Lung cancer surgery has advanced significantly over the decades, profoundly impacting patient outcomes and surgical practices. This review examines the major historical milestones in lung cancer surgery—from early pneumonectomies to the establishment of lobectomy as the standard treatment for resectable non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and the subsequent evolution toward sublobar resections (including segmentectomy and wedge resection) for early-stage NSCLC. Growing evidence for the efficacy of sublobar resections has redefined the surgical approach for early-stage lung cancer by shifting the focus from lobectomy to less invasive procedures. However, despite the demonstrated non-inferiority of sublobar resections, concerns about locoregional recurrence continue to pose a major challenge. Addressing this issue is essential for optimizing surgical outcomes in early-stage NSCLC. One promising innovation to mitigate recurrence is the novel asymmetrical linear stapler (NALS), which represents a significant advancement in stapling technology for minimally invasive lung cancer surgery. This review traces the evolution of lung cancer surgery from the 1960s to 2024, focusing on key milestones and the role of NALS in addressing current challenges.

Lung cancer surgery has advanced significantly over the decades, profoundly impacting patient outcomes and surgical practices. This review examines the major historical milestones in lung cancer surgery—from early pneumonectomies to the establishment of lobectomy as the standard treatment for resectable non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and the subsequent evolution toward sublobar resections (including segmentectomy and wedge resection) for early-stage NSCLC. Growing evidence for the efficacy of sublobar resections has redefined the surgical approach for early-stage lung cancer by shifting the focus from lobectomy to less invasive procedures. However, despite the demonstrated non-inferiority of sublobar resections, concerns about locoregional recurrence continue to pose a major challenge. Addressing this issue is essential for optimizing surgical outcomes in early-stage NSCLC. One promising innovation to mitigate recurrence is the novel asymmetrical linear stapler (NALS), which represents a significant advancement in stapling technology for minimally invasive lung cancer surgery. This review traces the evolution of lung cancer surgery from the 1960s to 2024, focusing on key milestones and the role of NALS in addressing current challenges.

Lung cancer surgery has advanced significantly over the decades, profoundly impacting patient outcomes and surgical practices. This review examines the major historical milestones in lung cancer surgery—from early pneumonectomies to the establishment of lobectomy as the standard treatment for resectable non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and the subsequent evolution toward sublobar resections (including segmentectomy and wedge resection) for early-stage NSCLC. Growing evidence for the efficacy of sublobar resections has redefined the surgical approach for early-stage lung cancer by shifting the focus from lobectomy to less invasive procedures. However, despite the demonstrated non-inferiority of sublobar resections, concerns about locoregional recurrence continue to pose a major challenge. Addressing this issue is essential for optimizing surgical outcomes in early-stage NSCLC. One promising innovation to mitigate recurrence is the novel asymmetrical linear stapler (NALS), which represents a significant advancement in stapling technology for minimally invasive lung cancer surgery. This review traces the evolution of lung cancer surgery from the 1960s to 2024, focusing on key milestones and the role of NALS in addressing current challenges.

Objective: To compare the safety profiles of biportal endoscopic spinal surgery (BESS) and microscopic spinal surgery (MSS) for lumbar disc herniation and spinal stenosis by analyzing the associated adverse events. Methods: We pooled data from 2 prospective randomized controlled trials involving 220 patients (110 in each group) who underwent single-level lumbar surgery. Participants aged 20–80 years with radiating pain due to lumbar disc herniation or spinal stenosis were included in this study. Adverse events were recorded and analyzed over a 12-month follow-up period. Results: The overall adverse event rates were 9.1% (10 of 110) in the BESS group and 17.3% (19 of 110) in the MSS group, which were not statistically significantly different (p=0.133). Notably, wound dehiscence occurred in 8.2% of MSS cases but in none of the BESS cases. Both groups showed similarly low rates of complications, such as dural tears, epidural hematoma, and nerve root injury. The most common adverse event in the BESS group was recurrent disc herniation (2.7%), whereas that in the MSS group was wound dehiscence (8.2%). Conclusion BESS demonstrated a safety profile comparable to that of MSS for the treatment of lumbar disc herniation and spinal stenosis, with a trend towards fewer overall complications. BESS offers particular advantages in terms of reducing wound-related complications. These findings suggest that BESS is a safe alternative to conventional MSS and potentially offers the benefits of a minimally invasive approach without compromising patient safety.

Objective: To compare the safety profiles of biportal endoscopic spinal surgery (BESS) and microscopic spinal surgery (MSS) for lumbar disc herniation and spinal stenosis by analyzing the associated adverse events. Methods: We pooled data from 2 prospective randomized controlled trials involving 220 patients (110 in each group) who underwent single-level lumbar surgery. Participants aged 20–80 years with radiating pain due to lumbar disc herniation or spinal stenosis were included in this study. Adverse events were recorded and analyzed over a 12-month follow-up period. Results: The overall adverse event rates were 9.1% (10 of 110) in the BESS group and 17.3% (19 of 110) in the MSS group, which were not statistically significantly different (p=0.133). Notably, wound dehiscence occurred in 8.2% of MSS cases but in none of the BESS cases. Both groups showed similarly low rates of complications, such as dural tears, epidural hematoma, and nerve root injury. The most common adverse event in the BESS group was recurrent disc herniation (2.7%), whereas that in the MSS group was wound dehiscence (8.2%). Conclusion BESS demonstrated a safety profile comparable to that of MSS for the treatment of lumbar disc herniation and spinal stenosis, with a trend towards fewer overall complications. BESS offers particular advantages in terms of reducing wound-related complications. These findings suggest that BESS is a safe alternative to conventional MSS and potentially offers the benefits of a minimally invasive approach without compromising patient safety.

Although guidelines and protocols are available for central venous access, existing methods lack specificity and sensitivity, especially when placing peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs). We evaluated the feasibility of catheter detection in the right atrial cavity using transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) during PICC placement. Methods: This single-center, retrospective study included consecutive patients who underwent PICC placement between January 2022 and March 2023. TTE was performed to detect the arrival of the catheter in the right atrial cavity. Catheter misplacement was defined as an aberrant catheter position on chest x-ray (CXR). The primary endpoint was predicting catheter misplacement based on catheter detection in the right atrial cavity. The secondary endpoint was optimizing catheter placement and examining catheter-associated complications. Results: Of the 110 patients identified, 10 were excluded because of poor echogenicity and vein access failure. The remaining 100 patients underwent PICC placement with TTE. The catheter was visualized in the right atrial cavity in 90 patients. CXR exams revealed catheter misplacement in seven cases. Eight patients with catheter misplacement underwent the same procedure in the other arm. In two patients, PICC placement failed due to anatomical reasons. Catheter misplacement was detected using TTE with sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of 97% confidence interval (CI; 91.31%–99.36%), 90% CI (55.50%–99.75%), 99%, and 75%, respectively. Conclusions: TTE is a reliable tool for detecting catheter misplacement and optimizing catheter tip positioning during PICC placement.

Although guidelines and protocols are available for central venous access, existing methods lack specificity and sensitivity, especially when placing peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs). We evaluated the feasibility of catheter detection in the right atrial cavity using transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) during PICC placement. Methods: This single-center, retrospective study included consecutive patients who underwent PICC placement between January 2022 and March 2023. TTE was performed to detect the arrival of the catheter in the right atrial cavity. Catheter misplacement was defined as an aberrant catheter position on chest x-ray (CXR). The primary endpoint was predicting catheter misplacement based on catheter detection in the right atrial cavity. The secondary endpoint was optimizing catheter placement and examining catheter-associated complications. Results: Of the 110 patients identified, 10 were excluded because of poor echogenicity and vein access failure. The remaining 100 patients underwent PICC placement with TTE. The catheter was visualized in the right atrial cavity in 90 patients. CXR exams revealed catheter misplacement in seven cases. Eight patients with catheter misplacement underwent the same procedure in the other arm. In two patients, PICC placement failed due to anatomical reasons. Catheter misplacement was detected using TTE with sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of 97% confidence interval (CI; 91.31%–99.36%), 90% CI (55.50%–99.75%), 99%, and 75%, respectively. Conclusions: TTE is a reliable tool for detecting catheter misplacement and optimizing catheter tip positioning during PICC placement.

Although guidelines and protocols are available for central venous access, existing methods lack specificity and sensitivity, especially when placing peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs). We evaluated the feasibility of catheter detection in the right atrial cavity using transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) during PICC placement. Methods: This single-center, retrospective study included consecutive patients who underwent PICC placement between January 2022 and March 2023. TTE was performed to detect the arrival of the catheter in the right atrial cavity. Catheter misplacement was defined as an aberrant catheter position on chest x-ray (CXR). The primary endpoint was predicting catheter misplacement based on catheter detection in the right atrial cavity. The secondary endpoint was optimizing catheter placement and examining catheter-associated complications. Results: Of the 110 patients identified, 10 were excluded because of poor echogenicity and vein access failure. The remaining 100 patients underwent PICC placement with TTE. The catheter was visualized in the right atrial cavity in 90 patients. CXR exams revealed catheter misplacement in seven cases. Eight patients with catheter misplacement underwent the same procedure in the other arm. In two patients, PICC placement failed due to anatomical reasons. Catheter misplacement was detected using TTE with sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of 97% confidence interval (CI; 91.31%–99.36%), 90% CI (55.50%–99.75%), 99%, and 75%, respectively. Conclusions: TTE is a reliable tool for detecting catheter misplacement and optimizing catheter tip positioning during PICC placement.

Although guidelines and protocols are available for central venous access, existing methods lack specificity and sensitivity, especially when placing peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs). We evaluated the feasibility of catheter detection in the right atrial cavity using transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) during PICC placement. Methods: This single-center, retrospective study included consecutive patients who underwent PICC placement between January 2022 and March 2023. TTE was performed to detect the arrival of the catheter in the right atrial cavity. Catheter misplacement was defined as an aberrant catheter position on chest x-ray (CXR). The primary endpoint was predicting catheter misplacement based on catheter detection in the right atrial cavity. The secondary endpoint was optimizing catheter placement and examining catheter-associated complications. Results: Of the 110 patients identified, 10 were excluded because of poor echogenicity and vein access failure. The remaining 100 patients underwent PICC placement with TTE. The catheter was visualized in the right atrial cavity in 90 patients. CXR exams revealed catheter misplacement in seven cases. Eight patients with catheter misplacement underwent the same procedure in the other arm. In two patients, PICC placement failed due to anatomical reasons. Catheter misplacement was detected using TTE with sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of 97% confidence interval (CI; 91.31%–99.36%), 90% CI (55.50%–99.75%), 99%, and 75%, respectively. Conclusions: TTE is a reliable tool for detecting catheter misplacement and optimizing catheter tip positioning during PICC placement.

This research group (forensic research via omics markers in environmental health vulnerable areas: FROM) aimed to develop biomarkers for exposure to environmental hazards and diseases, assess environmental diseases, and apply and verify these biomarkers in environmentally vulnerable areas. Environmentally vulnerable areas—including refineries, abandoned metal mines, coal-fired power plants, waste incinerators, cement factories, and areas with high exposure to particulate matter—along with control areas, were selected for epidemiological investigations. A total of 1,157 adults, who had resided in these areas for over 10 years, were recruited between June 2021 and September 2023. Personal characteristics of the study participants were gathered through a survey. Biological samples, specifically blood and urine, were collected during the field investigations, separated under refrigerated conditions, and then transported to the laboratory for biomarker analysis. Analyses of heavy metals, environmental hazards, and adducts were conducted on these blood and urine samples. Additionally, omics analyses of epigenomes, proteomes, and metabolomes were performed using the blood samples. The biomarkers identified in this study will be utilized to assess the risk of environmental disease occurrence and to evaluate the impact on the health of residents in environmentally vulnerable areas, following the validation of diagnostic accuracy for these diseases.