Background: Sacubitril-valsartan reduces the risk of cardiovascular mortality among patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). However, its long-term protective effects on cardiac function with concurrent acute kidney injury (AKI) remain unclear. This study investigated the recovery of cardiac function relative to kidney function decline. Methods: A total of 512 patients with HFrEF who started sacubitril-valsartan or valsartan treatment were enrolled in cohort 1. Additionally, patients who experienced AKI and underwent follow-up transthoracic echocardiography were enrolled in cohort 2. In cohort 1, short- and long-term kidney outcomes were analyzed. For cohort 2, changes in cardiac function in relation to changes in kidney function after drug initiation were analyzed. Results: The mean age of the patients was 68.3 ± 15.1 years, and 57.4% of the patients were male. AKI occurred in 15.9% of the sacubitril-valsartan group and 12.5% of the valsartan group. After AKI, 78.4% of patients in the sacubitril-valsartan group and 71.4% of those in the valsartan group underwent recovery. Furthermore, cardiovascular outcomes in patients who developed AKI after drug initiation were analyzed in cohort 2. The sacubitril-valsartan group showed a greater improvement in cardiac function compared with the valsartan group (12.4% ± 15.4% vs. 1.4% ± 5.7%, p = 0.046). The ratio of deltas of cardiac and kidney function in the sacubitril-valsartan and valsartan groups were –1.76 ± 2.58 and –0.20 ± 0.58, respectively (p = 0.03). Conclusion Patients with HFrEF treated with sacubitril-valsartan exhibited significant improvements in cardiovascular outcomes despite AKI.

Background: Sacubitril-valsartan reduces the risk of cardiovascular mortality among patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). However, its long-term protective effects on cardiac function with concurrent acute kidney injury (AKI) remain unclear. This study investigated the recovery of cardiac function relative to kidney function decline. Methods: A total of 512 patients with HFrEF who started sacubitril-valsartan or valsartan treatment were enrolled in cohort 1. Additionally, patients who experienced AKI and underwent follow-up transthoracic echocardiography were enrolled in cohort 2. In cohort 1, short- and long-term kidney outcomes were analyzed. For cohort 2, changes in cardiac function in relation to changes in kidney function after drug initiation were analyzed. Results: The mean age of the patients was 68.3 ± 15.1 years, and 57.4% of the patients were male. AKI occurred in 15.9% of the sacubitril-valsartan group and 12.5% of the valsartan group. After AKI, 78.4% of patients in the sacubitril-valsartan group and 71.4% of those in the valsartan group underwent recovery. Furthermore, cardiovascular outcomes in patients who developed AKI after drug initiation were analyzed in cohort 2. The sacubitril-valsartan group showed a greater improvement in cardiac function compared with the valsartan group (12.4% ± 15.4% vs. 1.4% ± 5.7%, p = 0.046). The ratio of deltas of cardiac and kidney function in the sacubitril-valsartan and valsartan groups were –1.76 ± 2.58 and –0.20 ± 0.58, respectively (p = 0.03). Conclusion Patients with HFrEF treated with sacubitril-valsartan exhibited significant improvements in cardiovascular outcomes despite AKI.

Background: Sacubitril-valsartan reduces the risk of cardiovascular mortality among patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). However, its long-term protective effects on cardiac function with concurrent acute kidney injury (AKI) remain unclear. This study investigated the recovery of cardiac function relative to kidney function decline. Methods: A total of 512 patients with HFrEF who started sacubitril-valsartan or valsartan treatment were enrolled in cohort 1. Additionally, patients who experienced AKI and underwent follow-up transthoracic echocardiography were enrolled in cohort 2. In cohort 1, short- and long-term kidney outcomes were analyzed. For cohort 2, changes in cardiac function in relation to changes in kidney function after drug initiation were analyzed. Results: The mean age of the patients was 68.3 ± 15.1 years, and 57.4% of the patients were male. AKI occurred in 15.9% of the sacubitril-valsartan group and 12.5% of the valsartan group. After AKI, 78.4% of patients in the sacubitril-valsartan group and 71.4% of those in the valsartan group underwent recovery. Furthermore, cardiovascular outcomes in patients who developed AKI after drug initiation were analyzed in cohort 2. The sacubitril-valsartan group showed a greater improvement in cardiac function compared with the valsartan group (12.4% ± 15.4% vs. 1.4% ± 5.7%, p = 0.046). The ratio of deltas of cardiac and kidney function in the sacubitril-valsartan and valsartan groups were –1.76 ± 2.58 and –0.20 ± 0.58, respectively (p = 0.03). Conclusion Patients with HFrEF treated with sacubitril-valsartan exhibited significant improvements in cardiovascular outcomes despite AKI.

Background: Sacubitril-valsartan reduces the risk of cardiovascular mortality among patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). However, its long-term protective effects on cardiac function with concurrent acute kidney injury (AKI) remain unclear. This study investigated the recovery of cardiac function relative to kidney function decline. Methods: A total of 512 patients with HFrEF who started sacubitril-valsartan or valsartan treatment were enrolled in cohort 1. Additionally, patients who experienced AKI and underwent follow-up transthoracic echocardiography were enrolled in cohort 2. In cohort 1, short- and long-term kidney outcomes were analyzed. For cohort 2, changes in cardiac function in relation to changes in kidney function after drug initiation were analyzed. Results: The mean age of the patients was 68.3 ± 15.1 years, and 57.4% of the patients were male. AKI occurred in 15.9% of the sacubitril-valsartan group and 12.5% of the valsartan group. After AKI, 78.4% of patients in the sacubitril-valsartan group and 71.4% of those in the valsartan group underwent recovery. Furthermore, cardiovascular outcomes in patients who developed AKI after drug initiation were analyzed in cohort 2. The sacubitril-valsartan group showed a greater improvement in cardiac function compared with the valsartan group (12.4% ± 15.4% vs. 1.4% ± 5.7%, p = 0.046). The ratio of deltas of cardiac and kidney function in the sacubitril-valsartan and valsartan groups were –1.76 ± 2.58 and –0.20 ± 0.58, respectively (p = 0.03). Conclusion Patients with HFrEF treated with sacubitril-valsartan exhibited significant improvements in cardiovascular outcomes despite AKI.

Purpose: The present study aimed to evaluate the role of early and delayed surgery in congenital brain tumors and analyze the clinical outcomes of infantile brain tumors. Materials and Methods: We performed a retrospective cohort study on 69 infantile brain tumors at a single institution from January 2008 to June 2023. Outcomes were assessed as early mortality (within 30 days following surgery) to evaluate the risk of early surgery in congenital brain tumors. Outcomes of recurrence and overall survival were analyzed in infantile brain tumors. Results: Surgery-related early mortality appeared to occur in young and low-body-weight patients. Cut-off values of age and body weight were found to be 1.3 months and 5.2 kg to avoid early mortality. Three patients (3/10, 30%) showed early mortality in the early surgery group, and early mortality occurred in one patient (1/14, 7.14%) in the delayed surgery group, whose tumor was excessively enlarged. Younger age at diagnosis (< 3 months of age; hazard ratios [HR], 7.1; 95% confidence intervals [CI], 1.4 to 35.6; p=0.018) and leptomeningeal seeding (LMS; HR, 30.6; 95% CI, 3.7 to 253.1; p=0.002) were significant independent risk factors for high mortality in infantile brain tumors. Conclusion We suggest delaying surgery until the patient reaches 1.3 months of age and weighs over 5.2 kg with short-term imaging follow-up unless tumors grow rapidly in congenital brain tumors. Younger ages and the presence of LMS are independent risk factors for high mortality in infantile brain tumors.

There are limited data on outcomes after implantation of everolimus-eluting stents (EES) in East Asian patients with small vessel coronary lesions. A total of 1,600 patients treated with XIENCE EES (Abbott Vascular, CA, USA) were divided into the small vessel group treated with one ≤2.5 mm stent (n=119) and the non-small vessel group treated with one ≥2.75 mm stent (n=933). The primary end point was a patient-oriented composite outcome (POCO), a composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction (MI), and any repeat revascularization at 12 months. The key secondary end point was a device-oriented composite outcome (DOCO), a composite of cardiovascular death, target-vessel MI, and target lesion revascularization at 12 months. The small vessel group was more often female, hypertensive, less likely to present with ST-elevation MI, and more often treated for the left circumflex artery, whereas the non-small vessel group more often had type B2/C lesions, underwent intravascular ultrasound, and received unfractionated heparin. In the propensity matched cohort, the mean stent diameter was 2.5±0.0 mm and 3.1±0.4 mm in the small and non-small vessel groups, respectively. Propensity-adjusted POCO at 12 months was 6.0% in the small vessel group and 4.3% in the non-small vessel group (p=0.558). There was no significant difference in DOCO at 12 months (small vessel group: 4.3% and non-small vessel group: 1.7%, p=0.270).Outcomes of XIENCE EES for small vessel disease were comparable to those for non-small vessel disease at 12-month clinical follow-up in real-world Korean patients.

Background: Atherogenic dyslipidemia, which is frequently associated with type 2 diabetes (T2D) and insulin resistance, contributes to the development of vascular complications. Statin therapy is the primary approach to dyslipidemia management in T2D, however, the role of non-statin therapy remains unclear. Ezetimibe reduces cholesterol burden by inhibiting intestinal cholesterol absorption. Fibrates lower triglyceride levels and increase high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) levels via peroxisome proliferator- activated receptor alpha agonism. Therefore, when combined, these drugs effectively lower non-HDL-C levels. Despite this, few clinical trials have specifically targeted non-HDL-C, and the efficacy of triple combination therapies, including statins, ezetimibe, and fibrates, has yet to be determined. Methods: This is a multicenter, prospective, randomized, open-label, active-comparator controlled trial involving 3,958 eligible participants with T2D, cardiovascular risk factors, and elevated non-HDL-C (≥100 mg/dL). Participants, already on moderate-intensity statins, will be randomly assigned to either Ezefeno (ezetimibe/fenofibrate) addition or statin dose-escalation. The primary end point is the development of a composite of major adverse cardiovascular and diabetic microvascular events over 48 months. Conclusion This trial aims to assess whether combining statins, ezetimibe, and fenofibrate is as effective as, or possibly superior to, statin monotherapy intensification in lowering cardiovascular and microvascular disease risk for patients with T2D. This could propose a novel therapeutic approach for managing dyslipidemia in T2D.

Background/Aims: The prevalence and incidence of ulcerative colitis (UC) in Korea is increasing. Each patient has a different disease course and treatment response. Recently, with the development of biologic agents, histological remission has become a treatment goal. In this study, we aimed to identify the predictors of histological remission after first-line biologic agent treatment in patients with biologic agent-naïve UC. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed the medical records of 92 patients who had been diagnosed with UC and treated with first-line biologic agent treatment at our center, between 2015 and 2022. The clinical characteristics, laboratory test results, and endoscopic and biopsy findings were analyzed. Histological remission was defined as the absence of cryptitis, crypt abscesses, and inflammatory cells on histology. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to identify the predictors of histological remission after first-line treatment. Results: Of the total 92 patients, 25 (27.2%) achieved histological remission. Each cohort had a varied body mass index (BMI) distribution, with a statistically significant overweight ratio, as defined by the Asian-Pacific BMI category of 23–25 kg/m2, of 48.0% in the histological remission cohort (P= 0.026). A causal correlation between the overweight category and histological remission was confirmed (odds ratio, 3.883; 95% confidence interval, 1.141–13.212; P= 0.030). Conclusions We confirmed that the overweight category was a predictor of histological remission after first-line treatment with a biological agent. However, as BMI does not account for skeletal muscle mass, future studies are required to confirm the correlation between skeletal muscle mass and histological remission.

Purpose: Advances in chemotherapeutic and targeted agents have increased pathologic complete response (pCR) rates after neoadjuvant systemic therapy (NST). Vacuum-assisted biopsy (VAB) has been suggested to accurately evaluate pCR. This study aims to confirm the non-inferiority of the 5-year disease-free survival of patients who omitted breast surgery when predicted to have a pCR based on breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and VAB after NST, compared with patients with a pCR who had undergone breast surgery in previous studies. Methods The Omission of breast surgery for PredicTed pCR patients wIth MRI and vacuumassisted bIopsy in breaST cancer after neoadjuvant systemic therapy (OPTIMIST) trial is a prospective, multicenter, single-arm, non-inferiority study enrolling in 17 tertiary care hospitals in the Republic of Korea. Eligible patients must have a clip marker placed in the tumor and meet the MRI criteria suggesting complete clinical response (post-NST MRI size ≤ 1 cm and lesion-to-background signal enhancement ratio ≤ 1.6) after NST. Patients will undergo VAB, and breast surgery will be omitted for those with no residual tumor. Axillary surgery can also be omitted if the patient was clinically node-negative before and after NST and met the stringent criteria of MRI size ≤ 0.5 cm. Survival and efficacy outcomes are evaluated over five years.Discussion: This study seeks to establish evidence for the safe omission of breast surgery in exceptional responders to NST while minimizing patient burden. The trial will address concerns about potential undertreatment due to false-negative results and recurrence as well as improved patient-reported quality of life issues from the omission of surgery. Successful completion of this trial may reshape clinical practice for certain breast cancer subtypes and lead to a safe and less invasive approach for selected patients.

Safe and effective sedation depends on various factors, such as the choice of sedatives, sedation techniques used, experience of the sedation provider, degree of sedation-related education and training, equipment and healthcare worker availability, the patient’s underlying diseases, and the procedure being performed. The purpose of these evidence-based multidisciplinary clinical practice guidelines is to ensure the safety and efficacy of sedation, thereby contributing to patient safety and ultimately improving public health. These clinical practice guidelines comprise 15 key questions covering various topics related to the following: the sedation providers; medications and equipment available; appropriate patient selection; anesthesiologist referrals for high-risk patients; pre-sedation fasting; comparison of representative drugs used in adult and pediatric patients; respiratory system, cardiovascular system, and sedation depth monitoring during sedation; management of respiratory complications during pediatric sedation; and discharge criteria. The recommendations in these clinical practice guidelines were systematically developed to assist providers and patients in sedation-related decision making for diagnostic and therapeutic examinations or procedures. Depending on the characteristics of primary, secondary, and tertiary care institutions as well as the clinical needs and limitations, sedation providers at each medical institution may choose to apply the recommendations as they are, modify them appropriately, or reject them completely.