Purpose: The purpose of this study was to compare the periodontal status of end-stage renal disease patients undergoing dialysis and referred for intraoral evaluation prior to renal transplantation surgery with those having normal kidney function. Materials and Methods: Patients who had been undergoing dialysis for end-stage renal disease and been referred to the Dental Clinic Center bythe Department of Nephrology at University Hospital for intraoral evaluation prior to kidney transplantation surgery. For comparisonof periodontal status, subjects without abnormalities in kidney function were matched with the patients by age and gender and selected as healthy controls. The patients’ age, gender, comorbidities, type of dialysis received, and duration of dialysis were investigated by reference to their medical records, and data on their periodontal status were analyzed via the relevant periodontal records. Results: A total of 102 patients, including 51 dialyzed patients and 51 healthy control group subjects, participated in this study. In the patients with end-stage renal disease undergoing dialysis with periodontal probing depth of 5 mm or more, percentage of sites with clinical attachment level of 4 mm or more, percentage of teeth with bleeding on probing, number of missing teeth, and ratio of moderate to severe periodontitis were all significantly greater than in the healthy controls. Conclusion The periodontal status of end-stage renal disease patients undergoing dialysis and referred for intraoral evaluation prior to kidney transplantation was worse than that of healthy controls.

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to compare the periodontal status of end-stage renal disease patients undergoing dialysis and referred for intraoral evaluation prior to renal transplantation surgery with those having normal kidney function. Materials and Methods: Patients who had been undergoing dialysis for end-stage renal disease and been referred to the Dental Clinic Center bythe Department of Nephrology at University Hospital for intraoral evaluation prior to kidney transplantation surgery. For comparisonof periodontal status, subjects without abnormalities in kidney function were matched with the patients by age and gender and selected as healthy controls. The patients’ age, gender, comorbidities, type of dialysis received, and duration of dialysis were investigated by reference to their medical records, and data on their periodontal status were analyzed via the relevant periodontal records. Results: A total of 102 patients, including 51 dialyzed patients and 51 healthy control group subjects, participated in this study. In the patients with end-stage renal disease undergoing dialysis with periodontal probing depth of 5 mm or more, percentage of sites with clinical attachment level of 4 mm or more, percentage of teeth with bleeding on probing, number of missing teeth, and ratio of moderate to severe periodontitis were all significantly greater than in the healthy controls. Conclusion The periodontal status of end-stage renal disease patients undergoing dialysis and referred for intraoral evaluation prior to kidney transplantation was worse than that of healthy controls.

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to compare the periodontal status of end-stage renal disease patients undergoing dialysis and referred for intraoral evaluation prior to renal transplantation surgery with those having normal kidney function. Materials and Methods: Patients who had been undergoing dialysis for end-stage renal disease and been referred to the Dental Clinic Center bythe Department of Nephrology at University Hospital for intraoral evaluation prior to kidney transplantation surgery. For comparisonof periodontal status, subjects without abnormalities in kidney function were matched with the patients by age and gender and selected as healthy controls. The patients’ age, gender, comorbidities, type of dialysis received, and duration of dialysis were investigated by reference to their medical records, and data on their periodontal status were analyzed via the relevant periodontal records. Results: A total of 102 patients, including 51 dialyzed patients and 51 healthy control group subjects, participated in this study. In the patients with end-stage renal disease undergoing dialysis with periodontal probing depth of 5 mm or more, percentage of sites with clinical attachment level of 4 mm or more, percentage of teeth with bleeding on probing, number of missing teeth, and ratio of moderate to severe periodontitis were all significantly greater than in the healthy controls. Conclusion The periodontal status of end-stage renal disease patients undergoing dialysis and referred for intraoral evaluation prior to kidney transplantation was worse than that of healthy controls.

Background: Lung dysfunction and high apolipoprotein B/apolipoprotein A-I (apoB/apoA-I) ratio are both recognized risk factors for cardiovascular disease. However, few studies have examined the association between the apoB/ApoA-I ratio and lung function. Therefore, we investigated whether this ratio is associated with decreased lung function in a large healthy cohort. Methods: We performed a cohort study on 68,418 healthy Koreans (34,797 males, mean age:38.1 years) who underwent a health examination in 2019. ApoB/apoA-I ratio was categorized into quartiles. Spirometric values at the fifth percentile in our population were considered the lower limit of normal (LLN), which was used to define lung function impairment. Adjusted odds ratios (aORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs), using the lowest quartile as the reference, were estimated to determine lung function impairment. Results: Mean apoB/apoA-I ratio was 0.67 ± 0.21. Subjects with the highest quartile of this ratio had the lowest predicted forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1 %) and forced vital capacity (FVC%) after controlling for covariates (P < 0.001). However, FEV1 /FVC ratio was not significantly different among the four quartiles (P = 0.059). Compared with the lowest quartile (Q1, reference), the aORs (95% CI) for FEV1 % < LLN across increasing quartiles (from Q2 to Q4) were 1.216 (1.094–1.351), 1.293 (1.156–1.448), and 1.481 (1.311– 1.672) (P for trend < 0.001), respectively. Similarly, the aORs for FVC% < LLN compared with the reference were 1.212 (1.090–1.348), 1.283 (1.147–1.436), and 1.502 (1.331–1.695) with increasing quartiles (P for trend < 0.001). However, the aORs for FEV1 /FVC < LLN were not significantly different among groups (P for trend = 0.273). Conclusion High apoB/apoA-I ratio was associated with decreased lung function. However, longitudinal follow-up studies are required to validate our findings.

Human Q fever, a zoonosis caused by Coxiella burnetii, presents with diverse clinical manifestations ranging from mild self-limited febrile illnesses to life-threatening complications such as endocarditis or vascular infection. Although acute Q fever is a benign illness with a low mortality rate, a large-scale outbreak of Q fever in the Netherlands led to concerns about the possibility of blood transfusion-related transmission or obstetric complications in pregnant women. Furthermore, a small minority (< 5%) of patients with asymptomatic or symptomatic infection progress to chronic Q fever. Chronic Q fever is fatal in 5–50% of patients if left untreated. In South Korea, Q fever in humans was designated as a notifiable infectious disease in 2006, and the number of Q fever cases has increased sharply since 2015. Nonetheless, it is still considered a neglected and under-recognized infectious disease. In this review, recent trends of human and animal Q fever in South Korea, and public health concerns regarding Q fever outbreaks are reviewed, and we consider how a One Health approach could be applied as a preventive measure to prepare for zoonotic Q fever outbreaks.

Background/Aims: Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is a common chronic gastrointestinal disorder that typically requires long-term maintenance therapy. However, little is known about patient preferences and satisfaction and real-world prescription patterns regarding maintenance therapy for GERD. Methods: This observational, cross-sectional, multicenter study involved patients from 18 referral hospitals in Korea. We surveyed patients who had been prescribed proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) for GERD for at least 90 days with a minimum follow-up duration of 1 year. The main outcome was overall patient satisfaction with different maintenance therapy modalities. Results: A total of 197 patients were enrolled. Overall patient satisfaction, patient preferences, and GERD health-related quality of life scores did not significantly differ among the maintenance therapy modality groups. However, the on-demand therapy group experienced a significantly longer disease duration than the continuous therapy group. The continuous therapy group demonstrated a lower level of awareness of potential adverse effects associated with PPIs than the on-demand therapy group but received higher doses of PPIs than the on-demand therapy group. The prescribed doses of PPIs also varied based on the phenotype of GERD, with higher doses prescribed for non-erosive reflux disease than erosive reflux disease. Conclusion Although overall patient satisfaction did not significantly differ among the different PPI maintenance therapy modality groups, awareness of potential adverse effects was significantly different between the on-demand and continuous therapy groups.

Background/Aims: It remains unclear which maintenance treatment modality is most appropriate for mild gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD).We aimed to compare on-demand treatment with continuous treatment using a proton pump inhibitor (PPI) in the maintenance treatment for patients with non-erosive GERD or mild erosive esophagitis. Methods: Patients whose GERD symptoms improved after 4 weeks of standard dose PPI treatment were prospectively enrolled at 25 hospitals.Subsequently, the enrolled patients were randomly assigned to either an on-demand or a continuous maintenance treatment group, and followed in an 8-week interval for up to 24 weeks. Results: A total of 304 patients were randomized to maintenance treatment (continuous, n = 151 vs on-demand, n = 153). The primary outcome, the overall proportion of unwillingness to continue the assigned maintenance treatment modality, failed to confirm the noninferiority of on-demand treatment (45.9%) compared to continuous treatment (36.1%). Compared with the on-demand group, the GERD symptom and health-related quality of life scores significantly more improved and the overall satisfaction score was significantly higher in the continuous treatment group, particularly at week 8 and week 16 of maintenance treatment. Work impairment scores were not different in the 2 groups, but the prescription cost was less in the on-demand group. Serum gastrin levels significantly elevated in the continuous treatment group, but not in the on-demand group. Conclusions Continuous treatment seems to be more appropriate for the initial maintenance treatment of non-erosive GERD or mild erosive esophagitis than on-demand treatment. Stepping down to on-demand treatment needs to be considered after a sufficient period of continuous treatment.

Given the recent advances in management and understanding of breast cancer, a standardized pathology report reflecting these changes is critical. To meet this need, the Breast Pathology Study Group of the Korean Society of Pathologists has developed a standardized pathology reporting format for breast cancer, consisting of ‘standard data elements,’ ‘conditional data elements,’ and a biomarker report form. The ‘standard data elements’ consist of the basic pathologic features used for prognostication, while other factors related to prognosis or diagnosis are described in the ‘conditional data elements.’ In addition to standard data elements, all recommended issues are also presented. We expect that this standardized pathology report for breast cancer will improve diagnostic concordance and communication between pathologists and clinicians, as well as between pathologists inter-institutionally.

Background/Aims: Minor complications that might occur after colonoscopy, including abdominal discomfort, bloating, diarrhea, and constipation, could a barrier for patients to undergo a screening colonoscopy. In this study, we aimed to identify the effect of gut microbial diversity and composition on minor complications after colonoscopy. Methods: A total of 24 healthy subjects provided their stools before bowel preparation and on the 7th and 28th day after colonoscopy. On the 7th day after colonoscopy, the presence of minor complications was investigated using a questionnaire. We divided patients into 2 groups, the no complication group and complications group. The fecal microbial diversity, distribution, and composition were then compared between the groups. Results: Five of the 24 subjects reported that they had undergone minor complications after colonoscopy. Most of the symptoms were mild and self-limited, but 1 patient needed medication. Interestingly, the Firmicutes/Bacteroidetes ratio of the initial stool samples before bowel preparation in the complication group was significantly higher than that in no complication group. After bowel preparation, the Firmicutes/Bacteroidetes ratio of the complication group decreased, but not in the no complication group. The microbial diversity of the no complication group decreased after bowel preparation, but not in the complication group. Conclusions The gut microbial composition and diversity before and after bowel preparation could be considered as one of the causes of minor complications after colonoscopy. Further studies are needed to delineate the role of gut microbiota in the occurrence of minor complications after colonoscopy.

Given the recent advances in management and understanding of breast cancer, a standardized pathology report reflecting these changes is critical. To meet this need, the Breast Pathology Study Group of the Korean Society of Pathologists has developed a standardized pathology reporting format for breast cancer, consisting of ‘standard data elements,’ ‘conditional data elements,’ and a biomarker report form. The ‘standard data elements’ consist of the basic pathologic features used for prognostication, while other factors related to prognosis or diagnosis are described in the ‘conditional data elements.’ In addition to standard data elements, all recommended issues are also presented. We expect that this standardized pathology report for breast cancer will improve diagnostic concordance and communication between pathologists and clinicians, as well as between pathologists inter-institutionally.