This report provides a summary of the 2024 survey results on the external quality assessment (EQA) scheme for the general transfusion medicine test and the general transfusion antibody test programs in Korea. Proficiency testing materials were prepared at the Asan Medical Center for bi-annual distribution to participating laboratories. The accuracy rates and number of participating laboratories for the bi-annual EQAs were: ABO typing, 99.6%–99.9% (n=944, n=945); RhD typing, 99.9%–100.0% (n=929, n=930);crossmatching, 95.0%–99.2% (n=825, n=825); unexpected antibody scre ening, 99.5%–100.0% (n=363, n=367); direct antiglobulin test (DAT) using a polyspecific reagent, 99.3%–100.0% (n=296, n=299); DAT using an antiimmunoglobulin G monospecific reagent, 100.0% (n=74, n=72); and DAT using an anti-C3d monospecific reagent, 98.6%–100.0% (n=72, n=71). The 2024 EQA scheme for the transfusion medicine program has improved and maintained the standards of the participating laboratories.

Purpose: Several types of dermal fillers have been recently introduced and used for penile augmentation (PA). However, few studies have compared outcomes after the injection of different fillers. This study aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of hyaluronic acid (HLA), polylactic acid (PLA), and polymethyl methacrylate (PMA) filler injections, which are the most commonly used for aesthetic purposes. Materials and Methods: This prospective study was conducted for 24 weeks after a filler injection by a surgeon between March 2017 and December 2021. Healthy adult men complaining of small penis were enrolled. Penile girth, satisfaction, and injection-associated adverse events (AEs) were assessed at baseline and 4, 12, and 24 weeks after injection. Results: Of the 301 men who received filler injections, 125, 134, and 42 received HLA, PLA, and PMA fillers, respectively. The augmentation effect was in the order of PMA, HLA, and PLA, respectively, at 24 weeks (PMA vs. HLA, p<0.001; HLA vs. PLA, p=0.006). Satisfaction levels increased significantly at 24 weeks in all groups (each with p<0.001). However, the increase in satisfaction levels was smaller in the PMA group (PMA vs. HLA or PLA, p<0.05, for both penile appearance and sexual life). No serious or systemic AEs were recorded. Filler injection-associated local AEs in the HLA, PLA, and PMA groups occurred in 9 (7.2%), 16 (11.9%), and 6 (14.3%) men, respectively. There was no significant difference in AEs among the groups (p=0.299). Conclusions The augmentative effect was greater in the PMA group than in the HLA and PLA groups, whereas the increase in satisfaction levels was smaller in the PMA group. Our study demonstrated the clinical course of different types of fillers and suggests that the filler type should be selected after detailed counseling considering individual characteristics and preferences.

ABO/RhD-mismatch transfusions are frequently encountered in clinical practice, so a systematic and thorough understanding of these events is necessary. In the case of ABO minor-incompatible transfusions, it is important to consider the possibility of hemolytic transfusion reactions because of the reaction between the ABO antibodies in the blood product and the patient’s red blood cells. For platelet products, the risk is approximately 1 in 9,000.In ABO major-incompatible transfusions, red blood cell products are contraindicated, but plasma or platelet products may be allowed in situations such as blood product shortages. In RhD major-incompatible transfusions, the use of Rh immunoglobulin to prevent alloimmunization may be considered depending on the patient’s clinical status and the availability of blood products. In the case of RhD major-incompatible red blood cell transfusions, however, such prevention is difficult to apply in Korea. ABO/RhD-mismatch transfusion may also affect the long-term outcomes of patients, in addition to immediate hemolytic transfusion reactions. Therefore, decisions must be made based on the patient’s clinical situation considering the benefits and potential risks.

This report provides a summary of the 2024 survey results on the external quality assessment (EQA) scheme for the general transfusion medicine test and the general transfusion antibody test programs in Korea. Proficiency testing materials were prepared at the Asan Medical Center for bi-annual distribution to participating laboratories. The accuracy rates and number of participating laboratories for the bi-annual EQAs were: ABO typing, 99.6%–99.9% (n=944, n=945); RhD typing, 99.9%–100.0% (n=929, n=930);crossmatching, 95.0%–99.2% (n=825, n=825); unexpected antibody scre ening, 99.5%–100.0% (n=363, n=367); direct antiglobulin test (DAT) using a polyspecific reagent, 99.3%–100.0% (n=296, n=299); DAT using an antiimmunoglobulin G monospecific reagent, 100.0% (n=74, n=72); and DAT using an anti-C3d monospecific reagent, 98.6%–100.0% (n=72, n=71). The 2024 EQA scheme for the transfusion medicine program has improved and maintained the standards of the participating laboratories.

Purpose: Several types of dermal fillers have been recently introduced and used for penile augmentation (PA). However, few studies have compared outcomes after the injection of different fillers. This study aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of hyaluronic acid (HLA), polylactic acid (PLA), and polymethyl methacrylate (PMA) filler injections, which are the most commonly used for aesthetic purposes. Materials and Methods: This prospective study was conducted for 24 weeks after a filler injection by a surgeon between March 2017 and December 2021. Healthy adult men complaining of small penis were enrolled. Penile girth, satisfaction, and injection-associated adverse events (AEs) were assessed at baseline and 4, 12, and 24 weeks after injection. Results: Of the 301 men who received filler injections, 125, 134, and 42 received HLA, PLA, and PMA fillers, respectively. The augmentation effect was in the order of PMA, HLA, and PLA, respectively, at 24 weeks (PMA vs. HLA, p<0.001; HLA vs. PLA, p=0.006). Satisfaction levels increased significantly at 24 weeks in all groups (each with p<0.001). However, the increase in satisfaction levels was smaller in the PMA group (PMA vs. HLA or PLA, p<0.05, for both penile appearance and sexual life). No serious or systemic AEs were recorded. Filler injection-associated local AEs in the HLA, PLA, and PMA groups occurred in 9 (7.2%), 16 (11.9%), and 6 (14.3%) men, respectively. There was no significant difference in AEs among the groups (p=0.299). Conclusions The augmentative effect was greater in the PMA group than in the HLA and PLA groups, whereas the increase in satisfaction levels was smaller in the PMA group. Our study demonstrated the clinical course of different types of fillers and suggests that the filler type should be selected after detailed counseling considering individual characteristics and preferences.

This report provides a summary of the 2024 survey results on the external quality assessment (EQA) scheme for the general transfusion medicine test and the general transfusion antibody test programs in Korea. Proficiency testing materials were prepared at the Asan Medical Center for bi-annual distribution to participating laboratories. The accuracy rates and number of participating laboratories for the bi-annual EQAs were: ABO typing, 99.6%–99.9% (n=944, n=945); RhD typing, 99.9%–100.0% (n=929, n=930);crossmatching, 95.0%–99.2% (n=825, n=825); unexpected antibody scre ening, 99.5%–100.0% (n=363, n=367); direct antiglobulin test (DAT) using a polyspecific reagent, 99.3%–100.0% (n=296, n=299); DAT using an antiimmunoglobulin G monospecific reagent, 100.0% (n=74, n=72); and DAT using an anti-C3d monospecific reagent, 98.6%–100.0% (n=72, n=71). The 2024 EQA scheme for the transfusion medicine program has improved and maintained the standards of the participating laboratories.

Purpose: Several types of dermal fillers have been recently introduced and used for penile augmentation (PA). However, few studies have compared outcomes after the injection of different fillers. This study aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of hyaluronic acid (HLA), polylactic acid (PLA), and polymethyl methacrylate (PMA) filler injections, which are the most commonly used for aesthetic purposes. Materials and Methods: This prospective study was conducted for 24 weeks after a filler injection by a surgeon between March 2017 and December 2021. Healthy adult men complaining of small penis were enrolled. Penile girth, satisfaction, and injection-associated adverse events (AEs) were assessed at baseline and 4, 12, and 24 weeks after injection. Results: Of the 301 men who received filler injections, 125, 134, and 42 received HLA, PLA, and PMA fillers, respectively. The augmentation effect was in the order of PMA, HLA, and PLA, respectively, at 24 weeks (PMA vs. HLA, p<0.001; HLA vs. PLA, p=0.006). Satisfaction levels increased significantly at 24 weeks in all groups (each with p<0.001). However, the increase in satisfaction levels was smaller in the PMA group (PMA vs. HLA or PLA, p<0.05, for both penile appearance and sexual life). No serious or systemic AEs were recorded. Filler injection-associated local AEs in the HLA, PLA, and PMA groups occurred in 9 (7.2%), 16 (11.9%), and 6 (14.3%) men, respectively. There was no significant difference in AEs among the groups (p=0.299). Conclusions The augmentative effect was greater in the PMA group than in the HLA and PLA groups, whereas the increase in satisfaction levels was smaller in the PMA group. Our study demonstrated the clinical course of different types of fillers and suggests that the filler type should be selected after detailed counseling considering individual characteristics and preferences.

ABO/RhD-mismatch transfusions are frequently encountered in clinical practice, so a systematic and thorough understanding of these events is necessary. In the case of ABO minor-incompatible transfusions, it is important to consider the possibility of hemolytic transfusion reactions because of the reaction between the ABO antibodies in the blood product and the patient’s red blood cells. For platelet products, the risk is approximately 1 in 9,000.In ABO major-incompatible transfusions, red blood cell products are contraindicated, but plasma or platelet products may be allowed in situations such as blood product shortages. In RhD major-incompatible transfusions, the use of Rh immunoglobulin to prevent alloimmunization may be considered depending on the patient’s clinical status and the availability of blood products. In the case of RhD major-incompatible red blood cell transfusions, however, such prevention is difficult to apply in Korea. ABO/RhD-mismatch transfusion may also affect the long-term outcomes of patients, in addition to immediate hemolytic transfusion reactions. Therefore, decisions must be made based on the patient’s clinical situation considering the benefits and potential risks.