Background and Objectives: Among various emerging catheter-based treatments for severe tricuspid regurgitation (TR), the spacer device can reduce the regurgitation orifice without manipulating the valve leaflet. However, its clinical application has been hampered by traumatic anchoring to the myocardium and the coaxial alignment of the balloon resulting in insufficient TR reduction. This study aimed to evaluate the early-stage safety, technical feasibility, and preliminary efficacy of the novel atraumatic vertical spacer in patients with isolated severe TR. Methods: All procedures were guided by fluoroscopy and transthoracic echocardiography.The maximum device placement time with an inflated balloon was 24 hours. Changes in the amount of TR, right ventricular function, and patient hemodynamics were measured during balloon deployment. Results: A total of 7 patients (median age 74), underwent successful device implantation without procedure-related complications. During balloon inflation (median 25 minutes), there were no symptoms or signs indicative of TR intolerance. TR was reduced by 1 grade or greater in all patients, with 2 patients exhibiting a reduction of 3 grades, from torrential TR to a moderate degree. Mild TR after balloon inflation was achieved in 3 patients with baseline severe TR. The TR reduction observed during initial balloon deployment was sustained during the subsequent balloon maintenance period. Conclusions The Pivot-balloon procedure was safe, technically feasible, and effective in reducing TR in patients with severe TR. No periprocedural complications or adverse cardiovascular events were reported during device placement with TR reduction observed in all patients. However, longer-term follow-up is needed to confirm safety and treatment effect.

Background and Objectives: Among various emerging catheter-based treatments for severe tricuspid regurgitation (TR), the spacer device can reduce the regurgitation orifice without manipulating the valve leaflet. However, its clinical application has been hampered by traumatic anchoring to the myocardium and the coaxial alignment of the balloon resulting in insufficient TR reduction. This study aimed to evaluate the early-stage safety, technical feasibility, and preliminary efficacy of the novel atraumatic vertical spacer in patients with isolated severe TR. Methods: All procedures were guided by fluoroscopy and transthoracic echocardiography.The maximum device placement time with an inflated balloon was 24 hours. Changes in the amount of TR, right ventricular function, and patient hemodynamics were measured during balloon deployment. Results: A total of 7 patients (median age 74), underwent successful device implantation without procedure-related complications. During balloon inflation (median 25 minutes), there were no symptoms or signs indicative of TR intolerance. TR was reduced by 1 grade or greater in all patients, with 2 patients exhibiting a reduction of 3 grades, from torrential TR to a moderate degree. Mild TR after balloon inflation was achieved in 3 patients with baseline severe TR. The TR reduction observed during initial balloon deployment was sustained during the subsequent balloon maintenance period. Conclusions The Pivot-balloon procedure was safe, technically feasible, and effective in reducing TR in patients with severe TR. No periprocedural complications or adverse cardiovascular events were reported during device placement with TR reduction observed in all patients. However, longer-term follow-up is needed to confirm safety and treatment effect.

Background and Objectives: Among various emerging catheter-based treatments for severe tricuspid regurgitation (TR), the spacer device can reduce the regurgitation orifice without manipulating the valve leaflet. However, its clinical application has been hampered by traumatic anchoring to the myocardium and the coaxial alignment of the balloon resulting in insufficient TR reduction. This study aimed to evaluate the early-stage safety, technical feasibility, and preliminary efficacy of the novel atraumatic vertical spacer in patients with isolated severe TR. Methods: All procedures were guided by fluoroscopy and transthoracic echocardiography.The maximum device placement time with an inflated balloon was 24 hours. Changes in the amount of TR, right ventricular function, and patient hemodynamics were measured during balloon deployment. Results: A total of 7 patients (median age 74), underwent successful device implantation without procedure-related complications. During balloon inflation (median 25 minutes), there were no symptoms or signs indicative of TR intolerance. TR was reduced by 1 grade or greater in all patients, with 2 patients exhibiting a reduction of 3 grades, from torrential TR to a moderate degree. Mild TR after balloon inflation was achieved in 3 patients with baseline severe TR. The TR reduction observed during initial balloon deployment was sustained during the subsequent balloon maintenance period. Conclusions The Pivot-balloon procedure was safe, technically feasible, and effective in reducing TR in patients with severe TR. No periprocedural complications or adverse cardiovascular events were reported during device placement with TR reduction observed in all patients. However, longer-term follow-up is needed to confirm safety and treatment effect.

Background and Objectives: Among various emerging catheter-based treatments for severe tricuspid regurgitation (TR), the spacer device can reduce the regurgitation orifice without manipulating the valve leaflet. However, its clinical application has been hampered by traumatic anchoring to the myocardium and the coaxial alignment of the balloon resulting in insufficient TR reduction. This study aimed to evaluate the early-stage safety, technical feasibility, and preliminary efficacy of the novel atraumatic vertical spacer in patients with isolated severe TR. Methods: All procedures were guided by fluoroscopy and transthoracic echocardiography.The maximum device placement time with an inflated balloon was 24 hours. Changes in the amount of TR, right ventricular function, and patient hemodynamics were measured during balloon deployment. Results: A total of 7 patients (median age 74), underwent successful device implantation without procedure-related complications. During balloon inflation (median 25 minutes), there were no symptoms or signs indicative of TR intolerance. TR was reduced by 1 grade or greater in all patients, with 2 patients exhibiting a reduction of 3 grades, from torrential TR to a moderate degree. Mild TR after balloon inflation was achieved in 3 patients with baseline severe TR. The TR reduction observed during initial balloon deployment was sustained during the subsequent balloon maintenance period. Conclusions The Pivot-balloon procedure was safe, technically feasible, and effective in reducing TR in patients with severe TR. No periprocedural complications or adverse cardiovascular events were reported during device placement with TR reduction observed in all patients. However, longer-term follow-up is needed to confirm safety and treatment effect.

Women with endometriosis often experience diminished ovarian reserve and a decreased number of oocytes retrieved. This reduction is exacerbated after surgery. Nevertheless, oocyte quality does not seem to be compromised in these patients. When embryos of good quality are obtained, in vitro fertilization outcomes are generally satisfactory. Oocyte cryopreservation may represent a fertility preservation option for women with planned and/or prior surgery, as it enables the collection of oocytes in advance. Given the diverse manifestations of endometriosis, which vary by type, age, and ovarian reserve, the decision to pursue oocyte cryopreservation should be weighed individually. Moreover, the potential benefits of this approach on future fertility must be carefully considered. Considering current guidelines, the most appropriate candidates for oocyte cryopreservation among women with endometriosis are: patients with bilateral endometriomas, typically larger than 3 cm; those with prior surgery for unilateral endometrioma who exhibit ipsilateral or contralateral recurrence; and those with unilateral endometrioma on a single ovary. However, the size criteria for endometrioma warrant further discussion. Conversely, oocyte cryopreservation is inadvisable for patients: with unilateral endometrioma smaller than 3 cm and good ovarian reserve; who have undergone surgery for bilateral endometriomas, regardless of recurrence; and who have diminished ovarian reserve. While consensus indicates that decisions regarding diminished ovarian reserve should be individualized, fertility preservation should often be considered for patients with serum anti-Müllerian hormone levels below 0.5 ng/mL. In such cases, a prolonged duration may be necessary to retrieve the desired 10 to 15 oocytes.

Women with endometriosis often experience diminished ovarian reserve and a decreased number of oocytes retrieved. This reduction is exacerbated after surgery. Nevertheless, oocyte quality does not seem to be compromised in these patients. When embryos of good quality are obtained, in vitro fertilization outcomes are generally satisfactory. Oocyte cryopreservation may represent a fertility preservation option for women with planned and/or prior surgery, as it enables the collection of oocytes in advance. Given the diverse manifestations of endometriosis, which vary by type, age, and ovarian reserve, the decision to pursue oocyte cryopreservation should be weighed individually. Moreover, the potential benefits of this approach on future fertility must be carefully considered. Considering current guidelines, the most appropriate candidates for oocyte cryopreservation among women with endometriosis are: patients with bilateral endometriomas, typically larger than 3 cm; those with prior surgery for unilateral endometrioma who exhibit ipsilateral or contralateral recurrence; and those with unilateral endometrioma on a single ovary. However, the size criteria for endometrioma warrant further discussion. Conversely, oocyte cryopreservation is inadvisable for patients: with unilateral endometrioma smaller than 3 cm and good ovarian reserve; who have undergone surgery for bilateral endometriomas, regardless of recurrence; and who have diminished ovarian reserve. While consensus indicates that decisions regarding diminished ovarian reserve should be individualized, fertility preservation should often be considered for patients with serum anti-Müllerian hormone levels below 0.5 ng/mL. In such cases, a prolonged duration may be necessary to retrieve the desired 10 to 15 oocytes.

Women with endometriosis often experience diminished ovarian reserve and a decreased number of oocytes retrieved. This reduction is exacerbated after surgery. Nevertheless, oocyte quality does not seem to be compromised in these patients. When embryos of good quality are obtained, in vitro fertilization outcomes are generally satisfactory. Oocyte cryopreservation may represent a fertility preservation option for women with planned and/or prior surgery, as it enables the collection of oocytes in advance. Given the diverse manifestations of endometriosis, which vary by type, age, and ovarian reserve, the decision to pursue oocyte cryopreservation should be weighed individually. Moreover, the potential benefits of this approach on future fertility must be carefully considered. Considering current guidelines, the most appropriate candidates for oocyte cryopreservation among women with endometriosis are: patients with bilateral endometriomas, typically larger than 3 cm; those with prior surgery for unilateral endometrioma who exhibit ipsilateral or contralateral recurrence; and those with unilateral endometrioma on a single ovary. However, the size criteria for endometrioma warrant further discussion. Conversely, oocyte cryopreservation is inadvisable for patients: with unilateral endometrioma smaller than 3 cm and good ovarian reserve; who have undergone surgery for bilateral endometriomas, regardless of recurrence; and who have diminished ovarian reserve. While consensus indicates that decisions regarding diminished ovarian reserve should be individualized, fertility preservation should often be considered for patients with serum anti-Müllerian hormone levels below 0.5 ng/mL. In such cases, a prolonged duration may be necessary to retrieve the desired 10 to 15 oocytes.

Background: s/Aims: Reported incidence of extrahepatic bile duct cancer is higher in Asians than in Western populations. Korea, in particular, is one of the countries with the highest incidence rates of extrahepatic bile duct cancer in the world. Although research and innovative therapeutic modalities for extrahepatic bile duct cancer are emerging, clinical guidelines are currently unavailable in Korea. The Korean Society of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic Surgery in collaboration with related societies (Korean Pancreatic and Biliary Surgery Society, Korean Society of Abdominal Radiology, Korean Society of Medical Oncology, Korean Society of Radiation Oncology, Korean Society of Pathologists, and Korean Society of Nuclear Medicine) decided to establish clinical guideline for extrahepatic bile duct cancer in June 2021. Methods: Contents of the guidelines were developed through subgroup meetings for each key question and a preliminary draft was finalized through a Clinical Guidelines Committee workshop. Results: In November 2021, the finalized draft was presented for public scrutiny during a formal hearing. Conclusions The extrahepatic guideline committee believed that this guideline could be helpful in the treatment of patients.

Background/Aims: Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (ATE+BEV) therapy has become the recommended first-line therapy for patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) because of favorable treatment responses. However, there is a lack of data on sequential regimens after ATE+BEV treatment failure. We aimed to investigate the clinical outcomes of patients with advanced HCC who received subsequent systemic therapy for disease progression after ATE+BEV. Methods: This multicenter, retrospective study included patients who started second-line systemic treatment with sorafenib or lenvatinib after HCC progressed on ATE+BEV between August 2019 and December 2022. Treatment response was assessed using the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (version 1.1.). Clinical features of the two groups were balanced through propensity score (PS) matching. Results: This study enrolled 126 patients, 40 (31.7%) in the lenvatinib group, and 86 (68.3%) in the sorafenib group. The median age was 63 years, and males were predominant (88.1%). In PS-matched cohorts (36 patients in each group), the objective response rate was similar between the lenvatinib- and sorafenib-treated groups (5.6% vs. 8.3%; P=0.643), but the disease control rate was superior in the lenvatinib group (66.7% vs. 22.2%; P<0.001). Despite the superior progression- free survival (PFS) in the lenvatinib group (3.5 vs. 1.8 months, P=0.001), the overall survival (OS, 10.3 vs. 7.5 months, P=0.353) did not differ between the two PS-matched treatment groups. Conclusions In second-line therapy for unresectable HCC after ATE+BEV failure, lenvatinib showed better PFS and comparable OS to sorafenib in a real-world setting. Future studies with larger sample sizes and longer follow-ups are needed to optimize second-line treatment.