Objective: To analyze costs and cost-effectiveness of transforaminal endoscopic thoracic discectomy (TETD) for the treatment of symptomatic thoracic disc herniation (TDH) and compare it with open microdiscectomy (MD). Methods: This retrospective cohort study included patients who underwent TETD or MD for symptomatic TDH and had a minimum follow-up of 1 year. Cost analysis included direct costs (primary and secondary hospital costs), indirect costs (lost wages due to work absence), total costs (direct + indirect), and cost-effectiveness (cost per quality-adjusted life year [QALY] and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio [ICER]). Clinical outcomes included patient-reported outcome measures (Oswestry Disability Index [ODI], 36-item Short Form health survey [SF-36]), QALY gained, and reoperation and readmission rates at 1 year. TETD and MD groups were compared for outcome measures. Results: A total of 111 patients (57 TETD, 54 MD) were included. The direct ($6,270 TETD vs. $7,410 MD, p < 0.01), indirect costs ($1,250 TETD vs. $1,450 MD, p < 0.01), total costs ($7,520 TETD vs. $8,860 MD, p < 0.01), and cost per QALY ($31,333 TETD vs. $44,300 MD, p < 0.01) were significantly lower for TETD compared to MD. ICER of TETD was found to be -$33,500. At 1 year, TETD group showed significantly greater improvement in ODI (46% vs. 36%, p < 0.01) and SF-36 (64% vs. 53%, p < 0.01) and significantly greater QALY gained (0.24 vs. 0.2, p < 0.01) compared to MD group. No significant difference was found in reoperation and readmission rates. Conclusion TETD demonstrated significantly better clinical outcomes, lower overall costs, and better cost-effectiveness than MD in appropriately selected patients of symptomatic TDH.

Objective: To analyze costs and cost-effectiveness of transforaminal endoscopic thoracic discectomy (TETD) for the treatment of symptomatic thoracic disc herniation (TDH) and compare it with open microdiscectomy (MD). Methods: This retrospective cohort study included patients who underwent TETD or MD for symptomatic TDH and had a minimum follow-up of 1 year. Cost analysis included direct costs (primary and secondary hospital costs), indirect costs (lost wages due to work absence), total costs (direct + indirect), and cost-effectiveness (cost per quality-adjusted life year [QALY] and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio [ICER]). Clinical outcomes included patient-reported outcome measures (Oswestry Disability Index [ODI], 36-item Short Form health survey [SF-36]), QALY gained, and reoperation and readmission rates at 1 year. TETD and MD groups were compared for outcome measures. Results: A total of 111 patients (57 TETD, 54 MD) were included. The direct ($6,270 TETD vs. $7,410 MD, p < 0.01), indirect costs ($1,250 TETD vs. $1,450 MD, p < 0.01), total costs ($7,520 TETD vs. $8,860 MD, p < 0.01), and cost per QALY ($31,333 TETD vs. $44,300 MD, p < 0.01) were significantly lower for TETD compared to MD. ICER of TETD was found to be -$33,500. At 1 year, TETD group showed significantly greater improvement in ODI (46% vs. 36%, p < 0.01) and SF-36 (64% vs. 53%, p < 0.01) and significantly greater QALY gained (0.24 vs. 0.2, p < 0.01) compared to MD group. No significant difference was found in reoperation and readmission rates. Conclusion TETD demonstrated significantly better clinical outcomes, lower overall costs, and better cost-effectiveness than MD in appropriately selected patients of symptomatic TDH.

Background: This study evaluated adherence to the Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) and Korean guidelines in the prescription patterns of respiratory specialists for stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) management. Methods: Data were collected on medications from 2011 to 2022 using the Korea COPD Subtype Study (KOCOSS) cohort. Patients were divided into two groups: those registered before and after 2019, and we analyzed the percentage of patients meeting the recommended treatment criteria established by each guideline. Results: Among 3,477 patients, 85.6% received pharmacological therapy, and 81.6% utilized inhaled medications. Compared to patients enrolled before 2019, there was an increase in inhaler prescriptions among those registered after 2019 (79.7% vs. 86.7%), with dual bronchodilators being the predominant therapy prescribed. Of the patients receiving treatment, 56.9% adhered to the Korean 2018 guideline. Compliance with the GOLD 2019 and GOLD 2023 guidelines was observed in 31.3% and 28.0% of cases, respectively. When analyzing inhaler prescription patterns according to both subgroups and considering the Korean 2018, GOLD 2019, and GOLD 2023 guidelines concurrently, the adherence rates were as follows: (56.6%, 37.8%, 24.0%) and (57.7%, 14.0%, 38.6%). Conclusion Adherence rates were higher for the Korean guideline compared to the GOLD recommendations. Furthermore, alignment with both the Korean 2018 and GOLD 2023 guidelines increased among patients enrolled after 2019, compared to those registered earlier. These findings suggest that physicians are modifying their therapeutic strategies to align with both domestic and recent international guidelines.

The Korean Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Committee within the Korean Society of Surgical Metabolism and Nutrition was established to develop ERAS guidelines tailored to the Korean context. This guideline focuses on creating the most current evidence-based practice guidelines for ERAS purposes, based on systematic reviews. All key questions targeted randomized controlled trials exclusively, and if fewer than 2 were available, studies employing propensity score matching were also included. Recommendations for each key question were marked with strength of recommendation and level of evidence following internal and external review processes by the committee.

Background: This study evaluated adherence to the Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) and Korean guidelines in the prescription patterns of respiratory specialists for stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) management. Methods: Data were collected on medications from 2011 to 2022 using the Korea COPD Subtype Study (KOCOSS) cohort. Patients were divided into two groups: those registered before and after 2019, and we analyzed the percentage of patients meeting the recommended treatment criteria established by each guideline. Results: Among 3,477 patients, 85.6% received pharmacological therapy, and 81.6% utilized inhaled medications. Compared to patients enrolled before 2019, there was an increase in inhaler prescriptions among those registered after 2019 (79.7% vs. 86.7%), with dual bronchodilators being the predominant therapy prescribed. Of the patients receiving treatment, 56.9% adhered to the Korean 2018 guideline. Compliance with the GOLD 2019 and GOLD 2023 guidelines was observed in 31.3% and 28.0% of cases, respectively. When analyzing inhaler prescription patterns according to both subgroups and considering the Korean 2018, GOLD 2019, and GOLD 2023 guidelines concurrently, the adherence rates were as follows: (56.6%, 37.8%, 24.0%) and (57.7%, 14.0%, 38.6%). Conclusion Adherence rates were higher for the Korean guideline compared to the GOLD recommendations. Furthermore, alignment with both the Korean 2018 and GOLD 2023 guidelines increased among patients enrolled after 2019, compared to those registered earlier. These findings suggest that physicians are modifying their therapeutic strategies to align with both domestic and recent international guidelines.

Objective: To analyze costs and cost-effectiveness of transforaminal endoscopic thoracic discectomy (TETD) for the treatment of symptomatic thoracic disc herniation (TDH) and compare it with open microdiscectomy (MD). Methods: This retrospective cohort study included patients who underwent TETD or MD for symptomatic TDH and had a minimum follow-up of 1 year. Cost analysis included direct costs (primary and secondary hospital costs), indirect costs (lost wages due to work absence), total costs (direct + indirect), and cost-effectiveness (cost per quality-adjusted life year [QALY] and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio [ICER]). Clinical outcomes included patient-reported outcome measures (Oswestry Disability Index [ODI], 36-item Short Form health survey [SF-36]), QALY gained, and reoperation and readmission rates at 1 year. TETD and MD groups were compared for outcome measures. Results: A total of 111 patients (57 TETD, 54 MD) were included. The direct ($6,270 TETD vs. $7,410 MD, p < 0.01), indirect costs ($1,250 TETD vs. $1,450 MD, p < 0.01), total costs ($7,520 TETD vs. $8,860 MD, p < 0.01), and cost per QALY ($31,333 TETD vs. $44,300 MD, p < 0.01) were significantly lower for TETD compared to MD. ICER of TETD was found to be -$33,500. At 1 year, TETD group showed significantly greater improvement in ODI (46% vs. 36%, p < 0.01) and SF-36 (64% vs. 53%, p < 0.01) and significantly greater QALY gained (0.24 vs. 0.2, p < 0.01) compared to MD group. No significant difference was found in reoperation and readmission rates. Conclusion TETD demonstrated significantly better clinical outcomes, lower overall costs, and better cost-effectiveness than MD in appropriately selected patients of symptomatic TDH.

Background: This study evaluated adherence to the Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) and Korean guidelines in the prescription patterns of respiratory specialists for stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) management. Methods: Data were collected on medications from 2011 to 2022 using the Korea COPD Subtype Study (KOCOSS) cohort. Patients were divided into two groups: those registered before and after 2019, and we analyzed the percentage of patients meeting the recommended treatment criteria established by each guideline. Results: Among 3,477 patients, 85.6% received pharmacological therapy, and 81.6% utilized inhaled medications. Compared to patients enrolled before 2019, there was an increase in inhaler prescriptions among those registered after 2019 (79.7% vs. 86.7%), with dual bronchodilators being the predominant therapy prescribed. Of the patients receiving treatment, 56.9% adhered to the Korean 2018 guideline. Compliance with the GOLD 2019 and GOLD 2023 guidelines was observed in 31.3% and 28.0% of cases, respectively. When analyzing inhaler prescription patterns according to both subgroups and considering the Korean 2018, GOLD 2019, and GOLD 2023 guidelines concurrently, the adherence rates were as follows: (56.6%, 37.8%, 24.0%) and (57.7%, 14.0%, 38.6%). Conclusion Adherence rates were higher for the Korean guideline compared to the GOLD recommendations. Furthermore, alignment with both the Korean 2018 and GOLD 2023 guidelines increased among patients enrolled after 2019, compared to those registered earlier. These findings suggest that physicians are modifying their therapeutic strategies to align with both domestic and recent international guidelines.

The Korean Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Committee within the Korean Society of Surgical Metabolism and Nutrition was established to develop ERAS guidelines tailored to the Korean context. This guideline focuses on creating the most current evidence-based practice guidelines for ERAS purposes, based on systematic reviews. All key questions targeted randomized controlled trials exclusively, and if fewer than 2 were available, studies employing propensity score matching were also included. Recommendations for each key question were marked with strength of recommendation and level of evidence following internal and external review processes by the committee.

The Korean Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Committee within the Korean Society of Surgical Metabolism and Nutrition was established to develop ERAS guidelines tailored to the Korean context. This guideline focuses on creating the most current evidence-based practice guidelines for ERAS purposes, based on systematic reviews. All key questions targeted randomized controlled trials exclusively, and if fewer than 2 were available, studies employing propensity score matching were also included. Recommendations for each key question were marked with strength of recommendation and level of evidence following internal and external review processes by the committee.

Objective: To analyze costs and cost-effectiveness of transforaminal endoscopic thoracic discectomy (TETD) for the treatment of symptomatic thoracic disc herniation (TDH) and compare it with open microdiscectomy (MD). Methods: This retrospective cohort study included patients who underwent TETD or MD for symptomatic TDH and had a minimum follow-up of 1 year. Cost analysis included direct costs (primary and secondary hospital costs), indirect costs (lost wages due to work absence), total costs (direct + indirect), and cost-effectiveness (cost per quality-adjusted life year [QALY] and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio [ICER]). Clinical outcomes included patient-reported outcome measures (Oswestry Disability Index [ODI], 36-item Short Form health survey [SF-36]), QALY gained, and reoperation and readmission rates at 1 year. TETD and MD groups were compared for outcome measures. Results: A total of 111 patients (57 TETD, 54 MD) were included. The direct ($6,270 TETD vs. $7,410 MD, p < 0.01), indirect costs ($1,250 TETD vs. $1,450 MD, p < 0.01), total costs ($7,520 TETD vs. $8,860 MD, p < 0.01), and cost per QALY ($31,333 TETD vs. $44,300 MD, p < 0.01) were significantly lower for TETD compared to MD. ICER of TETD was found to be -$33,500. At 1 year, TETD group showed significantly greater improvement in ODI (46% vs. 36%, p < 0.01) and SF-36 (64% vs. 53%, p < 0.01) and significantly greater QALY gained (0.24 vs. 0.2, p < 0.01) compared to MD group. No significant difference was found in reoperation and readmission rates. Conclusion TETD demonstrated significantly better clinical outcomes, lower overall costs, and better cost-effectiveness than MD in appropriately selected patients of symptomatic TDH.