Background and Objectives: Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) increases the risk of sudden cardiac death. Despite international guidelines for sudden death prevention and implantable cardiac defibrillator (ICD) use, clinical practices vary. This study assessed the practices and opinions of Korean cardiologists on HCM management, focusing on ICD use and reimbursement policies. Methods: A structured electronic survey was distributed to members of the Korean Society of Cardiology, covering HCM management, ICD preferences, and reimbursement policies. Results: A total of 119 cardiologists participated, with most being arrhythmia specialists (56.3%) and university professors (81.5%). Cardiac magnetic resonance imaging and genetic testing were underutilized (30.3% and 11.8%, respectively). Beta-blocker-refractory premature ventricular complexes were primarily managed with continued medical therapy (77.3%). ICD preferences varied by physician specialty and patient age, with subcutaneous ICDs preferred in younger patients and dual-chamber ICDs in older patients. Nearly half of respondents believed ICD reimbursement criteria required revision. Conclusions Significant variability in HCM management exists among Korean cardiologists, influenced by restrictive reimbursement criteria rather than clinical guidelines. Updated reimbursement policies and improved access to advanced diagnostics are needed to align with international standards and optimize patient care.

Purpose: Although neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) has been applied in patients with borderline resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (BR-PDAC), limited data on long-term outcomes are available to support its role as a potentially curable therapeutic option. This study assessed the probability of being statistically cured among these patients. Methods: The literature search was conducted focusing on previous studies that investigated the long-term recurrencefree survival rates of patients with BR-PDAC after NAT followed by radical resection. The reference cohort data were extracted from studies including patients undergoing upfront radical resection for resectable PDAC. Pseudo-individual patient data were reconstructed from the original papers. A non-mixture cure model was adopted to estimate the statistical cure fraction. Results Twelve retrospective studies reporting long-term recurrence-free survival after NAT followed by radical resection for patients with BR-PDAC were secondarily analyzed. The probability of being statistically cured in these patients was 8.1% (95% confidence interval [CI], 5.4%–11.5%), which was lower than that of the reference cohort of 5 retrospective studies (14.7%; 95% CI, 13.2%–16.4%). There was a statistically significant difference between the 2 groups (hazard ratio, 1.110;95% CI, 1.007–1.224).  Conclusion: From this study, we concluded that a cure can be expected in around eight percent of patients with BR-PDAC after NAT followed by radical resection, which would be helpful in counseling patients, as well as deciding whether to perform the surgery.

Background: Positron emission tomography (PET) viability scan is used to determine whether patients with a myocardial scar on single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) may need revascularization. However, the clinical utility of revascularization decision-making guided by PET viability imaging has not been proven yet. The purpose of this study was to investigate the impact of PET to determine revascularization on clinical outcomes. Methods: Between September 2012 and May 2021, 53 patients (37 males; mean age = 64 ± 11 years) with a myocardial scar on MIBI SPECT who underwent PET viability test were analyzed in this study. The primary outcome was a temporal change in echocardiographic findings.The secondary outcome was all-cause mortality. Results: Viable myocardium was presented by PET imaging in 29 (54.7%) patients.Revascularization was performed in 26 (49.1%) patients, including 18 (34.0%) with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and 8 (15.1%) with coronary artery bypass grafting.There were significant improvements in echocardiographic findings in the revascularization group and the viable myocardium group. All-cause mortality was significantly lower in the revascularization group than in the medical therapy-alone group (19.2% vs. 44.4%, log-rank P = 0.002) irrespective of viable (21.4% vs. 46.7%, log-rank P = 0.025) or non-viable myocardium (16.7% vs. 41.7%, log-rank P = 0.046). All-cause mortality was significantly lower in the PCI group than in the medical therapy-alone group (11.1% vs. 44.4%, log-rank P < 0.001). Conclusion Revascularization improved left ventricular systolic function and survival of patients with a myocardial scar on SPECT scans, irrespective of myocardial viability on PET scans.

Background and Objectives: Inherited arrhythmia (IA) is a more common cause of sudden cardiac death in Asian population, but little is known about the genetic background of Asian IA probands. We aimed to investigate the clinical characteristics and analyze the genetic underpinnings of IA in a Korean cohort. Methods: This study was conducted in a multicenter cohort of the Korean IA Registry from 2014 to 2017. Genetic testing was performed using a next-generation sequencing panel including 174 causative genes of cardiovascular disease. Results: Among the 265 IA probands, idiopathic ventricular fibrillation (IVF) and Brugada Syndrome (BrS) was the most prevalent diseases (96 and 95 cases respectively), followed by long QT syndrome (LQTS, n=54). Two-hundred-sixteen probands underwent genetic testing, and 69 probands (31.9%) were detected with genetic variant, with yield of pathogenic or likely pathogenic variant as 6.4%. Left ventricular ejection fraction was significantly lower in genotype positive probands (54.7±11.3 vs. 59.3±9.2%, p=0.005). IVF probands showed highest yield of positive genotype (54.0%), followed by LQTS (23.8%), and BrS (19.5%). Conclusions There were significant differences in clinical characteristics and genetic yields among BrS, LQTS, and IVF. Genetic testing did not provide better yield for BrS and LQTS. On the other hand, in IVF, genetic testing using multiple gene panel might enable the molecular diagnosis of concealed genotype, which may alter future clinical diagnosis and management strategies.

Purpose: Although various treatment regimens have been introduced for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) accompanied by portal vein tumor thrombosis (PVTT), comprehensive and direct comparisons between them are limited. Thus, the purpose of this study was to perform a network meta-analysis (NMA) to compare the efficacies of different treatment regimens for HCC accompanied by PVTT. Methods: A systematic review was conducted to identify studies comparing 2 or more treatment regimens for HCC accompanied by PVTT without extrahepatic metastasis and reporting each overall survival (OS). Endpoints of this NMA were to hazard ratios with confidential intervals for OS and mean survival time difference of each treatment regimen comparison using a random-effects model. Each treatment regimen was then ranked using the P-score to assess the probability of the superiority of each one. Results: Eleven studies involving 1,623 patients that yielded 16 comparisons were identified and enrolled in this NMA. There were 12 different treatment regimens as comparators, including sorafenib therapy alone (reference treatment).The NMA suggested that the following 4 treatment regimens improved OS compared to sorafenib: surgical resection followed by portal vein chemotherapy (SR plus PVC), SR, radiofrequency ablation plus sorafenib, and transarterial chemoembolization combined with selective internal radiation therapy. SR plus PVC was ranked the best treatment regimen for OS (P-score, 93.9%). Conclusion Comparative efficacy based on this NMA may help clinicians select treatment for HCC accompanied by PVTT. If amenable, aggressive locoregional treatment regimens such as SR plus PVC should be considered for HCC accompanied by PVTT.

Background: It has been known that the fear of contagion during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) creates time delays with subsequent impact on mortality in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI). However, difference of time delay and clinical outcome in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) or non-STEMI between the COVID-19 pandemic and pre-pandemic era has not been fully investigated yet in Korea. The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of COVID-19 pandemic on time delays and clinical outcome in patients with STEMI or non-STEMI compared to the same period years prior. Methods: A total of 598 patients with STEMI (n = 195) or non-STEMI (n = 403) who underwent coronary angiography during the COVID-19 pandemic (February 1 to April 30, 2020) and prepandemic era (February 1 to April 30, 2017, 2018, and 2019) were analyzed in this study. Main outcomes were the incidence of time delay, cardiac arrest, and in-hospital death. Results: There was 13.5% reduction in the number of patients hospitalized with AMI during the pandemic compared to pre-pandemic era. In patients with STEMI, door to balloon time tended to be longer during the pandemic compared to pre-pandemic era (55.7 ± 12.6 minutes vs. 60.8 ± 13.0 minutes, P = 0.08). There were no significant differences in cardiac arrest (15.6% vs. 10.4%, P = 0.397) and in-hospital mortality (15.6% vs. 10.4%, P = 0.397) between pre-pandemic and the pandemic era. In patients with non-STEMI, symptom to door time was significantly longer (310.0 ± 346.2 minutes vs. 511.5 ± 635.7 minutes, P = 0.038) and the incidence of cardiac arrest (0.9% vs. 3.5%, P = 0.017) and in-hospital mortality (0.3% vs.2.3%, P = 0.045) was significantly greater during the pandemic compared to pre-pandemic era. Among medications, angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin type 2 receptor blockers (ACE-I/ARBs) were underused in STEMI (64.6% vs. 45.8%, P = 0.021) and non-STEMI (67.8% vs. 57.0%, P = 0.061) during the pandemic. Conclusion During the COVID-19 pandemic, there has been a considerable reduction in hospital admissions for AMI, time delay, and underuse of ACE-I/ARBs for the management of AMI, and this might be closely associated with the excess death in Korea.

Background: Data regarding the association between preexisting cardiovascular risk factors (CVRFs) and cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) and the outcomes of patients requiring hospitalization for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) are limited. Therefore, the aim of this study was to investigate the impact of preexisting CVRFs or CVDs on the outcomes of patients with COVID-19 hospitalized in a Korean healthcare system. Methods: Patients with COVID-19 admitted to 10 hospitals in Daegu Metropolitan City, Korea, were examined. All sequentially hospitalized patients between February 15, 2020, and April 24, 2020, were enrolled in this study. All patients were confirmed to have COVID-19 based on the positive results on the polymerase chain reaction testing of nasopharyngeal samples. Clinical outcomes during hospitalization, such as requiring intensive care and invasive mechanical ventilation (MV) and death, were evaluated. Moreover, data on baseline comorbidities such as a history of diabetes, hypertension, dyslipidemia, current smoking, heart failure, coronary artery disease, cerebrovascular accidents, and other chronic cardiac diseases were obtained. Results: Of all the patients enrolled, 954 (42.0%) had preexisting CVRFs or CVDs. Among the CVRFs, the most common were hypertension (28.8%) and diabetes mellitus (17.0%). The prevalence rates of preexisting CVRFs or CVDs increased with age (P < 0.001). The number of patients requiring intensive care (P < 0.001) and invasive MV (P < 0.001) increased with age.The in-hospital death rate increased with age (P < 0.001). Patients requiring intensive care (5.3% vs. 1.6%; P < 0.001) and invasive MV (4.3% vs. 1.7%; P < 0.001) were significantly greater in patients with preexisting CVRFs or CVDs. In-hospital mortality (12.9% vs. 3.1%; P < 0.001) was significantly higher in patients with preexisting CVRFs or CVDs. Among the CVRFs, diabetes mellitus and hypertension were associated with increased requirement of intensive care and invasive MV and in-hospital death. Among the known CVDs, coronary artery disease and congestive heart failure were associated with invasive MV and in-hospital death. In multivariate analysis, preexisting CVRFs or CVDs (odds ratio [OR], 1.79; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.07–3.01; P = 0.027) were independent predictors of in-hospital death adjusting for confounding variables. Among individual preexisting CVRF or CVD components, diabetes mellitus (OR, 2.43; 95% CI, 1.51–3.90; P < 0.001) and congestive heart failure (OR, 2.43; 95% CI, 1.06–5.87; P = 0.049) were independent predictors of in-hospital death. Conclusion Based on the findings of this study, the patients with confirmed COVID-19 with preexisting CVRFs or CVDs had worse clinical outcomes. Caution is required in dealing with these patients at triage.after

Background and Objectives: As the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) spreads worldwide, cardiac injury in patients infected with COVID-19 becomes a significant concern. Thus, this study investigates the impact of several electrocardiogram (ECG) parameters and disease severity in COVID-19 patients. Methods: Seven medical centers in Daegu admitted 822 patients with COVID-19 between February and April 2020. This study examined 267 patients among them who underwent an ECG test and evaluated their biochemical parameters like C-reactive protein (CRP), log N-terminal pro-B-type Natriuretic Peptide (NT-proBNP), cardiac enzyme, and ECG parameters (heart rate, PR interval, QRS interval, T inversion, QT interval, and Tpe [the interval between peak to end in a T wave]). Results: Those patients were divided into 3 groups of mild (100 patients), moderate (89 patients), and severe (78 patients) according to clinical severity score. The level of CRP, log NT-proBNP, and creatinine kinase-myocardial band were significantly increased in severe patients. Meanwhile, severe patients exhibited prolonged QT intervals (QTc) and Tpe (Tpe-c) compared to mild or moderate patients. Moreover, deceased patients (58; 21.7%) showed increased dispersion of QTc and Tpe-c compared with surviving patients (78.2±41.1 vs. 40.8±24.6 ms and 60.2±37.3 vs. 40.8±24.5 ms, both p<0.05, respectively). The QTc dispersion of more than 56.1 ms could predict the mortality in multivariate analysis (odd ratio, 11.55; 95% confidence interval, 3.746–42.306). Conclusions COVID-19 infections could involve cardiac injuries, especially cardiac repolarization abnormalities. A prolonged QTc dispersion could be an independent predictable factor of mortality.

Background and Objectives: As the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) spreads worldwide, cardiac injury in patients infected with COVID-19 becomes a significant concern. Thus, this study investigates the impact of several electrocardiogram (ECG) parameters and disease severity in COVID-19 patients. Methods: Seven medical centers in Daegu admitted 822 patients with COVID-19 between February and April 2020. This study examined 267 patients among them who underwent an ECG test and evaluated their biochemical parameters like C-reactive protein (CRP), log N-terminal pro-B-type Natriuretic Peptide (NT-proBNP), cardiac enzyme, and ECG parameters (heart rate, PR interval, QRS interval, T inversion, QT interval, and Tpe [the interval between peak to end in a T wave]). Results: Those patients were divided into 3 groups of mild (100 patients), moderate (89 patients), and severe (78 patients) according to clinical severity score. The level of CRP, log NT-proBNP, and creatinine kinase-myocardial band were significantly increased in severe patients. Meanwhile, severe patients exhibited prolonged QT intervals (QTc) and Tpe (Tpe-c) compared to mild or moderate patients. Moreover, deceased patients (58; 21.7%) showed increased dispersion of QTc and Tpe-c compared with surviving patients (78.2±41.1 vs. 40.8±24.6 ms and 60.2±37.3 vs. 40.8±24.5 ms, both p<0.05, respectively). The QTc dispersion of more than 56.1 ms could predict the mortality in multivariate analysis (odd ratio, 11.55; 95% confidence interval, 3.746–42.306). Conclusions COVID-19 infections could involve cardiac injuries, especially cardiac repolarization abnormalities. A prolonged QTc dispersion could be an independent predictable factor of mortality.