Objectives: To investigate the relationship between self-rating of subjective oral health, oral hygiene behaviors, and objective oral health status, and to identify factors that determine self-rating for subjective oral health. Methods: This retrospective study examined data from 1,128 patients who underwent panoramic radiography and oral examination based on national health checkups between 2009 and 2015. Oral hygiene behavior was validated using a questionnaire, and the presence of oral diseases was validated through oral examination and panoramic radiographs. The effect of oral hygiene behaviors on the presence of oral diseases or dental treatment was evaluated using univariate regression analysis. Oral hygiene behaviors and the prevalence of oral disease were compared, according to selfrated subjective oral health, using the chi-square test. Factors affecting self-rating of subjective oral health were determined using multivariate regression analysis. Results: Patients who brushed their teeth less than three times per day had a higher risk of dental caries, periodontitis, and missing teeth (P<0.05). The percentage of patients performing oral hygiene behaviors differed significantly according to the self-rating of subjective oral health. The factors affecting the self-rating of subjective oral health were pain and the presence of restored teeth.The presence of gingivitis, periodontitis, and the number of dental caries had no significant effect on the self-rating of oral health. Conclusions Self-rating of oral health was determined by treatment experience rather than objective oral health status and it affected oral hygiene behavior.

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.

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.

Objectives: To investigate the relationship between self-rating of subjective oral health, oral hygiene behaviors, and objective oral health status, and to identify factors that determine self-rating for subjective oral health. Methods: This retrospective study examined data from 1,128 patients who underwent panoramic radiography and oral examination based on national health checkups between 2009 and 2015. Oral hygiene behavior was validated using a questionnaire, and the presence of oral diseases was validated through oral examination and panoramic radiographs. The effect of oral hygiene behaviors on the presence of oral diseases or dental treatment was evaluated using univariate regression analysis. Oral hygiene behaviors and the prevalence of oral disease were compared, according to selfrated subjective oral health, using the chi-square test. Factors affecting self-rating of subjective oral health were determined using multivariate regression analysis. Results: Patients who brushed their teeth less than three times per day had a higher risk of dental caries, periodontitis, and missing teeth (P<0.05). The percentage of patients performing oral hygiene behaviors differed significantly according to the self-rating of subjective oral health. The factors affecting the self-rating of subjective oral health were pain and the presence of restored teeth.The presence of gingivitis, periodontitis, and the number of dental caries had no significant effect on the self-rating of oral health. Conclusions Self-rating of oral health was determined by treatment experience rather than objective oral health status and it affected oral hygiene behavior.

Objectives: To investigate the relationship between self-rating of subjective oral health, oral hygiene behaviors, and objective oral health status, and to identify factors that determine self-rating for subjective oral health. Methods: This retrospective study examined data from 1,128 patients who underwent panoramic radiography and oral examination based on national health checkups between 2009 and 2015. Oral hygiene behavior was validated using a questionnaire, and the presence of oral diseases was validated through oral examination and panoramic radiographs. The effect of oral hygiene behaviors on the presence of oral diseases or dental treatment was evaluated using univariate regression analysis. Oral hygiene behaviors and the prevalence of oral disease were compared, according to selfrated subjective oral health, using the chi-square test. Factors affecting self-rating of subjective oral health were determined using multivariate regression analysis. Results: Patients who brushed their teeth less than three times per day had a higher risk of dental caries, periodontitis, and missing teeth (P<0.05). The percentage of patients performing oral hygiene behaviors differed significantly according to the self-rating of subjective oral health. The factors affecting the self-rating of subjective oral health were pain and the presence of restored teeth.The presence of gingivitis, periodontitis, and the number of dental caries had no significant effect on the self-rating of oral health. Conclusions Self-rating of oral health was determined by treatment experience rather than objective oral health status and it affected oral hygiene behavior.

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.

Objectives: To investigate the relationship between self-rating of subjective oral health, oral hygiene behaviors, and objective oral health status, and to identify factors that determine self-rating for subjective oral health. Methods: This retrospective study examined data from 1,128 patients who underwent panoramic radiography and oral examination based on national health checkups between 2009 and 2015. Oral hygiene behavior was validated using a questionnaire, and the presence of oral diseases was validated through oral examination and panoramic radiographs. The effect of oral hygiene behaviors on the presence of oral diseases or dental treatment was evaluated using univariate regression analysis. Oral hygiene behaviors and the prevalence of oral disease were compared, according to selfrated subjective oral health, using the chi-square test. Factors affecting self-rating of subjective oral health were determined using multivariate regression analysis. Results: Patients who brushed their teeth less than three times per day had a higher risk of dental caries, periodontitis, and missing teeth (P<0.05). The percentage of patients performing oral hygiene behaviors differed significantly according to the self-rating of subjective oral health. The factors affecting the self-rating of subjective oral health were pain and the presence of restored teeth.The presence of gingivitis, periodontitis, and the number of dental caries had no significant effect on the self-rating of oral health. Conclusions Self-rating of oral health was determined by treatment experience rather than objective oral health status and it affected oral hygiene behavior.

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.

Background: A healthcare system’s collapse due to a pandemic, such as the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), can expose healthcare workers (HCWs) to various mental health problems. This study aimed to investigate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the depression and anxiety of HCWs. Methods: A nationwide questionnaire-based survey was conducted on HCWs who worked in healthcare facilities and public health centers in Korea in December 2020. Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) and Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 (GAD-7) were used to measure depression and anxiety. To investigate factors associated with depression and anxiety, stepwise multiple logistic regression analysis was performed. Results: A total of 1,425 participating HCWs were included. The mean depression score (PHQ-9) of HCWs before and after COVID-19 increased from 2.37 to 5.39, and the mean anxiety score (GAD-7) increased from 1.41 to 3.41. The proportion of HCWs with moderate to severe depression (PHQ-9 ≥ 10) increased from 3.8% before COVID-19 to 19.5% after COVID-19, whereas that of HCWs with moderate to severe anxiety (GAD-7 ≥ 10) increased from 2.0% to 10.1%. In our study, insomnia, chronic fatigue symptoms and physical symptoms after COVID-19, anxiety score (GAD-7) after COVID-19, living alone, and exhaustion were positively correlated with depression. Furthermore, post-traumatic stress symptoms, stress score (Global Assessment of Recent Stress), depression score (PHQ-9) after COVID-19, and exhaustion were positively correlated with anxiety. Conclusion In Korea, during the COVID-19 pandemic, HCWs commonly suffered from mental health problems, including depression and anxiety. Regularly checking the physical and mental health problems of HCWs during the COVID-19 pandemic is crucial, and social support and strategy are needed to reduce the heavy workload and psychological distress of HCWs.

In recent years, next-generation sequencing (NGS)–based genetic testing has become crucial in cancer care. While its primary objective is to identify actionable genetic alterations to guide treatment decisions, its scope has broadened to encompass aiding in pathological diagnosis and exploring resistance mechanisms. With the ongoing expansion in NGS application and reliance, a compelling necessity arises for expert consensus on its application in solid cancers. To address this demand, the forthcoming recommendations not only provide pragmatic guidance for the clinical use of NGS but also systematically classify actionable genes based on specific cancer types. Additionally, these recommendations will incorporate expert perspectives on crucial biomarkers, ensuring informed decisions regarding circulating tumor DNA panel testing.