Background/Aims: H2 receptor antagonists (H2RA) have been used to treat gastritis by inhibiting gastric acid. Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are more potent acid suppressants than H2RA.However, the efficacy and safety of low-dose PPI for treating gastritis remain unclear. The aim was to investigate the efficacy and safety of low-dose PPI for treating gastritis. Methods: A double-blind, noninferiority, multicenter, phase 3 clinical trial randomly assigned 476 patients with endoscopic erosive gastritis to a group using esomeprazole 10 mg (DW1903) daily and a group using famotidine 20 mg (DW1903R1) daily for 2 weeks. The full-analysis set included 319 patients (DW1903, n=159; DW1903R1, n=160) and the per-protocol set included 298 patients (DW1903, n=147; DW1903R1, n=151). The primary endpoint (erosion improvement rate) and secondary endpoint (erosion and edema cure rates, improvement rates of hemorrhage, erythema, and symptoms) were assessed after the treatment. Adverse events were compared. Results: According to the full-analysis set, the erosion improvement rates in the DW1903 and DW1903R1 groups were 59.8% and 58.8%, respectively. According to the per-protocol analysis, the erosion improvement rates in the DW1903 and DW1903R1 groups were 61.9% and 59.6%, respectively. Secondary endpoints were not significantly different between two groups except that the hemorrhagic improvement rate was higher in DW1903 with statistical tendency. The number of adverse events were not statistically different. Conclusions DW1903 of a low-dose PPI was not inferior to DW1903R1 of H2RA. Thus, lowdose PPI can be a novel option for treating gastritis (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05163756).

Objective: Vulnerability to internet gaming disorder (IGD) has increased as internet gaming continues to grow. Cocaine- and amphetamine-regulated transcript (CART) is a hormone that plays a role in reward, anxiety, and stress. The purpose of this study was to identify the role of CART in the pathophysiology of IGD. Methods: The serum CART levels were measured by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay, and the associations of the serum CART level with psychological variables were analyzed in patients with IGD (n=31) and healthy controls (HC) (n=42). Results: The serum CART level was significantly lower in the IGD than HC group. The IGD group scored significantly higher than the HC group on the psychological domains of depression, anxiety, the reward response in the Behavioral Activation System and Behavioral Inhibition System. There were no significant correlations between serum CART level and other psychological variables in the IGD group. Conclusion Our results indicate that a decrease in the expression of the serum CART level is associated with the vulnerability of developing IGD. This study supports the possibility that CART is a biomarker in the pathophysiology of IGD.

Objective: This study was performed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of lurasidone (160 mg/day) compared to quetiapine XR (QXR; 600 mg/day) in the treatment of acutely psychotic patients with schizophrenia. Methods: Patients were randomly assigned to 6 weeks of double-blind treatment with lurasidone 160 mg/day (n=105) or QXR 600 mg/day (n=105). Primary efficacy measure was the change from baseline to week 6 in Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) total score and Clinical Global Impressions severity (CGI-S) score. Adverse events, body measurements, and laboratory parameters were assessed. Results: Lurasidone demonstrated non-inferiority to QXR on the PANSS total score. Adjusted mean±standard error change at week 6 on the PANSS total score was -26.42±2.02 and -27.33±2.01 in the lurasidone and QXR group, respectively. The mean difference score was -0.91 (95% confidence interval -6.35–4.53). The lurasidone group showed a greater reduction in PANSS total and negative subscale on week 1 and a greater reduction in end-point CGI-S score compared to the QXR group. Body weight, body mass index, and waist circumference in the lurasidone group were reduced, with significantly lower mean change compared to QXR. Endpoint changes in glucose, cholesterol, triglycerides, and low-density lipoprotein levels were also significantly lower. The most common adverse drug reactions with lurasidone were akathisia and nausea. Conclusion Lurasidone 160 mg/day was found to be non-inferior to QXR 600 mg/day in the treatment of schizophrenia with comparable efficacy and tolerability. Adverse effects of lurasidone were generally tolerable, and beneficial effects on metabolic parameters can be expected.

Objective: This study aimed to explore the characteristics and factors related to changes in cognitive function in vulnerable individuals with cognitive impairment during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Methods: Among patients who visited a local university hospital with subjective cognitive complaints, those who had been tested for cognitive function at least once after the onset of COVID-19 and tested regularly at least three times within the last 5 years were included (1st, the initial screening; 2nd, the test immediately before the COVID-19 pandemic; 3rd, the most recent test after the pandemic). Finally, 108 patients were included in this study. They were divided into groups according to whether the Clinical Dementia Rating (CDR) was maintained/improved and deteriorated. We investigated the characteristics of the changes in cognitive function and related factors during COVID-19. Results: When comparing CDR changes before and after COVID-19, there was no significant difference between the two groups (p=0.317). Alternatively, the main effect of the time when the test was conducted was significant (p<0.001). There was also a significant difference in the interaction between the groups and time. When the effect of the interaction was analyzed, the CDR score of the maintained/ improved group significantly decreased before COVID-19 (1st–2nd) (p=0.045). After COVID-19 (2nd–3rd), the CDR score of the deteriorated group was significantly higher than that of the maintained/improved group (p<0.001). Mini-Mental State Examination recall memory and changes in activity during COVID-19 were significantly associated with CDR deterioration. Conclusion Memory dysfunction and decreased activity during the COVID-19 pandemic are strongly related to the deterioration of cognitive impairment.

Background: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has caused the death of thousands of patients worldwide. Although age is known to be a risk factor for morbidity and mortality in COVID-19 patients, critical illness or death is occurring even in the younger age group as the epidemic spreads. In early 2022, omicron became the dominant variant of the COVID-19 virus in South Korea, and the epidemic proceeded on a large scale. Accordingly, this study aimed to determine whether young adults (aged ≤ 50 years) with critical COVID-19 infection during the omicron period had different characteristics from older patients and to determine the risk factors for mortality in this specific age group. Methods: We evaluated 213 critical adult patients (high flow nasal cannula or higher respiratory support) hospitalized for polymerase chain reaction-confirmed COVID-19 in nine hospitals in South Korea between February 1, 2022 and April 30, 2022. Demographic characteristics, including body mass index (BMI) and vaccination status; underlying diseases; clinical features and laboratory findings; clinical course; treatment received; and outcomes were collected from electronic medical records (EMRs) and analyzed according to age and mortality. Results: Overall, 71 critically ill patients aged ≤ 50 years were enrolled, and 142 critically ill patients aged over 50 years were selected through 1:2 matching based on the date of diagnosis. The most frequent underlying diseases among those aged ≤ 50 years were diabetes and hypertension, and all 14 patients who died had either a BMI ≥ 25 kg/m 2 or an underlying disease. The total case fatality rate among severe patients (S-CFR) was 31.0%, and the S-CFR differed according to age and was higher than that during the delta period. The S-CFR was 19.7% for those aged ≤ 50 years, 36.6% for those aged > 50 years, and 38.1% for those aged ≥ 65 years. In multivariate analysis, age (odds ratio [OR], 1.084; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.043–1.127), initial low-density lipoprotein > 600 IU/L (OR, 4.782; 95% CI, 1.584–14.434), initial C-reactive protein > 8 mg/dL (OR, 2.940; 95% CI, 1.042–8.293), highest aspartate aminotransferase > 200 IU/L (OR, 12.931; 95% CI, 1.691–98.908), and mechanical ventilation implementation (OR, 3.671; 95% CI, 1.294–10.420) were significant independent predictors of mortality in critical COVID-19 patients during the omicron wave. A similar pattern was shown when analyzing the data by age group, but most had no statistical significance owing to the small number of deaths in the young critical group. Although the vaccination completion rate of all the patients (31.0%) was higher than that in the delta wave period (13.6%), it was still lower than that of the general population. Further, only 15 (21.1%) critically ill patients aged ≤ 50 years were fully vaccinated. Overall, the severity of hospitalized critical patients was significantly higher than that in the delta period, indicating that it was difficult to find common risk factors in the two periods only with a simple comparison. Conclusion Overall, the S-CFR of critically ill COVID-19 patients in the omicron period was higher than that in the delta period, especially in those aged ≤ 50 years. All of the patients who died had an underlying disease or obesity. In the same population, the vaccination rate was very low compared to that in the delta wave, indicating that non-vaccination significantly affected the progression to critical illness. Notably, there was a lack of prescription for Paxlovid for these patients although they satisfied the prescription criteria. Early diagnosis and active initial treatment was necessary, along with the proven methods of vaccination and personal hygiene. Further studies are needed to determine how each variant affects critically ill patients.

Objective: Dysphagia is a common clinical condition characterized by difficulty in swallowing. It is sub-classified into oropharyngeal dysphagia, which refers to problems in the mouth and pharynx, and esophageal dysphagia, which refers to problems in the esophageal body and esophagogastric junction. Dysphagia can have a significant negative impact one’s physical health and quality of life as its severity increases. Therefore, proper assessment and management of dysphagia are critical for improving swallowing function and preventing complications. Thus a guideline was developed to provide evidence-based recommendations for assessment and management in patients with dysphagia. Methods: Nineteen key questions on dysphagia were developed. These questions dealt with various aspects of problems related to dysphagia, including assessment, management, and complications. A literature search for relevant articles was conducted using Pubmed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and one domestic database of KoreaMed, until April 2021. The level of evidence and recommendation grade were established according to the Grading of Recommendation Assessment, Development and Evaluation methodology. Results: Early screening and assessment of videofluoroscopic swallowing were recommended for assessing the presence of dysphagia. Therapeutic methods, such as tongue and pharyngeal muscle strengthening exercises and neuromuscular electrical stimulation with swallowing therapy, were effective in improving swallowing function and quality of life in patients with dysphagia. Nutritional intervention and an oral care program were also recommended. Conclusion This guideline presents recommendations for the assessment and management of patients with oropharyngeal dysphagia, including rehabilitative strategies.

While the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic is ongoing, monkeypox has been rapidly spreading in non-endemic countries since May 2022. Accurate and rapid laboratory tests are essential for identifying and controlling monkeypox. Korean Society for Laboratory Medicine and the Korea Disease Prevention and Control Agency have proposed guidelines for diagnosing monkeypox in clinical laboratories in Korea. These guidelines cover the type of tests, selection of specimens, collection of specimens, diagnostic methods, interpretation of test results, and biosafety. Molecular tests are recommended as confirmatory tests. Skin lesion specimens are recommended for testing in the symptomatic stage, and the collection of both blood and oropharyngeal swabs is recommended in the presymptomatic or prodromal stage.

Background/Aims: The eradication success rate of Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) infection with a first-line standard triple therapy (STT) has been decreasing in Korea. However, treatment outcomes of H. pylori infection in Yeongdong, Gangwon Province have been scarcely reported. This study aimed to investigate the treatment outcomes of H. pylori infection in a single tertiary care hospital with regional characteristics. Materials and Methods: From July 2018 to June 2019, a total of 592 patients who underwent STT consisting of a proton pump inhibitor, amoxicillin, and clarithromycin for 7 to 14 days as a first-line H. pylori eradication therapy were included. Demographic data and treatment outcomes were retrospectively reviewed using medical records. Results: The median age of 592 patients was 58 years (range 23 to 86) and 329 patients (55.6%) were men. The indication for eradication therapy included chronic atrophic gastritis (57.9%), peptic ulcer disease (19.6%), and gastric neoplasm after endoscopic resection (5.9%). Most patients (92.2%) received a 7-day course of STT. Eradication rate of STT was 64.0% (379/592). Rescue therapy was performed in 146 patients, and the final eradication rate reached 85.6% (507/592). Conclusions Eradication rate of STT in Yeongdong area of Gangwon Province was unsatisfactory, warranting the consideration of a first-line eradication regimen other than STT.

Background: Numerous patients around the globe are dying from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). While age is a known risk factor, risk analysis in the young generation is lacking. The present study aimed to evaluate the clinical features and mortality risk factors in younger patients (≤ 50 years) with a critical case of COVID-19 in comparison with those among older patients (> 50 years) in Korea. Methods: We analyzed the data of adult patients only in critical condition (requiring high flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy or higher respiratory support) hospitalized with PCR-confirmed COVID-19 at 11 hospitals in Korea from July 1, 2021 to November 30, 2021 when the delta variant was a dominant strain. Patients’ electronic medical records were reviewed to identify clinical characteristics. Results: During the study period, 448 patients were enrolled. One hundred and forty-two were aged 50 years or younger (the younger group), while 306 were above 50 years of age (the older group). The most common pre-existing conditions in the younger group were diabetes mellitus and hypertension, and 69.7% of the patients had a body mass index (BMI) > 25 kg/m 2 .Of 142 younger patients, 31 of 142 patients (21.8%, 19 women) did not have these pre-existing conditions. The overall case fatality rate among severity cases was 21.0%, and it differed according to age: 5.6% (n = 8/142) in the younger group, 28.1% in the older group, and 38% in the ≥ 65 years group. Age (odds ratio [OR], 7.902; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.754–18.181), mechanical ventilation therapy (OR, 17.233; 95% CI, 8.439–35.192), highest creatinine > 1.5 mg/dL (OR, 17.631; 95% CI, 8.321–37.357), and combined blood stream infection (OR, 7.092;95% CI, 1.061–18.181) were identified as independent predictors of mortality in total patients.Similar patterns were observed in age-specific analyses, but most results were statistically insignificant in multivariate analysis due to the low number of deaths in the younger group.The full vaccination rate was very low among study population (13.6%), and only three patients were fully vaccinated, with none of the patients who died having been fully vaccinated in the younger group. Seven of eight patients who died had a pre-existing condition or were obese (BMI > 25 kg/m 2 ), and the one remaining patient died from a secondary infection. Conclusion About 22% of the patients in the young critical group did not have an underlying disease or obesity, but the rate of obesity (BMI > 25 kg/m2 ) was high, with a fatality rate of 5.6%. The full vaccination rate was extremely low compared to the general population of the same age group, showing that non-vaccination has a grave impact on the progression of COVID-19 to a critical condition. The findings of this study highlight the need for measures to prevent critical progression of COVID-19, such as vaccinations and targeting young adults especially having risk factors.

Background: This study aimed to present the surgical facilitation of neurovascular bundle (NVB) sparing using the toggling technique (30° lens down/up switching) and to evaluate erectile dysfunction (ED) recovery after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP). Methods: We assessed 144 patients (group with toggling, n = 72; group without toggling, n = 72) who underwent RARP with bilateral NVB sparing using propensity score matching.Inclusion criteria were ≥ 1 year follow-up and preoperative potency as per the Sexual Health Inventory for Men (SHIM) questionnaire (≥ 17 points). Recovery of ED after RARP was defined as return to baseline sexual function or self-assessment regarding successful intercourse. The subjective surgeon’s nerve sparing (SNS) score and tunneling success rates were used to evaluate surgical facilitation. The recovery rate of ED between the groups was analyzed using Kaplan-Meier analysis. Results: A better ED recovery trend was confirmed according to the SNS score (R 2 = 0.142, P = 0.004). In the analysis of NVB sparing ease, the toggling group showed higher SNS scores (on right/left side: P = 0.011 and < 0.001, respectively) and overall tunneling success rates (87% vs. 74%, P = 0.001) than the group without toggling. Overall, ED recovery rates were 82% (59/72) and 75% (54/72) in the groups with and without toggling, respectively, at the 1-year follow-up (P = 0.047), and the toggling group showed a faster ED recovery rate at 3 months (47% vs. 35%, P = 0.013). In a specific analysis of the potent cohort (< 60 years, bilateral full NVB spared, SHIM score ≥ 22), the ED recovery rate reached 87% (14/16) in the toggling group. Conclusion The retrograde early release with the toggling technique improves the facilitation of NVB sparing, leading to improved ED recovery.