Purpose: Improvement of left ventricular (LV) diastolic dysfunction (DD) is known to be a good prognostic factor in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (EF). In the present study, we investigated the predisposing risk factors affecting the reversibility of LV diastolic filling pattern (DFP) in patients with preserved EF. Materials and Methods: A total of 600 patients with pseudonormal LVDFP and preserved EF who underwent follow-up echocardiography were enrolled between 2011 and 2020. We compared their index and follow-up echocardiography findings and determined the predisposing risk factor affecting the reversibility of LVDFP. Results: Comparing the index and follow-up echocardiography findings showed that 379 (63%) patients had improved to normal or impaired relaxation LVDFP (improved group) and 221 (37%) patients had maintained or worsened LVDFP (unimproved group).The incidence of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (PAF) was significantly higher in the unimproved group than in the improved group (4.7% vs. 9.5%, p=0.026). After adjustment for relevant clinical risk factors of diastolic dysfunction, PAF was determined to be an independent predisposing risk factor for the unimproved LVDFP (odds ratio: 2.10, 95% confidence interval: 1.06–4.15, p=0.033).Among the parameters of diastolic dysfunction in follow-up echocardiography, the left atrial volume index, mean E/A ratio, and E/e' were significantly improved in patients without PAF but remained in patients with PAF. Conclusion We identified that PAF was an independent predisposing risk factor of the unimproved LVDFP in patients with pseudonormal LVDFP and preserved EF. Therefore, early detection and management of PAF might be required in patients with LVDD and preserved EF to prevent adverse cardiovascular events.

Purpose: Improvement of left ventricular (LV) diastolic dysfunction (DD) is known to be a good prognostic factor in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (EF). In the present study, we investigated the predisposing risk factors affecting the reversibility of LV diastolic filling pattern (DFP) in patients with preserved EF. Materials and Methods: A total of 600 patients with pseudonormal LVDFP and preserved EF who underwent follow-up echocardiography were enrolled between 2011 and 2020. We compared their index and follow-up echocardiography findings and determined the predisposing risk factor affecting the reversibility of LVDFP. Results: Comparing the index and follow-up echocardiography findings showed that 379 (63%) patients had improved to normal or impaired relaxation LVDFP (improved group) and 221 (37%) patients had maintained or worsened LVDFP (unimproved group).The incidence of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (PAF) was significantly higher in the unimproved group than in the improved group (4.7% vs. 9.5%, p=0.026). After adjustment for relevant clinical risk factors of diastolic dysfunction, PAF was determined to be an independent predisposing risk factor for the unimproved LVDFP (odds ratio: 2.10, 95% confidence interval: 1.06–4.15, p=0.033).Among the parameters of diastolic dysfunction in follow-up echocardiography, the left atrial volume index, mean E/A ratio, and E/e' were significantly improved in patients without PAF but remained in patients with PAF. Conclusion We identified that PAF was an independent predisposing risk factor of the unimproved LVDFP in patients with pseudonormal LVDFP and preserved EF. Therefore, early detection and management of PAF might be required in patients with LVDD and preserved EF to prevent adverse cardiovascular events.

Background: To identify the optimal surgical technique for single-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF), this study compared surgical outcomes and incidence of adjacent segment degeneration (ASD) in patients undergoing single-level ACDF using cage alone single-level fusion and plate fixation techniques. Methods: This single-center retrospective study (2003–2018) included patients who underwent single-level ACDF with either plate fixation (PLATE) or cage (CAGE) alone. The radiologic and clinical outcomes between the 2 surgical groups were compared over a 4-year follow-up period. Outcomes of interest included parameters related to range of motion, sagittal alignment, as well as fusion, subsidence, and ASD rates. Clinical outcomes were evaluated using the Neck Disability Index (NDI) and visual analog scale (VAS) for pain. Dysphagia and hoarseness rates were estimated based on medical records. Results: Forty-seven patients were included (n=17 in CAGE group). In the CAGE group, 94.1% of the patients had Bridwell grade 1 or 2, compared to 83.3% in the PLATE group (p = 0.396). Subsidence occurred in 12.5% and 3.6% of the CAGE and PLATE cases, respectively (p = 0.543). Segmental kyphosis progressed in the CAGE group compared to the PLATE group at 12, 24, and 48 months (p < 0.001). Radiographic ASD was observed in 41.2% and 30.0% of patients in the CAGE and PLATE groups, respectively, with a higher incidence in the upper segments for both groups. Preoperative NDI scores were similar between the groups; however, postoperatively, the CAGE group had significantly lower NDI scores (3.50 ± 2.74 vs. 8.00 ± 5.81) at 4 years (p = 0.020). Neck pain VAS scores also showed significant improvement in the CAGE group (2.33 ± 2.94) compared with that in the PLATE group (3.07 ± 2.31) at 4 years (p = 0.045). Both groups showed comparable arm pain VAS scores at 2 and 4 years postoperatively. Postoperative dysphagia occurred in 1 patient in the PLATE group, resolving almost completely by 1 year. Conclusions Single-level ACDF using a cage alone technique demonstrated favorable radiologic and clinical outcomes overall compared to plate-augmented ACDF. However, plate augmentation is recommended for patients with severe cervical kyphosis or those at high risk of subsidence.

Background: To identify the optimal surgical technique for single-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF), this study compared surgical outcomes and incidence of adjacent segment degeneration (ASD) in patients undergoing single-level ACDF using cage alone single-level fusion and plate fixation techniques. Methods: This single-center retrospective study (2003–2018) included patients who underwent single-level ACDF with either plate fixation (PLATE) or cage (CAGE) alone. The radiologic and clinical outcomes between the 2 surgical groups were compared over a 4-year follow-up period. Outcomes of interest included parameters related to range of motion, sagittal alignment, as well as fusion, subsidence, and ASD rates. Clinical outcomes were evaluated using the Neck Disability Index (NDI) and visual analog scale (VAS) for pain. Dysphagia and hoarseness rates were estimated based on medical records. Results: Forty-seven patients were included (n=17 in CAGE group). In the CAGE group, 94.1% of the patients had Bridwell grade 1 or 2, compared to 83.3% in the PLATE group (p = 0.396). Subsidence occurred in 12.5% and 3.6% of the CAGE and PLATE cases, respectively (p = 0.543). Segmental kyphosis progressed in the CAGE group compared to the PLATE group at 12, 24, and 48 months (p < 0.001). Radiographic ASD was observed in 41.2% and 30.0% of patients in the CAGE and PLATE groups, respectively, with a higher incidence in the upper segments for both groups. Preoperative NDI scores were similar between the groups; however, postoperatively, the CAGE group had significantly lower NDI scores (3.50 ± 2.74 vs. 8.00 ± 5.81) at 4 years (p = 0.020). Neck pain VAS scores also showed significant improvement in the CAGE group (2.33 ± 2.94) compared with that in the PLATE group (3.07 ± 2.31) at 4 years (p = 0.045). Both groups showed comparable arm pain VAS scores at 2 and 4 years postoperatively. Postoperative dysphagia occurred in 1 patient in the PLATE group, resolving almost completely by 1 year. Conclusions Single-level ACDF using a cage alone technique demonstrated favorable radiologic and clinical outcomes overall compared to plate-augmented ACDF. However, plate augmentation is recommended for patients with severe cervical kyphosis or those at high risk of subsidence.

Purpose: Improvement of left ventricular (LV) diastolic dysfunction (DD) is known to be a good prognostic factor in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (EF). In the present study, we investigated the predisposing risk factors affecting the reversibility of LV diastolic filling pattern (DFP) in patients with preserved EF. Materials and Methods: A total of 600 patients with pseudonormal LVDFP and preserved EF who underwent follow-up echocardiography were enrolled between 2011 and 2020. We compared their index and follow-up echocardiography findings and determined the predisposing risk factor affecting the reversibility of LVDFP. Results: Comparing the index and follow-up echocardiography findings showed that 379 (63%) patients had improved to normal or impaired relaxation LVDFP (improved group) and 221 (37%) patients had maintained or worsened LVDFP (unimproved group).The incidence of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (PAF) was significantly higher in the unimproved group than in the improved group (4.7% vs. 9.5%, p=0.026). After adjustment for relevant clinical risk factors of diastolic dysfunction, PAF was determined to be an independent predisposing risk factor for the unimproved LVDFP (odds ratio: 2.10, 95% confidence interval: 1.06–4.15, p=0.033).Among the parameters of diastolic dysfunction in follow-up echocardiography, the left atrial volume index, mean E/A ratio, and E/e' were significantly improved in patients without PAF but remained in patients with PAF. Conclusion We identified that PAF was an independent predisposing risk factor of the unimproved LVDFP in patients with pseudonormal LVDFP and preserved EF. Therefore, early detection and management of PAF might be required in patients with LVDD and preserved EF to prevent adverse cardiovascular events.

Purpose: Improvement of left ventricular (LV) diastolic dysfunction (DD) is known to be a good prognostic factor in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (EF). In the present study, we investigated the predisposing risk factors affecting the reversibility of LV diastolic filling pattern (DFP) in patients with preserved EF. Materials and Methods: A total of 600 patients with pseudonormal LVDFP and preserved EF who underwent follow-up echocardiography were enrolled between 2011 and 2020. We compared their index and follow-up echocardiography findings and determined the predisposing risk factor affecting the reversibility of LVDFP. Results: Comparing the index and follow-up echocardiography findings showed that 379 (63%) patients had improved to normal or impaired relaxation LVDFP (improved group) and 221 (37%) patients had maintained or worsened LVDFP (unimproved group).The incidence of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (PAF) was significantly higher in the unimproved group than in the improved group (4.7% vs. 9.5%, p=0.026). After adjustment for relevant clinical risk factors of diastolic dysfunction, PAF was determined to be an independent predisposing risk factor for the unimproved LVDFP (odds ratio: 2.10, 95% confidence interval: 1.06–4.15, p=0.033).Among the parameters of diastolic dysfunction in follow-up echocardiography, the left atrial volume index, mean E/A ratio, and E/e' were significantly improved in patients without PAF but remained in patients with PAF. Conclusion We identified that PAF was an independent predisposing risk factor of the unimproved LVDFP in patients with pseudonormal LVDFP and preserved EF. Therefore, early detection and management of PAF might be required in patients with LVDD and preserved EF to prevent adverse cardiovascular events.

Background: To identify the optimal surgical technique for single-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF), this study compared surgical outcomes and incidence of adjacent segment degeneration (ASD) in patients undergoing single-level ACDF using cage alone single-level fusion and plate fixation techniques. Methods: This single-center retrospective study (2003–2018) included patients who underwent single-level ACDF with either plate fixation (PLATE) or cage (CAGE) alone. The radiologic and clinical outcomes between the 2 surgical groups were compared over a 4-year follow-up period. Outcomes of interest included parameters related to range of motion, sagittal alignment, as well as fusion, subsidence, and ASD rates. Clinical outcomes were evaluated using the Neck Disability Index (NDI) and visual analog scale (VAS) for pain. Dysphagia and hoarseness rates were estimated based on medical records. Results: Forty-seven patients were included (n=17 in CAGE group). In the CAGE group, 94.1% of the patients had Bridwell grade 1 or 2, compared to 83.3% in the PLATE group (p = 0.396). Subsidence occurred in 12.5% and 3.6% of the CAGE and PLATE cases, respectively (p = 0.543). Segmental kyphosis progressed in the CAGE group compared to the PLATE group at 12, 24, and 48 months (p < 0.001). Radiographic ASD was observed in 41.2% and 30.0% of patients in the CAGE and PLATE groups, respectively, with a higher incidence in the upper segments for both groups. Preoperative NDI scores were similar between the groups; however, postoperatively, the CAGE group had significantly lower NDI scores (3.50 ± 2.74 vs. 8.00 ± 5.81) at 4 years (p = 0.020). Neck pain VAS scores also showed significant improvement in the CAGE group (2.33 ± 2.94) compared with that in the PLATE group (3.07 ± 2.31) at 4 years (p = 0.045). Both groups showed comparable arm pain VAS scores at 2 and 4 years postoperatively. Postoperative dysphagia occurred in 1 patient in the PLATE group, resolving almost completely by 1 year. Conclusions Single-level ACDF using a cage alone technique demonstrated favorable radiologic and clinical outcomes overall compared to plate-augmented ACDF. However, plate augmentation is recommended for patients with severe cervical kyphosis or those at high risk of subsidence.

Background: To identify the optimal surgical technique for single-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF), this study compared surgical outcomes and incidence of adjacent segment degeneration (ASD) in patients undergoing single-level ACDF using cage alone single-level fusion and plate fixation techniques. Methods: This single-center retrospective study (2003–2018) included patients who underwent single-level ACDF with either plate fixation (PLATE) or cage (CAGE) alone. The radiologic and clinical outcomes between the 2 surgical groups were compared over a 4-year follow-up period. Outcomes of interest included parameters related to range of motion, sagittal alignment, as well as fusion, subsidence, and ASD rates. Clinical outcomes were evaluated using the Neck Disability Index (NDI) and visual analog scale (VAS) for pain. Dysphagia and hoarseness rates were estimated based on medical records. Results: Forty-seven patients were included (n=17 in CAGE group). In the CAGE group, 94.1% of the patients had Bridwell grade 1 or 2, compared to 83.3% in the PLATE group (p = 0.396). Subsidence occurred in 12.5% and 3.6% of the CAGE and PLATE cases, respectively (p = 0.543). Segmental kyphosis progressed in the CAGE group compared to the PLATE group at 12, 24, and 48 months (p < 0.001). Radiographic ASD was observed in 41.2% and 30.0% of patients in the CAGE and PLATE groups, respectively, with a higher incidence in the upper segments for both groups. Preoperative NDI scores were similar between the groups; however, postoperatively, the CAGE group had significantly lower NDI scores (3.50 ± 2.74 vs. 8.00 ± 5.81) at 4 years (p = 0.020). Neck pain VAS scores also showed significant improvement in the CAGE group (2.33 ± 2.94) compared with that in the PLATE group (3.07 ± 2.31) at 4 years (p = 0.045). Both groups showed comparable arm pain VAS scores at 2 and 4 years postoperatively. Postoperative dysphagia occurred in 1 patient in the PLATE group, resolving almost completely by 1 year. Conclusions Single-level ACDF using a cage alone technique demonstrated favorable radiologic and clinical outcomes overall compared to plate-augmented ACDF. However, plate augmentation is recommended for patients with severe cervical kyphosis or those at high risk of subsidence.

Purpose: Improvement of left ventricular (LV) diastolic dysfunction (DD) is known to be a good prognostic factor in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (EF). In the present study, we investigated the predisposing risk factors affecting the reversibility of LV diastolic filling pattern (DFP) in patients with preserved EF. Materials and Methods: A total of 600 patients with pseudonormal LVDFP and preserved EF who underwent follow-up echocardiography were enrolled between 2011 and 2020. We compared their index and follow-up echocardiography findings and determined the predisposing risk factor affecting the reversibility of LVDFP. Results: Comparing the index and follow-up echocardiography findings showed that 379 (63%) patients had improved to normal or impaired relaxation LVDFP (improved group) and 221 (37%) patients had maintained or worsened LVDFP (unimproved group).The incidence of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (PAF) was significantly higher in the unimproved group than in the improved group (4.7% vs. 9.5%, p=0.026). After adjustment for relevant clinical risk factors of diastolic dysfunction, PAF was determined to be an independent predisposing risk factor for the unimproved LVDFP (odds ratio: 2.10, 95% confidence interval: 1.06–4.15, p=0.033).Among the parameters of diastolic dysfunction in follow-up echocardiography, the left atrial volume index, mean E/A ratio, and E/e' were significantly improved in patients without PAF but remained in patients with PAF. Conclusion We identified that PAF was an independent predisposing risk factor of the unimproved LVDFP in patients with pseudonormal LVDFP and preserved EF. Therefore, early detection and management of PAF might be required in patients with LVDD and preserved EF to prevent adverse cardiovascular events.

Purpose: This subgroup analysis of the Korean subset of patients in the phase 3 LASER301 trial evaluated the efficacy and safety of lazertinib versus gefitinib as first-line therapy for epidermal growth factor receptor mutated (EGFRm) non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Materials and Methods: Patients with locally advanced or metastatic EGFRm NSCLC were randomized 1:1 to lazertinib (240 mg/day) or gefitinib (250 mg/day). The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS). Results: In total, 172 Korean patients were enrolled (lazertinib, n=87; gefitinib, n=85). Baseline characteristics were balanced between the treatment groups. One-third of patients had brain metastases (BM) at baseline. Median PFS was 20.8 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 16.7 to 26.1) for lazertinib and 9.6 months (95% CI, 8.2 to 12.3) for gefitinib (hazard ratio [HR], 0.41; 95% CI, 0.28 to 0.60). This was supported by PFS analysis based on blinded independent central review. Significant PFS benefit with lazertinib was consistently observed across predefined subgroups, including patients with BM (HR, 0.28; 95% CI, 0.15 to 0.53) and those with L858R mutations (HR, 0.36; 95% CI, 0.20 to 0.63). Lazertinib safety data were consistent with its previously reported safety profile. Common adverse events (AEs) in both groups included rash, pruritus, and diarrhoea. Numerically fewer severe AEs and severe treatment–related AEs occurred with lazertinib than gefitinib. Conclusion Consistent with results for the overall LASER301 population, this analysis showed significant PFS benefit with lazertinib versus gefitinib with comparable safety in Korean patients with untreated EGFRm NSCLC, supporting lazertinib as a new potential treatment option for this patient population.