Background and Objectives: Evidence remains limited on the real-world prescription of very low-dose oral anticoagulation among frail patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). We described the practice patterns, effectiveness, and safety of very low-dose edoxaban (15 mg once daily). Methods: Patients with AF prescribed edoxaban 15 mg once daily in 2 tertiary hospitals between 2016 and September 2022 were included. Baseline clinical characteristics and clinical outcomes of interest were thromboembolic and bleeding events. Results: A total of 674 patients were included (mean age 78.3±9.1, 49.7% aged ≥80 years, 49.3% women, median follow-up 1.0±1.2 years). Mean CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc score was 3.9±1.6, and the modified HAS-BLED score was 2.0±1.1. Between 2016 and 2022, the number of very lowdose edoxaban prescriptions increased. The main reasons for the prescription of very lowdose were low body weight (55.5% below 60 kg), anaemia (62.8%), chronic kidney disease (40.2%), active cancer (15.3%), concomitant anti-platelet use (26.7%), and prior major bleeding (19.7%). During a median follow-up duration of 8 (interquartile range 3–16) months, overall thromboembolic and bleeding events occurred in 16 (2.3%) and 88 (13.1%) patients, respectively. Compared to the expected event rates on the established risk scoring systems, patients receiving very low-dose edoxaban demonstrated a 61% reduction in ischemic stroke, a 68% reduction of ischemic stroke/transient ischemic attack/systemic embolism, whereas a 49% increase in major bleeding. Conclusions The prescription of very low-dose edoxaban was increased over time, attributable to various clinical factors. The use of very low-dose edoxaban reduced the expected risk of thromboembolic events.

Background and Objectives: Evidence remains limited on the real-world prescription of very low-dose oral anticoagulation among frail patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). We described the practice patterns, effectiveness, and safety of very low-dose edoxaban (15 mg once daily). Methods: Patients with AF prescribed edoxaban 15 mg once daily in 2 tertiary hospitals between 2016 and September 2022 were included. Baseline clinical characteristics and clinical outcomes of interest were thromboembolic and bleeding events. Results: A total of 674 patients were included (mean age 78.3±9.1, 49.7% aged ≥80 years, 49.3% women, median follow-up 1.0±1.2 years). Mean CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc score was 3.9±1.6, and the modified HAS-BLED score was 2.0±1.1. Between 2016 and 2022, the number of very lowdose edoxaban prescriptions increased. The main reasons for the prescription of very lowdose were low body weight (55.5% below 60 kg), anaemia (62.8%), chronic kidney disease (40.2%), active cancer (15.3%), concomitant anti-platelet use (26.7%), and prior major bleeding (19.7%). During a median follow-up duration of 8 (interquartile range 3–16) months, overall thromboembolic and bleeding events occurred in 16 (2.3%) and 88 (13.1%) patients, respectively. Compared to the expected event rates on the established risk scoring systems, patients receiving very low-dose edoxaban demonstrated a 61% reduction in ischemic stroke, a 68% reduction of ischemic stroke/transient ischemic attack/systemic embolism, whereas a 49% increase in major bleeding. Conclusions The prescription of very low-dose edoxaban was increased over time, attributable to various clinical factors. The use of very low-dose edoxaban reduced the expected risk of thromboembolic events.

Background/Aims: Early diagnosis of esophageal cancer (EC) remains challenging despite the increasing frequency of endoscopic screenings globally. The rapidly increasing number of endoscopic screenings performed over a certain period might influence diagnostic performance. This study evaluated the association between the number of endoscopic screenings and EC detection rates in a nationwide cohort. Methods: This retrospective population-based study used the Korean National Cancer Screening Program database, comprising 32,774,742 males and females aged ≥40 years between 2015and 2019. Negative binomial regression model and least-squares mean evaluation were used to assess the association between month of the year and EC detection rates. Results: This study enrolled 28,032,590 participants who underwent upper endoscopy. The number of participants in the fourth quarter (October to December: 10,923,142 [39.0%]) was 2.1 times higher than that in the first quarter (January to March: 5,085,087 [18.1%]); this trend continued for all 5 years. Contrarily, detection rates for EC in the fourth quarter (0.08/1,000 person) were half that in the first quarter (0.15/1,000 person). The odds of detecting EC were lowest in November; in 2015 the odds were 0.57 (95% confidence interval, 0.41 to 0.79; p=0.001) times lower and in 2016, they were 0.51 (95% confidence interval, 0.37 to 0.68; p<0.001) times lower compared to January. The predicted detection rates showed a decreasing trend toward the end of the year (p>0.05 for all). Conclusions The workload of endoscopists increased excessively with the rising number of endoscopies toward the end of the year, which was reflected by the decreased EC detection rates during this period.

Background/Aims: Although the urea breath test (UBT) is widely used as a representative monitoring test after Helicobacter pylori eradication, false-negative results can occur because of the gray zone related to its cutoff value. This study aimed to compare the diagnostic performances of the rapid urease test (RUT), the RUT with sweeping method, and the UBT, and to investigate the role of the sweeping method in the gray zone of UBT values. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 216 patients who received standard first-line H. pylori eradication treatments (n=216). All participants underwent to testing using the sweeping method and UBT on the same day. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy were analyzed to compare the two methods. Results: The sensitivity (0.537 vs 0.806, p=0.002) and accuracy (0.843 vs 0.870, p=0.026) of the UBT were inferior to those of the sweeping method. A total of 31 individuals tested positive for H. pylori according to the UBT, whereas 54 individuals tested positive according to the sweeping method. In the group for which the gold standard definition indicated H. pylori positivity but UBT results were negative (n=31), all individuals had a UBT value under 2.5‰. In the multivariate logistic regression model, a UBT value of 1.4‰ to 2.5‰ increased the risk of false-negative results by 6.5 times (odds ratio, 6.5; 95% confidence interval, 2.077 to 20.288; p=0.001). Conclusions After H. pylori eradication, false-negative results can occur for individuals undergoing the UBT, primarily for values below the UBT cutoff. The RUT with the sweeping method can potentially help detect H. pylori in the gray zone of the UBT, improving diagnostic accuracy.

Background/Aims: Early diagnosis of esophageal cancer (EC) remains challenging despite the increasing frequency of endoscopic screenings globally. The rapidly increasing number of endoscopic screenings performed over a certain period might influence diagnostic performance. This study evaluated the association between the number of endoscopic screenings and EC detection rates in a nationwide cohort. Methods: This retrospective population-based study used the Korean National Cancer Screening Program database, comprising 32,774,742 males and females aged ≥40 years between 2015and 2019. Negative binomial regression model and least-squares mean evaluation were used to assess the association between month of the year and EC detection rates. Results: This study enrolled 28,032,590 participants who underwent upper endoscopy. The number of participants in the fourth quarter (October to December: 10,923,142 [39.0%]) was 2.1 times higher than that in the first quarter (January to March: 5,085,087 [18.1%]); this trend continued for all 5 years. Contrarily, detection rates for EC in the fourth quarter (0.08/1,000 person) were half that in the first quarter (0.15/1,000 person). The odds of detecting EC were lowest in November; in 2015 the odds were 0.57 (95% confidence interval, 0.41 to 0.79; p=0.001) times lower and in 2016, they were 0.51 (95% confidence interval, 0.37 to 0.68; p<0.001) times lower compared to January. The predicted detection rates showed a decreasing trend toward the end of the year (p>0.05 for all). Conclusions The workload of endoscopists increased excessively with the rising number of endoscopies toward the end of the year, which was reflected by the decreased EC detection rates during this period.

Background/Aims: Although the urea breath test (UBT) is widely used as a representative monitoring test after Helicobacter pylori eradication, false-negative results can occur because of the gray zone related to its cutoff value. This study aimed to compare the diagnostic performances of the rapid urease test (RUT), the RUT with sweeping method, and the UBT, and to investigate the role of the sweeping method in the gray zone of UBT values. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 216 patients who received standard first-line H. pylori eradication treatments (n=216). All participants underwent to testing using the sweeping method and UBT on the same day. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy were analyzed to compare the two methods. Results: The sensitivity (0.537 vs 0.806, p=0.002) and accuracy (0.843 vs 0.870, p=0.026) of the UBT were inferior to those of the sweeping method. A total of 31 individuals tested positive for H. pylori according to the UBT, whereas 54 individuals tested positive according to the sweeping method. In the group for which the gold standard definition indicated H. pylori positivity but UBT results were negative (n=31), all individuals had a UBT value under 2.5‰. In the multivariate logistic regression model, a UBT value of 1.4‰ to 2.5‰ increased the risk of false-negative results by 6.5 times (odds ratio, 6.5; 95% confidence interval, 2.077 to 20.288; p=0.001). Conclusions After H. pylori eradication, false-negative results can occur for individuals undergoing the UBT, primarily for values below the UBT cutoff. The RUT with the sweeping method can potentially help detect H. pylori in the gray zone of the UBT, improving diagnostic accuracy.

Background/Aims: Early diagnosis of esophageal cancer (EC) remains challenging despite the increasing frequency of endoscopic screenings globally. The rapidly increasing number of endoscopic screenings performed over a certain period might influence diagnostic performance. This study evaluated the association between the number of endoscopic screenings and EC detection rates in a nationwide cohort. Methods: This retrospective population-based study used the Korean National Cancer Screening Program database, comprising 32,774,742 males and females aged ≥40 years between 2015and 2019. Negative binomial regression model and least-squares mean evaluation were used to assess the association between month of the year and EC detection rates. Results: This study enrolled 28,032,590 participants who underwent upper endoscopy. The number of participants in the fourth quarter (October to December: 10,923,142 [39.0%]) was 2.1 times higher than that in the first quarter (January to March: 5,085,087 [18.1%]); this trend continued for all 5 years. Contrarily, detection rates for EC in the fourth quarter (0.08/1,000 person) were half that in the first quarter (0.15/1,000 person). The odds of detecting EC were lowest in November; in 2015 the odds were 0.57 (95% confidence interval, 0.41 to 0.79; p=0.001) times lower and in 2016, they were 0.51 (95% confidence interval, 0.37 to 0.68; p<0.001) times lower compared to January. The predicted detection rates showed a decreasing trend toward the end of the year (p>0.05 for all). Conclusions The workload of endoscopists increased excessively with the rising number of endoscopies toward the end of the year, which was reflected by the decreased EC detection rates during this period.

Background/Aims: Although the urea breath test (UBT) is widely used as a representative monitoring test after Helicobacter pylori eradication, false-negative results can occur because of the gray zone related to its cutoff value. This study aimed to compare the diagnostic performances of the rapid urease test (RUT), the RUT with sweeping method, and the UBT, and to investigate the role of the sweeping method in the gray zone of UBT values. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 216 patients who received standard first-line H. pylori eradication treatments (n=216). All participants underwent to testing using the sweeping method and UBT on the same day. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy were analyzed to compare the two methods. Results: The sensitivity (0.537 vs 0.806, p=0.002) and accuracy (0.843 vs 0.870, p=0.026) of the UBT were inferior to those of the sweeping method. A total of 31 individuals tested positive for H. pylori according to the UBT, whereas 54 individuals tested positive according to the sweeping method. In the group for which the gold standard definition indicated H. pylori positivity but UBT results were negative (n=31), all individuals had a UBT value under 2.5‰. In the multivariate logistic regression model, a UBT value of 1.4‰ to 2.5‰ increased the risk of false-negative results by 6.5 times (odds ratio, 6.5; 95% confidence interval, 2.077 to 20.288; p=0.001). Conclusions After H. pylori eradication, false-negative results can occur for individuals undergoing the UBT, primarily for values below the UBT cutoff. The RUT with the sweeping method can potentially help detect H. pylori in the gray zone of the UBT, improving diagnostic accuracy.