Background: Malnutrition exacerbates the prognosis of numerous diseases; however, its specific impact on severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outcomes remains insufficiently explored. Methods: This multicenter study in Korea evaluated the nutritional status of 1,088 adults with severe COVID-19 using the Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index (GNRI) based on serum albumin levels and body weight. The patients were categorized into two groups: GNRI >98 (no-risk) and GNRI ≤98 (risk). Propensity score matching, adjusted for demographic and clinical variables, was conducted. Results: Of the 1,088 patients, 642 (59%) were classified as at risk of malnutrition. Propensity score matching revealed significant disparities in hospital (34.3% vs. 19.4%, p<0.001) and intensive care unit (ICU) mortality (31.5% vs. 18.9%, p<0.001) between the groups. The risk group was associated with a higher hospital mortality rate in the multivariate Cox regression analyses following propensity score adjustment (hazard ratio [HR], 1.64; p=0.001). Among the 670 elderly patients, 450 were at risk of malnutrition. Furthermore, the risk group demonstrated significantly higher hospital (52.1% vs. 29.5%, p<0.001) and ICU mortality rates (47.2% vs. 29.1%, p<0.001). The risk group was significantly associated with increased hospital mortality rates in the multivariate analyses following propensity score adjustment (HR, 1.66; p=0.001). Conclusion Malnutrition, as indicated by a low GNRI, was associated with increased mortality in patients with severe COVID-19. This effect was also observed in the elderly population. These findings underscore the critical importance of nutritional assessment and effective interventions for patients with severe COVID-19.

Background: Lung ultrasound (LUS) has proven valuable in the initial assessment of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), but its role in detecting pulmonary fibrosis following intensive care remains unclear. This study aims to assess the presence of pulmonary sequelae and fibrosis-like changes using LUS in survivors of severe COVID-19 pneumonia one month after discharge. Methods: We prospectively enrolled patients with severe COVID-19 who required mechanical ventilation in the intensive care unit (ICU) and conducted LUS assessments from admission to the outpatient visit after discharge. We tracked changes in key LUS findings and applied our proprietary LUS scoring system. To evaluate LUS accuracy, we correlated measured LUS values with computed tomography scores. Results: We evaluated B-line presence, pleural thickness, and consolidation in 14 eligible patients. The LUS scores exhibited minimal changes, with values of 19.1, 19.2, and 17.5 at admission, discharge, and the outpatient visit, respectively. Notably, the number of B-lines decreased significantly, from 1.92 at admission to 0.56 at the outpatient visit (p<0.05), while pleural thickness increased significantly, from 2.05 at admission to 2.48 at the outpatient visit (p≤0.05). Conclusion This study demonstrates that LUS can track changes in lung abnormalities in severe COVID-19 patients from ICU admission through to outpatient follow-up. While pleural thickening and B-line patterns showed significant changes, no correlation was found between LUS and high-resolution computed tomography fibrosis scores. These findings suggest that LUS may serve as a supplementary tool for assessing pulmonary recovery in severe COVID-19 cases.

Background: The development of frailty at hospital discharge affects the clinical outcomes in severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) survivors who had no frailty before hospitalization. We aimed to describe the prevalence of new frailty using the clinical frailty scale (CFS) and evaluate its associated factors in patients with severe COVID-19 without pre-existing frailty before hospitalization. Methods: We performed a secondary analysis of clinical data from a nationwide retrospective cohort collected from 22 hospitals between January 1, 2020 and August 31, 2021. The patients were at least 19 years old and survived until discharge after admission to the intensive care unit (ICU) because of severe COVID-19. Development of new frailty was defined as a CFS score ≥5 at hospital discharge. Results: Among 669 severe COVID-19 survivors without pre-existing frailty admitted to the ICU, the mean age was 65.2±12.8 years, 62.5% were male, and 50.2% received mechanical ventilation (MV). The mean CFS score at admission was 2.4±0.9, and new frailty developed in 27.8% (186/483). In multivariate analysis, older age, cardiovascular disease, CFS score of 3–4 before hospitalization, increased C-reactive protein level, longer duration of corticosteroid treatment, and use of MV and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation were identified as factors associated with new-onset frailty. Conclusion Our study suggests that new frailty is not uncommon and is associated with diverse factors in survivors of severe COVID-19 without pre-existing frailty.

RESULTS: Resveratrol significantly reduced cardiac hypertrophy and remodeling in aging hearts. In addition, resveratrol significantly ameliorated aging-induced mitochondrial dysfunction (e.g., decreased oxygen respiration and increased hydrogen peroxide emission) and mitochondria-dependent apoptotic signaling (the Bax/Bcl-2 ratio, mitochondrial permeability transition pore opening sensitivity, and cleaved caspase-3 protein levels).Resveratrol also significantly attenuated aging-induced apoptosis (determined via cleaved caspase-3 staining and TUNEL-positive myonuclei) in cardiac muscles. CONCLUSION This study demonstrates that resveratrol treatment has a beneficial effect on aging-induced cardiac remodeling by ameliorating mitochondrial dysfunction and inhibiting mitochondria-mediated apoptosis in the heart.

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.

Purpose: Adjuvant treatment for craniopharyngioma after surgery is controversial. Adjuvant external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) can increase the risk of long-term sequelae. Stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) is used to reduce treatment-related toxicity.In this study, we compared the treatment outcomes and toxicities of adjuvant therapies for craniopharyngioma. Materials and Methods: We analyzed patients who underwent craniopharyngioma tumor removal between 2000 and 2017. Of the 153 patients, 27 and 20 received adjuvant fractionated EBRT and SRS, respectively. We compared the local control (LC), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival between groups that received adjuvant fractionated EBRT, SRS, and surveillance. Results: The median follow-up period was 77.7 months. For SRS and surveillance, the 10-year LC was 57.2% and 57.4%, respectively. No local progression was observed after adjuvant fractionated EBRT. One patient in the adjuvant fractionated EBRT group died owing to glioma 94 months after receiving radiotherapy (10-year PFS: 80%). The 10-year PFS was 43.6% and 50.7% in the SRS and surveillance groups, respectively. The treatment outcomes significantly differed according to adjuvant treatment in nongross total resection (GTR) patients. Additional treatment-related toxicity was comparable in the adjuvant fractionated EBRT and other groups. Conclusion Adjuvant fractionated EBRT could be effective in controlling local failure, especially in patients with non-GTR, while maintaining acceptable treatment-related toxicity.

Background and Objectives: The purpose of this study was to compare and analyze the 18- year change in the relative value scale (RVS) in otolaryngology in relation to other surgical departments so as to help make future policy decisions.Subjects and Method Data on RVSs and addition rates, the deparments of main managed care, frequency of practice, and number of specialists were collected for all surgeries and procedures conducted in 2004, 2008, 2013, 2018, and 2022. Among these, an analysis was conducted for nine surgical departments. The number of surgeries and procedure items, the median value of the RVS, and the usage amount (i.e., RVS of all items multiplied by the frequency of surgeries and procedures) were calculated. Results: Over the past 18 years, the increase in the number of surgeries, procedure items and RVS in otolaryngology has grown smaller than that in other surgical departments, and the usage has decreased very sharply; in essence, the usage per specialist has actually decreased compared to 18 years ago. Conclusion Compared to other departments, RVS in otorhinolaryngology has shown very little change over the past period of 18 years. It is necessary to reasonably increase the currently undervalued RVS in otorhinolaryngology, particularly focusing on surgeries and procedures.

Objective: Full endoscopic cervical surgery (FECS) is an evolving minimally invasive approach for treating cervical spine disorders. This systematic review synthesizes current evidence on the clinical outcomes and patient perspectives associated with FECS, specifically evaluating its safety, efficacy, and overall patient satisfaction. Methods: A systematic search of the PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, Embase, and Web of Science databases was conducted following PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. Studies published between January 2000 and September 2024 that reported on clinical outcomes or patient perspectives related to FECS were included. Risk of bias was assessed using the ROBINS-I (Risk Of Bias In Non-randomized Studies - of Interventions) tool and the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. Inclusion criteria encompassed randomized controlled trials, prospective cohort studies, retrospective studies, and observational studies focused on adult populations undergoing FECS for cervical spine surgery. Results: The final synthesis included 30 studies. FECS was associated with significant reductions in both cervical and radicular pain, as well as meaningful functional improvements, measured by standardized clinical scales such as the Neck Disability Index and visual analogue scale. Patient satisfaction rates were consistently high, with most studies reporting satisfaction exceeding 85%. Complication rates were low, primarily involving transient neurological deficits that were typically resolved without the need for further intervention. Nonrandomized studies generally presented a moderate risk of bias due to confounding and selection, whereas randomized controlled trials exhibited a low risk of bias. Conclusion FECS is a safe and effective minimally invasive surgical option for cervical spine disorders associated with substantial pain relief, functional improvement and high levels of patient satisfaction.

Background and Objectives: The purpose of this study was to compare and analyze the 18- year change in the relative value scale (RVS) in otolaryngology in relation to other surgical departments so as to help make future policy decisions.Subjects and Method Data on RVSs and addition rates, the deparments of main managed care, frequency of practice, and number of specialists were collected for all surgeries and procedures conducted in 2004, 2008, 2013, 2018, and 2022. Among these, an analysis was conducted for nine surgical departments. The number of surgeries and procedure items, the median value of the RVS, and the usage amount (i.e., RVS of all items multiplied by the frequency of surgeries and procedures) were calculated. Results: Over the past 18 years, the increase in the number of surgeries, procedure items and RVS in otolaryngology has grown smaller than that in other surgical departments, and the usage has decreased very sharply; in essence, the usage per specialist has actually decreased compared to 18 years ago. Conclusion Compared to other departments, RVS in otorhinolaryngology has shown very little change over the past period of 18 years. It is necessary to reasonably increase the currently undervalued RVS in otorhinolaryngology, particularly focusing on surgeries and procedures.

Objective: Full endoscopic cervical surgery (FECS) is an evolving minimally invasive approach for treating cervical spine disorders. This systematic review synthesizes current evidence on the clinical outcomes and patient perspectives associated with FECS, specifically evaluating its safety, efficacy, and overall patient satisfaction. Methods: A systematic search of the PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, Embase, and Web of Science databases was conducted following PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. Studies published between January 2000 and September 2024 that reported on clinical outcomes or patient perspectives related to FECS were included. Risk of bias was assessed using the ROBINS-I (Risk Of Bias In Non-randomized Studies - of Interventions) tool and the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. Inclusion criteria encompassed randomized controlled trials, prospective cohort studies, retrospective studies, and observational studies focused on adult populations undergoing FECS for cervical spine surgery. Results: The final synthesis included 30 studies. FECS was associated with significant reductions in both cervical and radicular pain, as well as meaningful functional improvements, measured by standardized clinical scales such as the Neck Disability Index and visual analogue scale. Patient satisfaction rates were consistently high, with most studies reporting satisfaction exceeding 85%. Complication rates were low, primarily involving transient neurological deficits that were typically resolved without the need for further intervention. Nonrandomized studies generally presented a moderate risk of bias due to confounding and selection, whereas randomized controlled trials exhibited a low risk of bias. Conclusion FECS is a safe and effective minimally invasive surgical option for cervical spine disorders associated with substantial pain relief, functional improvement and high levels of patient satisfaction.