Background and Objectives: Lipid lowering therapy is essential to reduce the risk of major cardiovascular events; however, limited evidence exists regarding the use of statin with ezetimibe as primary prevention strategy for middle-aged adults. We aimed to investigate the impact of single pill combination therapy on clinical outcomes in relatively healthy middleaged patients when compared with statin monotherapy. Methods: Using the Korean National Health Insurance Service database, a propensity score match analysis was performed for baseline characteristics of 92,156 patients categorized into combination therapy (n=46,078) and statin monotherapy (n=46,078) groups. Primary outcome was composite outcomes, including death, coronary artery disease, and ischemic stroke. And secondary outcome was all-cause death. The mean follow-up duration was 2.9±0.3 years. Results: The 3-year composite outcomes of all-cause death, coronary artery disease, and ischemic stroke demonstrated no significant difference between the 2 groups (10.3% vs.10.1%; hazard ratio [HR], 1.022; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.980–1.064; p=0.309).Meanwhile, the 3-year all-cause death rate was lower in the combination therapy group than in the statin monotherapy group (0.2% vs. 0.4%; p<0.001), with a significant HR of 0.595 (95% CI, 0.460–0.769; p<0.001). Single pill combination therapy exhibited consistently lower mortality rates across various subgroups. Conclusions Compared to the statin monotherapy, the combination therapy for primary prevention showed no difference in composite outcomes but may reduce mortality risk in relatively healthy middle-aged patients. However, since the study was observational, further randomized clinical trials are needed to confirm these findings.

Background and Objectives: Lipid lowering therapy is essential to reduce the risk of major cardiovascular events; however, limited evidence exists regarding the use of statin with ezetimibe as primary prevention strategy for middle-aged adults. We aimed to investigate the impact of single pill combination therapy on clinical outcomes in relatively healthy middleaged patients when compared with statin monotherapy. Methods: Using the Korean National Health Insurance Service database, a propensity score match analysis was performed for baseline characteristics of 92,156 patients categorized into combination therapy (n=46,078) and statin monotherapy (n=46,078) groups. Primary outcome was composite outcomes, including death, coronary artery disease, and ischemic stroke. And secondary outcome was all-cause death. The mean follow-up duration was 2.9±0.3 years. Results: The 3-year composite outcomes of all-cause death, coronary artery disease, and ischemic stroke demonstrated no significant difference between the 2 groups (10.3% vs.10.1%; hazard ratio [HR], 1.022; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.980–1.064; p=0.309).Meanwhile, the 3-year all-cause death rate was lower in the combination therapy group than in the statin monotherapy group (0.2% vs. 0.4%; p<0.001), with a significant HR of 0.595 (95% CI, 0.460–0.769; p<0.001). Single pill combination therapy exhibited consistently lower mortality rates across various subgroups. Conclusions Compared to the statin monotherapy, the combination therapy for primary prevention showed no difference in composite outcomes but may reduce mortality risk in relatively healthy middle-aged patients. However, since the study was observational, further randomized clinical trials are needed to confirm these findings.

Background and Objectives: Lipid lowering therapy is essential to reduce the risk of major cardiovascular events; however, limited evidence exists regarding the use of statin with ezetimibe as primary prevention strategy for middle-aged adults. We aimed to investigate the impact of single pill combination therapy on clinical outcomes in relatively healthy middleaged patients when compared with statin monotherapy. Methods: Using the Korean National Health Insurance Service database, a propensity score match analysis was performed for baseline characteristics of 92,156 patients categorized into combination therapy (n=46,078) and statin monotherapy (n=46,078) groups. Primary outcome was composite outcomes, including death, coronary artery disease, and ischemic stroke. And secondary outcome was all-cause death. The mean follow-up duration was 2.9±0.3 years. Results: The 3-year composite outcomes of all-cause death, coronary artery disease, and ischemic stroke demonstrated no significant difference between the 2 groups (10.3% vs.10.1%; hazard ratio [HR], 1.022; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.980–1.064; p=0.309).Meanwhile, the 3-year all-cause death rate was lower in the combination therapy group than in the statin monotherapy group (0.2% vs. 0.4%; p<0.001), with a significant HR of 0.595 (95% CI, 0.460–0.769; p<0.001). Single pill combination therapy exhibited consistently lower mortality rates across various subgroups. Conclusions Compared to the statin monotherapy, the combination therapy for primary prevention showed no difference in composite outcomes but may reduce mortality risk in relatively healthy middle-aged patients. However, since the study was observational, further randomized clinical trials are needed to confirm these findings.

Background and Objectives: Lipid lowering therapy is essential to reduce the risk of major cardiovascular events; however, limited evidence exists regarding the use of statin with ezetimibe as primary prevention strategy for middle-aged adults. We aimed to investigate the impact of single pill combination therapy on clinical outcomes in relatively healthy middleaged patients when compared with statin monotherapy. Methods: Using the Korean National Health Insurance Service database, a propensity score match analysis was performed for baseline characteristics of 92,156 patients categorized into combination therapy (n=46,078) and statin monotherapy (n=46,078) groups. Primary outcome was composite outcomes, including death, coronary artery disease, and ischemic stroke. And secondary outcome was all-cause death. The mean follow-up duration was 2.9±0.3 years. Results: The 3-year composite outcomes of all-cause death, coronary artery disease, and ischemic stroke demonstrated no significant difference between the 2 groups (10.3% vs.10.1%; hazard ratio [HR], 1.022; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.980–1.064; p=0.309).Meanwhile, the 3-year all-cause death rate was lower in the combination therapy group than in the statin monotherapy group (0.2% vs. 0.4%; p<0.001), with a significant HR of 0.595 (95% CI, 0.460–0.769; p<0.001). Single pill combination therapy exhibited consistently lower mortality rates across various subgroups. Conclusions Compared to the statin monotherapy, the combination therapy for primary prevention showed no difference in composite outcomes but may reduce mortality risk in relatively healthy middle-aged patients. However, since the study was observational, further randomized clinical trials are needed to confirm these findings.

Purpose: The incidence of early-onset colorectal cancer (EoCRC) is increasing worldwide. The association between hypertriglyceridemia (HTG) and EoCRC risk remains unclear. Materials and Methods: We conducted a nationwide cohort study of 3,340,635 individuals aged 20-49 years who underwent health checkups between 2009 and 2011 under the Korean National Health Insurance Service. HTG was defined as serum triglyceride (TG) level ≥ 150 mg/dL. According to the change in TG status, participants were categorized into persistent normotriglyceridemia (NTG; group 1), NTG to HTG (group 2), HTG to NTG (group 3), and persistent HTG (group 4) groups. The EoCRC incidence was followed up until 2019. Results: In total, 7,492 EoCRC cases developed after a mean of 6.05 years of follow-up. Group 4 had the highest risk of EoCRC (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 1.097; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.025 to 1.174). While the risk of rectal cancer was significantly increased in groups 3 and 4 (aHR [95% CI], 1.236 [1.076 to 1.419] and 1.175 [1.042-1.325], respectively), no significant risk differences were observed in right colon cancer. In group 4, male sex and diabetes were associated with a further increased risk of EoCRC (aHR [95% CI], 1.149 [1.082 to 1.221] and 1.409 [1.169 to 1.699], respectively). In addition, there was a dose-response relationship between serum TG levels and the risk of EoCRC (p for trends < 0.0001). Conclusion Persistent HTG increased the risk of EoCRC, which was significantly higher only for rectal cancer and marginally higher for other colonic subsites.

Purpose: Although smoking and alcohol consumption are known risk factors for gastric cancer (GC), studies assessing their effects on early-onset GC are limited. In this nationwide, population-based, prospective cohort study, we assessed the effects of smoking and alcohol consumption on early-onset GC in patients aged <50 years. Materials and Methods: We analyzed data of patients aged 20–39 years who underwent cancer and general health screening in the Korean National Health Screening Program between 2009 and 2012. We calculated the adjusted hazard ratios (aHR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for GC incidence until December 2020. Results: We enrolled 6,793,699 individuals (men:women=4,077,292:2,716,407) in this cohort. The mean duration of follow-up was 9.4 years. During follow-up, 9,893 cases of GC (men:women=6,304:3,589) were reported. Compared with the aHRs (95% CI) of neversmokers, those of former and current-smokers were 1.121 (1.044–1.205) and 1.282 (1.212–1.355), respectively. Compared with the aHRs (95% CI) of non-consumers, those of low-moderate- and high-risk alcohol consumers were 1.095 (1.046–1.146) and 1.212 (1.113–1.321), respectively. GC risk was the highest in current-smokers and high-risk alcohol consumers (1.447 [1.297–1.615]).Interestingly, alcohol consumption and smoking additively increased the GC risk in men but not in women (P interaction =0.002). Conclusion Smoking and alcohol consumption are significant risk factors for early-onset GC in young Koreans. Further studies are needed to investigate sex-based impact of alcohol consumption and smoking on GC incidence in young individuals.

Background: The benefits of transradial access (TRA) over transfemoral access (TFA) for bifurcation percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) are uncertain because of the limited availability of device selection. This study aimed to compare the procedural differences and the in-hospital and long-term outcomes of TRA and TFA for bifurcation PCI using secondgeneration drug-eluting stents (DESs). Methods: Based on data from the Coronary Bifurcation Stenting Registry III, a retrospective registry of 2,648 patients undergoing bifurcation PCI with second-generation DES from 21 centers in South Korea, patients were categorized into the TRA group (n = 1,507) or the TFA group (n = 1,141). After propensity score matching (PSM), procedural differences, in-hospital outcomes, and device-oriented composite outcomes (DOCOs; a composite of cardiac death, target vessel-related myocardial infarction, and target lesion revascularization) were compared between the two groups (772 matched patients each group). Results: Despite well-balanced baseline clinical and lesion characteristics after PSM, the use of the two-stent strategy (14.2% vs. 23.7%, P = 0.001) and the incidence of in-hospital adverse outcomes, primarily driven by access site complications (2.2% vs. 4.4%, P = 0.015), were significantly lower in the TRA group than in the TFA group. At the 5-year follow-up, the incidence of DOCOs was similar between the groups (6.3% vs. 7.1%, P = 0.639). Conclusion The findings suggested that TRA may be safer than TFA for bifurcation PCI using second-generation DESs. Despite differences in treatment strategy, TRA was associated with similar long-term clinical outcomes as those of TFA. Therefore, TRA might be the preferred access for bifurcation PCI using second-generation DES.

The Korean Society of Nephrology (KSN) has published a clinical practice guideline (CPG) document for maintenance hemodialysis (HD). The document, 2021 Clinical Practice Guideline on Optimal HD Treatment, is based on an extensive evidence-oriented review of the benefits of preparation, initiation, and maintenance therapy for HD, with the participation of representative experts from the KSN under the methodologists’ support for guideline development. It was intended to help clinicians participating in HD treatment make safer and more effective clinical decisions by providing user-friendly guidelines. We hope that this CPG will be meaningful as a recommendation in practice, but not on a regulatory rule basis, as different approaches and treatments may be used by health care providers depending on the individual patient’s condition. This CPG consists of eight sections and 15 key questions. Each begins with statements that are graded by the strength of recommendations and quality of the evidence. Each statement is followed by a summary of the evidence supporting the recommendations. There are also a link to full-text documents and lists of the most important reports so that the readers can read further (most of this is available online).

Background/aims: Contradictory findings on the association between cholecystectomy and cancer have been reported. We aimed to investigate the risk of all types of cancers or site-specific cancers in patients who underwent cholecystectomy using a nationwide dataset. Methods: Subjects who underwent cholecystectomy from January 1, 2007, to December 31, 2014, who were older than 20 years and who underwent an initial baseline health check-up within 2 years were enrolled. Those who were diagnosed with any type of cancer before the enrollment or within 1 year after enrollment were excluded. Ultimately, patients (n=123,295) who underwent cholecystectomy and age/sex matched population (n=123,295) were identified from the database of the Korean National Health Insurance Service. The hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) for cancer were estimated, and Cox regression analysis was performed. Results: The incidence of cancer in the cholecystectomy group was 9.56 per 1,000 person-years and that in the control group was 7.95 per 1,000 person-years. Patients who underwent cholecystectomy showed an increased risk of total cancer (adjusted HR, 1.19; 95% CI, 1.15 to 1.24; p<0.001), particularly leukemia and malignancies of the colon, liver, pancreas, biliary tract, thyroid, pharynx, and oral cavity. In the subgroup analysis according to sex, the risk of developing cancers in the pancreas, biliary tract, thyroid, lungs and stomach was higher in men than in women. Conclusions Physicians should pay more attention to the possibility of the occurrence of secondary cancers among patients who undergo cholecystectomy.

Purpose: There remains controversy about relationship between obesity and gastric cancer. We aimed to examine the association using obesity-persistence. Materials and Methods: We analyzed a nationwide population-based cohort which underwent health check-up between 2009 and 2012. Among them, those who had annual examinations during the last 5 years were selected. Gastric cancer risk was compared between those without obesity during the 5 years (never-obesity group) and those with obesity diagnosis during the 5 years (non-persistent obesity group; persistent obesity group). Results: Among 2,757,017 individuals, 13,441 developed gastric cancer after median 6.78 years of follow-up. Gastric cancer risk was the highest in persistent obesity group (incidence rate [IR], 0.89/1,000 person-years; hazard ratio [HR], 1.197; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.117 to 1.284), followed by non-persistent obesity group (IR, 0.83/1,000 person-years; HR, 1.113; 95% CI, 1.056 to 1.172) compared with never-obesity group. In subgroup analysis, this positive relationship was true among those < 65 years old and male. Among heavy-drinkers, the impact of obesity-persistence on the gastric cancer risk far increased (non-persistent obesity: HR, 1.297; 95% CI, 1.094 to 1.538; persistent obesity: HR, 1.351; 95% CI, 1.076 to 1.698). Conclusion Obesity-persistence is associated with increased risk of gastric cancer in a dose-response manner, especially among male < 65 years old. The risk raising effect was much stronger among heavy-drinkers.