Background and Objectives: Cigarette smoking is a major risk factor for atherosclerosis.Nicotine, a crucial constituent of tobacco, contributes to atherosclerosis development and progression. However, evidence of the association between nicotine and neointima formation is limited. We aimed to evaluate whether nicotine enhances neointimal hyperplasia in the native epicardial coronary arteries of pigs after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stents (DES). Methods: After coronary angiography (CAG) and quantitative coronary angiography (QCA), we implanted 20 DES into 20 pigs allocated to 2 groups: no-nicotine (n=10) and nicotine (n=10) groups. Post-PCI CAG and QCA were performed immediately. Follow-up CAG, QCA, optical coherence tomography (OCT), and histopathological analyses were performed 2 months post-PCI. Results: Despite intergroup similarities in the baseline QCA findings, OCT analysis showed that the nicotine group had a smaller mean stent and lumen areas, a larger mean neointimal area, greater percent area stenosis, and higher peri-strut fibrin and inflammation scores than the no-nicotine group. In immunofluorescence analysis, the nicotine group displayed higher expression of CD68 and α-smooth muscle actin but lower CD31 expression than the no-nicotine group. Conclusions Nicotine inhibited re-endothelialization and promoted inflammation and NIH after PCI with DES in a porcine model.

Background and Objectives: Cigarette smoking is a major risk factor for atherosclerosis.Nicotine, a crucial constituent of tobacco, contributes to atherosclerosis development and progression. However, evidence of the association between nicotine and neointima formation is limited. We aimed to evaluate whether nicotine enhances neointimal hyperplasia in the native epicardial coronary arteries of pigs after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stents (DES). Methods: After coronary angiography (CAG) and quantitative coronary angiography (QCA), we implanted 20 DES into 20 pigs allocated to 2 groups: no-nicotine (n=10) and nicotine (n=10) groups. Post-PCI CAG and QCA were performed immediately. Follow-up CAG, QCA, optical coherence tomography (OCT), and histopathological analyses were performed 2 months post-PCI. Results: Despite intergroup similarities in the baseline QCA findings, OCT analysis showed that the nicotine group had a smaller mean stent and lumen areas, a larger mean neointimal area, greater percent area stenosis, and higher peri-strut fibrin and inflammation scores than the no-nicotine group. In immunofluorescence analysis, the nicotine group displayed higher expression of CD68 and α-smooth muscle actin but lower CD31 expression than the no-nicotine group. Conclusions Nicotine inhibited re-endothelialization and promoted inflammation and NIH after PCI with DES in a porcine model.

Purpose: Finasteride and dutasteride are used to treat benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) and reduce the risk of developing prostate cancer. Finasteride blocks only the type 2 form of 5-alpha-reductase, whereas dutasteride blocks both type 1 and 2 forms of the enzyme. Previous studies suggest the possibility that dutasteride may be superior to finasteride in preventing prostate cancer. We directly compared the effects of finasteride and dutasteride on the risk of prostate cancer in patients with BPH using a pooled analysis of 15 real-world databases. Materials and Methods: We conducted a multicenter, cohort study of new-users of finasteride and dutasteride. We include patients who were prescribed 5 mg finasteride or dutasteride for the first time to treat BPH and had at least 180 days of prescription. We excluded patients with a history of prostate cancer or a prostate-specific antigen level ≥ 4 ng/mL before the study drug prescription. Cox regression analysis was performed to examine the hazard ratio (HR) for prostate cancer after propensity score (PS) matching. Results: A total of 8,284 patients of new-users of finasteride and 8,670 patients of new-users of dutasteride were included across the 15 databases. In the overall population, compared to dutasteride, finasteride was associated with a lower risk of prostate cancer in both on-treatment and intent-to-treat time-at-risk periods. After 1:1 PS matching, 4,897 patients using finasteride and 4,897 patients using dutasteride were enrolled in the present study. No significant differences were observed for risk of prostate cancer between finasteride and dutasteride both on-treatment (HR=0.66, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.44–1.00; p=0.051) and intent-to-treat time-at-risk periods (HR=0.87, 95% CI: 0.67–1.14; p=0.310). Conclusions Using real-world databases, the present study demonstrated that dutasteride was not associated with a lower risk of prostate cancer than finasteride in patients with BPH.

Purpose: To evaluate the relationship between distal fusion level in correction and fusion surgery for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) and radiologic changes in the sacroiliac (SI) joint. Materials and Methods: This retrospective cohort study evaluated patients who underwent correction and fusion for AIS between 2005 and 2017 with at least 5 years of follow-up. We categorized patients into two groups: Group 1 (distal fusion above L2, 74 patients) and Group 2 (distal fusion at L3 and below, 52 patients). Radiologic parameters and SI joint changes were evaluated on plain radiographs obtained from preoperative to 5 years postoperatively. We also investigated other risk factors for SI joint change. Results: Analysis of demographic factors revealed no significant difference between the two groups. There was a significant difference in the incidence of SI joint change between Group 1 (5 patients, 6.75%) and Group 2 (18 patients, 34.61%), with Group 2 showing a faster increase in incidence according to the Kaplan-Meier method (p<0.0001). Preoperative lumbar lordosis (LL) and ΔLL had a significant relationship with SI joint changes [preoperative LL, hazard ratio (HR)=0.77, 95% confidence interval (CI)=0.64– 0.93, p=0.008; ΔLL, HR=0.79, 95% CI=0.67–0.95, p=0.01). Conclusion After AIS surgery, patients who had fusion to the lower lumbar vertebrae (L3 or L4) experienced a higher incidence and faster progression of degenerative changes in the SI joint. Low preoperative LL and inadequate correction of LL during the operation were also risk factors for SI joint degeneration.

Background: To identify the optimal surgical technique for single-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF), this study compared surgical outcomes and incidence of adjacent segment degeneration (ASD) in patients undergoing single-level ACDF using cage alone single-level fusion and plate fixation techniques. Methods: This single-center retrospective study (2003–2018) included patients who underwent single-level ACDF with either plate fixation (PLATE) or cage (CAGE) alone. The radiologic and clinical outcomes between the 2 surgical groups were compared over a 4-year follow-up period. Outcomes of interest included parameters related to range of motion, sagittal alignment, as well as fusion, subsidence, and ASD rates. Clinical outcomes were evaluated using the Neck Disability Index (NDI) and visual analog scale (VAS) for pain. Dysphagia and hoarseness rates were estimated based on medical records. Results: Forty-seven patients were included (n=17 in CAGE group). In the CAGE group, 94.1% of the patients had Bridwell grade 1 or 2, compared to 83.3% in the PLATE group (p = 0.396). Subsidence occurred in 12.5% and 3.6% of the CAGE and PLATE cases, respectively (p = 0.543). Segmental kyphosis progressed in the CAGE group compared to the PLATE group at 12, 24, and 48 months (p < 0.001). Radiographic ASD was observed in 41.2% and 30.0% of patients in the CAGE and PLATE groups, respectively, with a higher incidence in the upper segments for both groups. Preoperative NDI scores were similar between the groups; however, postoperatively, the CAGE group had significantly lower NDI scores (3.50 ± 2.74 vs. 8.00 ± 5.81) at 4 years (p = 0.020). Neck pain VAS scores also showed significant improvement in the CAGE group (2.33 ± 2.94) compared with that in the PLATE group (3.07 ± 2.31) at 4 years (p = 0.045). Both groups showed comparable arm pain VAS scores at 2 and 4 years postoperatively. Postoperative dysphagia occurred in 1 patient in the PLATE group, resolving almost completely by 1 year. Conclusions Single-level ACDF using a cage alone technique demonstrated favorable radiologic and clinical outcomes overall compared to plate-augmented ACDF. However, plate augmentation is recommended for patients with severe cervical kyphosis or those at high risk of subsidence.

Background/Aims: Magnifying endoscopy with narrow-band imaging (ME-NBI) enables the visualization of detailed microsurface (MS) and microvascular (MV) structures in the gastrointestinal tract. White globe appearance (WGA) is a small whitish lesion with a globular shape identified during ME-NBI for early gastric cancer (EGC). This study aimed to investigate the associations between WGA, clinicopathological characteristics, and other ME-NBI findings in patients with EGC. Methods: The presence or absence of WGA in 122 patients (126 lesions) with an endoscopic diagnosis of EGC who underwent ME-NBI before endoscopic or surgical resection was prospectively collected and retrospectively analyzed. During ME-NBI, the MS and MV patterns and the presence of WGA and white opaque substances (WOS) were investigated. EGC cases were categorized as differentiated or undifferentiated type, and mucosal, submucosal, or advanced. Results: Of 126 lesions, WGA was observed in 25 (19.8%). WGA was associated with tumor size (≤2 cm [17/63, 27.0%] vs >2 cm [8/63, 12.7%]; p=0.044), histologic type differentiated type [22/89, 24.7%] vs undifferentiated type [3/37. 8.1%]; p=0.033), and tumor location (upper third [1/11, 9.1%] vs middle third [18/58, 31.0%] and lower third [6/57, 10.5%]; p=0.017). Although WGA was observed more frequently in lesions with an oval/tubular MS pattern, a fine-network MV pattern, and the absence of WOS, the difference was not statistically significant (MS pattern, p=0.358; MV pattern, p=0.212; WOS, p=0.121, respectively). Conclusions WGA was associated with small tumor size, differentiated-type histology, and middle-third tumor location, and was more frequently observed in lesions with an oval/tubular MS and fine-network MV patterns and the absence of WOS.

Purpose: Finasteride and dutasteride are used to treat benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) and reduce the risk of developing prostate cancer. Finasteride blocks only the type 2 form of 5-alpha-reductase, whereas dutasteride blocks both type 1 and 2 forms of the enzyme. Previous studies suggest the possibility that dutasteride may be superior to finasteride in preventing prostate cancer. We directly compared the effects of finasteride and dutasteride on the risk of prostate cancer in patients with BPH using a pooled analysis of 15 real-world databases. Materials and Methods: We conducted a multicenter, cohort study of new-users of finasteride and dutasteride. We include patients who were prescribed 5 mg finasteride or dutasteride for the first time to treat BPH and had at least 180 days of prescription. We excluded patients with a history of prostate cancer or a prostate-specific antigen level ≥ 4 ng/mL before the study drug prescription. Cox regression analysis was performed to examine the hazard ratio (HR) for prostate cancer after propensity score (PS) matching. Results: A total of 8,284 patients of new-users of finasteride and 8,670 patients of new-users of dutasteride were included across the 15 databases. In the overall population, compared to dutasteride, finasteride was associated with a lower risk of prostate cancer in both on-treatment and intent-to-treat time-at-risk periods. After 1:1 PS matching, 4,897 patients using finasteride and 4,897 patients using dutasteride were enrolled in the present study. No significant differences were observed for risk of prostate cancer between finasteride and dutasteride both on-treatment (HR=0.66, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.44–1.00; p=0.051) and intent-to-treat time-at-risk periods (HR=0.87, 95% CI: 0.67–1.14; p=0.310). Conclusions Using real-world databases, the present study demonstrated that dutasteride was not associated with a lower risk of prostate cancer than finasteride in patients with BPH.

Purpose: To evaluate the relationship between distal fusion level in correction and fusion surgery for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) and radiologic changes in the sacroiliac (SI) joint. Materials and Methods: This retrospective cohort study evaluated patients who underwent correction and fusion for AIS between 2005 and 2017 with at least 5 years of follow-up. We categorized patients into two groups: Group 1 (distal fusion above L2, 74 patients) and Group 2 (distal fusion at L3 and below, 52 patients). Radiologic parameters and SI joint changes were evaluated on plain radiographs obtained from preoperative to 5 years postoperatively. We also investigated other risk factors for SI joint change. Results: Analysis of demographic factors revealed no significant difference between the two groups. There was a significant difference in the incidence of SI joint change between Group 1 (5 patients, 6.75%) and Group 2 (18 patients, 34.61%), with Group 2 showing a faster increase in incidence according to the Kaplan-Meier method (p<0.0001). Preoperative lumbar lordosis (LL) and ΔLL had a significant relationship with SI joint changes [preoperative LL, hazard ratio (HR)=0.77, 95% confidence interval (CI)=0.64– 0.93, p=0.008; ΔLL, HR=0.79, 95% CI=0.67–0.95, p=0.01). Conclusion After AIS surgery, patients who had fusion to the lower lumbar vertebrae (L3 or L4) experienced a higher incidence and faster progression of degenerative changes in the SI joint. Low preoperative LL and inadequate correction of LL during the operation were also risk factors for SI joint degeneration.

Purpose: Finasteride and dutasteride are used to treat benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) and reduce the risk of developing prostate cancer. Finasteride blocks only the type 2 form of 5-alpha-reductase, whereas dutasteride blocks both type 1 and 2 forms of the enzyme. Previous studies suggest the possibility that dutasteride may be superior to finasteride in preventing prostate cancer. We directly compared the effects of finasteride and dutasteride on the risk of prostate cancer in patients with BPH using a pooled analysis of 15 real-world databases. Materials and Methods: We conducted a multicenter, cohort study of new-users of finasteride and dutasteride. We include patients who were prescribed 5 mg finasteride or dutasteride for the first time to treat BPH and had at least 180 days of prescription. We excluded patients with a history of prostate cancer or a prostate-specific antigen level ≥ 4 ng/mL before the study drug prescription. Cox regression analysis was performed to examine the hazard ratio (HR) for prostate cancer after propensity score (PS) matching. Results: A total of 8,284 patients of new-users of finasteride and 8,670 patients of new-users of dutasteride were included across the 15 databases. In the overall population, compared to dutasteride, finasteride was associated with a lower risk of prostate cancer in both on-treatment and intent-to-treat time-at-risk periods. After 1:1 PS matching, 4,897 patients using finasteride and 4,897 patients using dutasteride were enrolled in the present study. No significant differences were observed for risk of prostate cancer between finasteride and dutasteride both on-treatment (HR=0.66, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.44–1.00; p=0.051) and intent-to-treat time-at-risk periods (HR=0.87, 95% CI: 0.67–1.14; p=0.310). Conclusions Using real-world databases, the present study demonstrated that dutasteride was not associated with a lower risk of prostate cancer than finasteride in patients with BPH.

Purpose: To evaluate the relationship between distal fusion level in correction and fusion surgery for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) and radiologic changes in the sacroiliac (SI) joint. Materials and Methods: This retrospective cohort study evaluated patients who underwent correction and fusion for AIS between 2005 and 2017 with at least 5 years of follow-up. We categorized patients into two groups: Group 1 (distal fusion above L2, 74 patients) and Group 2 (distal fusion at L3 and below, 52 patients). Radiologic parameters and SI joint changes were evaluated on plain radiographs obtained from preoperative to 5 years postoperatively. We also investigated other risk factors for SI joint change. Results: Analysis of demographic factors revealed no significant difference between the two groups. There was a significant difference in the incidence of SI joint change between Group 1 (5 patients, 6.75%) and Group 2 (18 patients, 34.61%), with Group 2 showing a faster increase in incidence according to the Kaplan-Meier method (p<0.0001). Preoperative lumbar lordosis (LL) and ΔLL had a significant relationship with SI joint changes [preoperative LL, hazard ratio (HR)=0.77, 95% confidence interval (CI)=0.64– 0.93, p=0.008; ΔLL, HR=0.79, 95% CI=0.67–0.95, p=0.01). Conclusion After AIS surgery, patients who had fusion to the lower lumbar vertebrae (L3 or L4) experienced a higher incidence and faster progression of degenerative changes in the SI joint. Low preoperative LL and inadequate correction of LL during the operation were also risk factors for SI joint degeneration.