This study aimed to assess the utilization trends of pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) among lung cancer patients in Korea using the National Health Insurance Service (NHIS) database (2017 to 2021). PR was introduced and covered under the NHIS in 2016, primarily for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, but recent evidence suggests its benefits for lung cancer patients. Data extraction was based on Korea Informative Classification of Diseases 8th revision codes C33 and C34, with PR prescriptions identified by codes MM440 and MM290.Descriptive statistical analysis was performed, and propensity score matching was used for comparison between PR and non-PR groups. Results showed a significant increase in PR utilization, with the number of patients receiving PR (MM440) rising from 1,002 in 2017 to 3,723 in 2021, indicating a 3.7-fold increase. However, the proportion of patients receiving PR remained low at 2.9% in 2021. Enhanced access to PR services and improved evaluation strategies are essential for optimizing patient outcomes.

This study aimed to assess the utilization trends of pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) among lung cancer patients in Korea using the National Health Insurance Service (NHIS) database (2017 to 2021). PR was introduced and covered under the NHIS in 2016, primarily for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, but recent evidence suggests its benefits for lung cancer patients. Data extraction was based on Korea Informative Classification of Diseases 8th revision codes C33 and C34, with PR prescriptions identified by codes MM440 and MM290.Descriptive statistical analysis was performed, and propensity score matching was used for comparison between PR and non-PR groups. Results showed a significant increase in PR utilization, with the number of patients receiving PR (MM440) rising from 1,002 in 2017 to 3,723 in 2021, indicating a 3.7-fold increase. However, the proportion of patients receiving PR remained low at 2.9% in 2021. Enhanced access to PR services and improved evaluation strategies are essential for optimizing patient outcomes.

This study aimed to assess the utilization trends of pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) among lung cancer patients in Korea using the National Health Insurance Service (NHIS) database (2017 to 2021). PR was introduced and covered under the NHIS in 2016, primarily for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, but recent evidence suggests its benefits for lung cancer patients. Data extraction was based on Korea Informative Classification of Diseases 8th revision codes C33 and C34, with PR prescriptions identified by codes MM440 and MM290.Descriptive statistical analysis was performed, and propensity score matching was used for comparison between PR and non-PR groups. Results showed a significant increase in PR utilization, with the number of patients receiving PR (MM440) rising from 1,002 in 2017 to 3,723 in 2021, indicating a 3.7-fold increase. However, the proportion of patients receiving PR remained low at 2.9% in 2021. Enhanced access to PR services and improved evaluation strategies are essential for optimizing patient outcomes.

This study aimed to assess the utilization trends of pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) among lung cancer patients in Korea using the National Health Insurance Service (NHIS) database (2017 to 2021). PR was introduced and covered under the NHIS in 2016, primarily for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, but recent evidence suggests its benefits for lung cancer patients. Data extraction was based on Korea Informative Classification of Diseases 8th revision codes C33 and C34, with PR prescriptions identified by codes MM440 and MM290.Descriptive statistical analysis was performed, and propensity score matching was used for comparison between PR and non-PR groups. Results showed a significant increase in PR utilization, with the number of patients receiving PR (MM440) rising from 1,002 in 2017 to 3,723 in 2021, indicating a 3.7-fold increase. However, the proportion of patients receiving PR remained low at 2.9% in 2021. Enhanced access to PR services and improved evaluation strategies are essential for optimizing patient outcomes.

Objective: This study aimed to compare the accuracy of robotic spine surgery and conventional pedicle screw fixation in lumbar degenerative disease. We evaluated clinical and radiological outcomes to demonstrate the noninferiority of robotic surgery. Methods: This study employed propensity score matching and included 3 groups: robot-assisted mini-open posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) (robotic surgery, RS), c-arm guided minimally invasive surgery transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (C-arm guidance, CG), and freehand open PLIF (free of guidance, FG) (54 patients each). The mean follow-up period was 2.2 years. The preoperative spine condition was considered. Accuracy was evaluated using the Gertzbein-Robbins scale (GRS score) and Babu classification (Babu score). Radiological outcomes included adjacent segmental disease (ASD) and mechanical failure. Clinical outcomes were assessed based on the visual analogue scale, Oswestry Disability Index, 36-item Short Form health survey, and clinical ASD rate. Results: Accuracy was higher in the RS group (p < 0.01) than in other groups. The GRS score was lower in the CG group, whereas the Babu score was lower in the FG group compared with the RS group. No significant differences were observed in radiological and clinical outcomes among the 3 groups. Regression analysis identified preoperative facet degeneration, GRS and Babu scores as significant variables for radiological and clinical ASD. Mechanical failure was influenced by the GRS score and patients’ age. Conclusion This study showed the superior accuracy of robotic spine surgery compared with conventional techniques. When combined with minimally invasive surgery, robotic surgery is advantageous with reduced ligament and muscle damage associated with traditional open procedures.

Objective: This study aimed to compare the accuracy of robotic spine surgery and conventional pedicle screw fixation in lumbar degenerative disease. We evaluated clinical and radiological outcomes to demonstrate the noninferiority of robotic surgery. Methods: This study employed propensity score matching and included 3 groups: robot-assisted mini-open posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) (robotic surgery, RS), c-arm guided minimally invasive surgery transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (C-arm guidance, CG), and freehand open PLIF (free of guidance, FG) (54 patients each). The mean follow-up period was 2.2 years. The preoperative spine condition was considered. Accuracy was evaluated using the Gertzbein-Robbins scale (GRS score) and Babu classification (Babu score). Radiological outcomes included adjacent segmental disease (ASD) and mechanical failure. Clinical outcomes were assessed based on the visual analogue scale, Oswestry Disability Index, 36-item Short Form health survey, and clinical ASD rate. Results: Accuracy was higher in the RS group (p < 0.01) than in other groups. The GRS score was lower in the CG group, whereas the Babu score was lower in the FG group compared with the RS group. No significant differences were observed in radiological and clinical outcomes among the 3 groups. Regression analysis identified preoperative facet degeneration, GRS and Babu scores as significant variables for radiological and clinical ASD. Mechanical failure was influenced by the GRS score and patients’ age. Conclusion This study showed the superior accuracy of robotic spine surgery compared with conventional techniques. When combined with minimally invasive surgery, robotic surgery is advantageous with reduced ligament and muscle damage associated with traditional open procedures.

Lecanemab (product name Leqembi ® ) is an anti-amyloid monoclonal antibody treatment approved for use in Korea for patients with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) or mild dementia due to Alzheimer's disease. The Korean Dementia Association has created recommendations for the appropriate use of lecanemab to assist clinicians. These recommendations include selecting patients for administration, necessary pre-administration tests and preparations,administration methods, monitoring for amyloid related imaging abnormalities (ARIA), and communication with patients and caregivers. Lecanemab is recommended for patients with MCI or mild dementia who confirmed positive amyloid biomarkers, and should not be administered to patients with severe hypersensitivity to lecanemab or those unable to undergo magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) evaluation. To predict the risk of ARIA before administration, apolipoprotein E genotyping is conducted, and regular brain MRI evaluations are recommended to monitor for ARIA during treatment. The most common adverse reactions are infusion-related reactions, which require appropriate management upon occurrence. Additional caution is needed when co-administering with anticoagulants or tissue plasminogen activator due to the risk of macrohemorrhage. Clinicians should consider the efficacy and necessary conditions for administration, as well as the safety of lecanemab, to make a comprehensive decision regarding its use.

Objective: This study aimed to compare the accuracy of robotic spine surgery and conventional pedicle screw fixation in lumbar degenerative disease. We evaluated clinical and radiological outcomes to demonstrate the noninferiority of robotic surgery. Methods: This study employed propensity score matching and included 3 groups: robot-assisted mini-open posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) (robotic surgery, RS), c-arm guided minimally invasive surgery transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (C-arm guidance, CG), and freehand open PLIF (free of guidance, FG) (54 patients each). The mean follow-up period was 2.2 years. The preoperative spine condition was considered. Accuracy was evaluated using the Gertzbein-Robbins scale (GRS score) and Babu classification (Babu score). Radiological outcomes included adjacent segmental disease (ASD) and mechanical failure. Clinical outcomes were assessed based on the visual analogue scale, Oswestry Disability Index, 36-item Short Form health survey, and clinical ASD rate. Results: Accuracy was higher in the RS group (p < 0.01) than in other groups. The GRS score was lower in the CG group, whereas the Babu score was lower in the FG group compared with the RS group. No significant differences were observed in radiological and clinical outcomes among the 3 groups. Regression analysis identified preoperative facet degeneration, GRS and Babu scores as significant variables for radiological and clinical ASD. Mechanical failure was influenced by the GRS score and patients’ age. Conclusion This study showed the superior accuracy of robotic spine surgery compared with conventional techniques. When combined with minimally invasive surgery, robotic surgery is advantageous with reduced ligament and muscle damage associated with traditional open procedures.

Lecanemab (product name Leqembi ® ) is an anti-amyloid monoclonal antibody treatment approved for use in Korea for patients with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) or mild dementia due to Alzheimer's disease. The Korean Dementia Association has created recommendations for the appropriate use of lecanemab to assist clinicians. These recommendations include selecting patients for administration, necessary pre-administration tests and preparations,administration methods, monitoring for amyloid related imaging abnormalities (ARIA), and communication with patients and caregivers. Lecanemab is recommended for patients with MCI or mild dementia who confirmed positive amyloid biomarkers, and should not be administered to patients with severe hypersensitivity to lecanemab or those unable to undergo magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) evaluation. To predict the risk of ARIA before administration, apolipoprotein E genotyping is conducted, and regular brain MRI evaluations are recommended to monitor for ARIA during treatment. The most common adverse reactions are infusion-related reactions, which require appropriate management upon occurrence. Additional caution is needed when co-administering with anticoagulants or tissue plasminogen activator due to the risk of macrohemorrhage. Clinicians should consider the efficacy and necessary conditions for administration, as well as the safety of lecanemab, to make a comprehensive decision regarding its use.

Lecanemab (product name Leqembi ® ) is an anti-amyloid monoclonal antibody treatment approved for use in Korea for patients with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) or mild dementia due to Alzheimer's disease. The Korean Dementia Association has created recommendations for the appropriate use of lecanemab to assist clinicians. These recommendations include selecting patients for administration, necessary pre-administration tests and preparations,administration methods, monitoring for amyloid related imaging abnormalities (ARIA), and communication with patients and caregivers. Lecanemab is recommended for patients with MCI or mild dementia who confirmed positive amyloid biomarkers, and should not be administered to patients with severe hypersensitivity to lecanemab or those unable to undergo magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) evaluation. To predict the risk of ARIA before administration, apolipoprotein E genotyping is conducted, and regular brain MRI evaluations are recommended to monitor for ARIA during treatment. The most common adverse reactions are infusion-related reactions, which require appropriate management upon occurrence. Additional caution is needed when co-administering with anticoagulants or tissue plasminogen activator due to the risk of macrohemorrhage. Clinicians should consider the efficacy and necessary conditions for administration, as well as the safety of lecanemab, to make a comprehensive decision regarding its use.