung PARK ; Young Ho PARK ; Gihwan BYEON ; Jeewon SUH ; Joon Hyun SHIN ; YongSoo SHIM ; YoungSoon YANG ; Yoo Hyun UM ; Seong-il OH ; Sheng-Min WANG ; Bora YOON ; Sun Min LEE ; Juyoun LEE ; Jin San LEE ; Jae-Sung LIM ; Young Hee JUNG ; Juhee CHIN ; Hyemin JANG ; Miyoung CHOI ; Yun Jeong HONG ; Hak Young RHEE ; Jae-Won JANG ;
Dementia and Neurocognitive Disorders 2025;24(1):1-23
Background:
and Purpose: This clinical practice guideline provides evidence-based recommendations for treatment of dementia, focusing on cholinesterase inhibitors and N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) receptor antagonists for Alzheimer’s disease (AD) and other types of dementia.
Methods:
Using the Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcomes (PICO) framework, we developed key clinical questions and conducted systematic literature reviews. A multidisciplinary panel of experts, organized by the Korean Dementia Association, evaluated randomized controlled trials and observational studies. Recommendations were graded for evidence quality and strength using Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology.
Results:
Three main recommendations are presented: (1) For AD, cholinesterase inhibitors (donepezil, rivastigmine, galantamine) are strongly recommended for improving cognition and daily function based on moderate evidence; (2) Cholinesterase inhibitors are conditionally recommended for vascular dementia and Parkinson’s disease dementia, with a strong recommendation for Lewy body dementia; (3) For moderate to severe AD, NMDA receptor antagonist (memantine) is strongly recommended, demonstrating significant cognitive and functional improvements. Both drug classes showed favorable safety profiles with manageable side effects.
Conclusions
This guideline offers standardized, evidence-based pharmacologic recommendations for dementia management, with specific guidance on cholinesterase inhibitors and NMDA receptor antagonists. It aims to support clinical decision-making and improve patient outcomes in dementia care. Further updates will address emerging treatments, including amyloid-targeting therapies, to reflect advances in dementia management.
2.The role of placenta Hofbauer cells during pregnancy and pregnancy complications
Seung-Woo YANG ; Han-Sung HWANG ; Young-Sun KANG
Obstetrics & Gynecology Science 2025;68(1):9-17
Placental Hofbauer cells (HBCs) are specialized macrophages present in the human placenta that play a crucial role in maintaining a healthy pregnancy. These cells are derived from the fetal mesoderm and are responsible for various functions, including immune regulation, angiogenesis, and nutrient transport. In normal pregnancies, HBCs primarily exhibit an M2 or immunomodulatory phenotype, which helps maintain a tolerant and antiinflammatory environment at the maternal-fetal interface. However, in pregnancies complicated by conditions such as immunological disorders, inflammation, or infection, the phenotype and function of HBCs may be altered. Although emerging evidence has highlighted the vital role of HBCs in both normal pregnancies and those with complications, such as chorioamnionitis, gestational diabetes, preeclampsia, and viral infections, their role remains unclear. Recent research also suggests a relationship between HBCs and the development of diseases in offspring. Understanding the role of HBCs in pregnancy could provide insights into the pathophysiology of various pregnancy-related disorders and offer potential therapeutic targets for improving maternal and fetal outcomes. This review explores the functions of HBCs in normal pregnancy and their involvement in complications, emphasizing their potential as biomarkers or targets for interventions aimed at reducing the incidence of adverse pregnancy outcomes. Additionally, we reviewed their potential for perinatal research in recent studies.
3.Observer-Blind Randomized Control Trial for the Effectiveness of Intensive Case Management in Seoul: Clinical and Quality-of-Life Outcomes for Severe Mental Illness
Hye-Young MIN ; Seung-Hee AHN ; Jeung Suk LIM ; Hwa Yeon SEO ; Sung Joon CHO ; Seung Yeon LEE ; Dohhee KIM ; Kihoon YOU ; Hyun Seo CHOI ; Su-Jin YANG ; Jee Eun PARK ; Bong Jin HAHM ; Hae Woo LEE ; Jee Hoon SOHN
Psychiatry Investigation 2025;22(5):513-521
Objective:
In South Korea, there is a significant gap in systematic, evidence-based research on intensive case management (ICM) for individuals with severe mental illness (SMI). This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of ICM through a randomized controlled trial (RCT) comparing ICM with standard case management (non-ICM).
Methods:
An RCT was conducted to assess the effectiveness of Seoul-intensive case management (S-ICM) vs. non-ICM in individuals with SMI in Seoul. A total of 78 participants were randomly assigned to either the S-ICM group (n=41) or the control group (n=37). Various clinical assessments, including the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS), Montgomery–Åsberg Depression Rating Scale, Health of the Nation Outcome Scale, and Clinical Global Impression-Improvement (CGI-I), along with quality-of-life measures such as the WHO Disability Assessment Schedule, WHO Quality of Life scale, and Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support (MSPSS) were evaluated over a 3-month period. Statistical analyses, including analysis of covariance and logistic regression, were used to determine the effectiveness of S-ICM.
Results:
The S-ICM group had significantly lower odds of self-harm or suicidal attempts compared to the control group (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]=0.30, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.21–1.38). Psychiatric symptoms measured by the BPRS and perceived social support measured by the MSPSS significantly improved in the S-ICM group. The S-ICM group also had significantly higher odds of CGI-I compared to the control group (aOR=8.20, 95% CI: 2.66–25.32).
Conclusion
This study provides inaugural evidence on the effectiveness of S-ICM services, supporting their standardization and potential nationwide expansion.
4.Observer-Blind Randomized Control Trial for the Effectiveness of Intensive Case Management in Seoul: Clinical and Quality-of-Life Outcomes for Severe Mental Illness
Hye-Young MIN ; Seung-Hee AHN ; Jeung Suk LIM ; Hwa Yeon SEO ; Sung Joon CHO ; Seung Yeon LEE ; Dohhee KIM ; Kihoon YOU ; Hyun Seo CHOI ; Su-Jin YANG ; Jee Eun PARK ; Bong Jin HAHM ; Hae Woo LEE ; Jee Hoon SOHN
Psychiatry Investigation 2025;22(5):513-521
Objective:
In South Korea, there is a significant gap in systematic, evidence-based research on intensive case management (ICM) for individuals with severe mental illness (SMI). This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of ICM through a randomized controlled trial (RCT) comparing ICM with standard case management (non-ICM).
Methods:
An RCT was conducted to assess the effectiveness of Seoul-intensive case management (S-ICM) vs. non-ICM in individuals with SMI in Seoul. A total of 78 participants were randomly assigned to either the S-ICM group (n=41) or the control group (n=37). Various clinical assessments, including the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS), Montgomery–Åsberg Depression Rating Scale, Health of the Nation Outcome Scale, and Clinical Global Impression-Improvement (CGI-I), along with quality-of-life measures such as the WHO Disability Assessment Schedule, WHO Quality of Life scale, and Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support (MSPSS) were evaluated over a 3-month period. Statistical analyses, including analysis of covariance and logistic regression, were used to determine the effectiveness of S-ICM.
Results:
The S-ICM group had significantly lower odds of self-harm or suicidal attempts compared to the control group (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]=0.30, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.21–1.38). Psychiatric symptoms measured by the BPRS and perceived social support measured by the MSPSS significantly improved in the S-ICM group. The S-ICM group also had significantly higher odds of CGI-I compared to the control group (aOR=8.20, 95% CI: 2.66–25.32).
Conclusion
This study provides inaugural evidence on the effectiveness of S-ICM services, supporting their standardization and potential nationwide expansion.
5.A Pilot Study Examining If the Additional Use of a Continuous Glucose Monitoring Is Helpful for Glucose Control in Older Adults
Kwang Joon KIM ; Yang Sun PARK ; Eunseo SUN ; Euna JO ; Jiwon SHINN ; Hyeon Woo YIM ; Chang Oh KIM ; Hun-Sung KIM
Yonsei Medical Journal 2025;66(6):346-353
Purpose:
To investigate whether using a continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) for the second time (2nd_CGM) would be effective after using it for the first time (1st_CGM), depending on age.
Materials and Methods:
This study included patients aged ≥40 years who were diagnosed with type 2 diabetes and had used a CGM at least twice between 2017 and 2021. Participants were divided into two groups based on their age: those aged <60 years and those aged ≥60 years. We assessed the glycemic control status of the 1st_CGM and 2nd_CGM, along with the glycemic variability.
Results:
Overall, 15 patients were included in the study. The mean glucose level in users aged <60 years significantly decreased (p<0.001) owing to the CGM use, while it did not increase in those aged ≥60 years. In users aged ≥60 years, the 1st_CGM group showed a significant decrease in blood glucose levels over time (p<0.05), whereas the 2nd_CGM group only showed a non-significant decreasing trend. The time in range tended to increase in those aged <60 years but decreased in those aged ≥60 years. In those aged <60 years, the mean amplitude of glycemic excursions (p<0.001), standard deviation (p<0.05), and coefficient of variation (p<0.001) significantly decreased. In those aged ≥60 years, these parameters exhibited a non-significant decreasing trend.
Conclusion
Glycemic effect and variability improved as expected with 1st_CGM use. However, 2nd_CGM did not significantly improve glycemic effect or variability in users aged ≥60 years, contrary to expectations. To address this issue, further investigation is needed to understand why, compared to 1st_CGM, 2nd_CGM fails to achieve better glycemic control in individuals aged ≥60 years.
6.The role of placenta Hofbauer cells during pregnancy and pregnancy complications
Seung-Woo YANG ; Han-Sung HWANG ; Young-Sun KANG
Obstetrics & Gynecology Science 2025;68(1):9-17
Placental Hofbauer cells (HBCs) are specialized macrophages present in the human placenta that play a crucial role in maintaining a healthy pregnancy. These cells are derived from the fetal mesoderm and are responsible for various functions, including immune regulation, angiogenesis, and nutrient transport. In normal pregnancies, HBCs primarily exhibit an M2 or immunomodulatory phenotype, which helps maintain a tolerant and antiinflammatory environment at the maternal-fetal interface. However, in pregnancies complicated by conditions such as immunological disorders, inflammation, or infection, the phenotype and function of HBCs may be altered. Although emerging evidence has highlighted the vital role of HBCs in both normal pregnancies and those with complications, such as chorioamnionitis, gestational diabetes, preeclampsia, and viral infections, their role remains unclear. Recent research also suggests a relationship between HBCs and the development of diseases in offspring. Understanding the role of HBCs in pregnancy could provide insights into the pathophysiology of various pregnancy-related disorders and offer potential therapeutic targets for improving maternal and fetal outcomes. This review explores the functions of HBCs in normal pregnancy and their involvement in complications, emphasizing their potential as biomarkers or targets for interventions aimed at reducing the incidence of adverse pregnancy outcomes. Additionally, we reviewed their potential for perinatal research in recent studies.
7.Observer-Blind Randomized Control Trial for the Effectiveness of Intensive Case Management in Seoul: Clinical and Quality-of-Life Outcomes for Severe Mental Illness
Hye-Young MIN ; Seung-Hee AHN ; Jeung Suk LIM ; Hwa Yeon SEO ; Sung Joon CHO ; Seung Yeon LEE ; Dohhee KIM ; Kihoon YOU ; Hyun Seo CHOI ; Su-Jin YANG ; Jee Eun PARK ; Bong Jin HAHM ; Hae Woo LEE ; Jee Hoon SOHN
Psychiatry Investigation 2025;22(5):513-521
Objective:
In South Korea, there is a significant gap in systematic, evidence-based research on intensive case management (ICM) for individuals with severe mental illness (SMI). This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of ICM through a randomized controlled trial (RCT) comparing ICM with standard case management (non-ICM).
Methods:
An RCT was conducted to assess the effectiveness of Seoul-intensive case management (S-ICM) vs. non-ICM in individuals with SMI in Seoul. A total of 78 participants were randomly assigned to either the S-ICM group (n=41) or the control group (n=37). Various clinical assessments, including the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS), Montgomery–Åsberg Depression Rating Scale, Health of the Nation Outcome Scale, and Clinical Global Impression-Improvement (CGI-I), along with quality-of-life measures such as the WHO Disability Assessment Schedule, WHO Quality of Life scale, and Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support (MSPSS) were evaluated over a 3-month period. Statistical analyses, including analysis of covariance and logistic regression, were used to determine the effectiveness of S-ICM.
Results:
The S-ICM group had significantly lower odds of self-harm or suicidal attempts compared to the control group (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]=0.30, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.21–1.38). Psychiatric symptoms measured by the BPRS and perceived social support measured by the MSPSS significantly improved in the S-ICM group. The S-ICM group also had significantly higher odds of CGI-I compared to the control group (aOR=8.20, 95% CI: 2.66–25.32).
Conclusion
This study provides inaugural evidence on the effectiveness of S-ICM services, supporting their standardization and potential nationwide expansion.
8.A Pilot Study Examining If the Additional Use of a Continuous Glucose Monitoring Is Helpful for Glucose Control in Older Adults
Kwang Joon KIM ; Yang Sun PARK ; Eunseo SUN ; Euna JO ; Jiwon SHINN ; Hyeon Woo YIM ; Chang Oh KIM ; Hun-Sung KIM
Yonsei Medical Journal 2025;66(6):346-353
Purpose:
To investigate whether using a continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) for the second time (2nd_CGM) would be effective after using it for the first time (1st_CGM), depending on age.
Materials and Methods:
This study included patients aged ≥40 years who were diagnosed with type 2 diabetes and had used a CGM at least twice between 2017 and 2021. Participants were divided into two groups based on their age: those aged <60 years and those aged ≥60 years. We assessed the glycemic control status of the 1st_CGM and 2nd_CGM, along with the glycemic variability.
Results:
Overall, 15 patients were included in the study. The mean glucose level in users aged <60 years significantly decreased (p<0.001) owing to the CGM use, while it did not increase in those aged ≥60 years. In users aged ≥60 years, the 1st_CGM group showed a significant decrease in blood glucose levels over time (p<0.05), whereas the 2nd_CGM group only showed a non-significant decreasing trend. The time in range tended to increase in those aged <60 years but decreased in those aged ≥60 years. In those aged <60 years, the mean amplitude of glycemic excursions (p<0.001), standard deviation (p<0.05), and coefficient of variation (p<0.001) significantly decreased. In those aged ≥60 years, these parameters exhibited a non-significant decreasing trend.
Conclusion
Glycemic effect and variability improved as expected with 1st_CGM use. However, 2nd_CGM did not significantly improve glycemic effect or variability in users aged ≥60 years, contrary to expectations. To address this issue, further investigation is needed to understand why, compared to 1st_CGM, 2nd_CGM fails to achieve better glycemic control in individuals aged ≥60 years.
9.Outcomes of Deferring Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Without Physiologic Assessment for Intermediate Coronary Lesions
Jihoon KIM ; Seong-Hoon LIM ; Joo-Yong HAHN ; Jin-Ok JEONG ; Yong Hwan PARK ; Woo Jung CHUN ; Ju Hyeon OH ; Dae Kyoung CHO ; Yu Jeong CHOI ; Eul-Soon IM ; Kyung-Heon WON ; Sung Yun LEE ; Sang-Wook KIM ; Ki Hong CHOI ; Joo Myung LEE ; Taek Kyu PARK ; Jeong Hoon YANG ; Young Bin SONG ; Seung-Hyuk CHOI ; Hyeon-Cheol GWON
Korean Circulation Journal 2025;55(3):185-195
Background and Objectives:
Outcomes of deferring percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) without invasive physiologic assessment for intermediate coronary lesions is uncertain.We sought to compare long-term outcomes between medical treatment and PCI of intermediate lesions without invasive physiologic assessment.
Methods:
A total of 899 patients with intermediate coronary lesions between 50% and 70% diameter-stenosis were randomized to the conservative group (n=449) or the aggressive group (n=450). For intermediate lesions, PCI was performed in the aggressive group, but was deferred in the conservative group. The primary endpoint was major adverse cardiac events (MACE, a composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction [MI], or ischemia-driven any revascularization) at 3 years.
Results:
The number of treated lesions per patient was 0.8±0.9 in the conservative group and 1.7±0.9 in the aggressive group (p=0.001). At 3 years, the conservative group had a significantly higher incidence of MACE than the aggressive group (13.8% vs. 9.3%; hazard ratio [HR], 1.49; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.00–2.21; p=0.049), mainly driven by revascularization of target intermediate lesion (6.5% vs. 1.1%; HR, 5.69; 95% CI, 2.20–14.73;p<0.001). Between 1 and 3 years after the index procedure, compared to the aggressive group, the conservative group had significantly higher incidence of cardiac death or MI (3.2% vs.0.7%; HR, 4.34; 95% CI, 1.24–15.22; p=0.022) and ischemia-driven any revascularization.
Conclusions
For intermediate lesions, medical therapy alone, guided only by angiography, was associated with a higher risk of MACE at 3 years compared with performing PCI, mainly due to increased revascularization.
10.The role of placenta Hofbauer cells during pregnancy and pregnancy complications
Seung-Woo YANG ; Han-Sung HWANG ; Young-Sun KANG
Obstetrics & Gynecology Science 2025;68(1):9-17
Placental Hofbauer cells (HBCs) are specialized macrophages present in the human placenta that play a crucial role in maintaining a healthy pregnancy. These cells are derived from the fetal mesoderm and are responsible for various functions, including immune regulation, angiogenesis, and nutrient transport. In normal pregnancies, HBCs primarily exhibit an M2 or immunomodulatory phenotype, which helps maintain a tolerant and antiinflammatory environment at the maternal-fetal interface. However, in pregnancies complicated by conditions such as immunological disorders, inflammation, or infection, the phenotype and function of HBCs may be altered. Although emerging evidence has highlighted the vital role of HBCs in both normal pregnancies and those with complications, such as chorioamnionitis, gestational diabetes, preeclampsia, and viral infections, their role remains unclear. Recent research also suggests a relationship between HBCs and the development of diseases in offspring. Understanding the role of HBCs in pregnancy could provide insights into the pathophysiology of various pregnancy-related disorders and offer potential therapeutic targets for improving maternal and fetal outcomes. This review explores the functions of HBCs in normal pregnancy and their involvement in complications, emphasizing their potential as biomarkers or targets for interventions aimed at reducing the incidence of adverse pregnancy outcomes. Additionally, we reviewed their potential for perinatal research in recent studies.

Result Analysis
Print
Save
E-mail