Background/Aims: Krebs von den Lungen-6 (KL-6) is associated with prognosis in patients with COVID-19. However, there is limited data on the correlation between the prognosis of COVID-19 and varying KL-6 levels at different time points. We investigated the optimal cutoff values of the initial and peak serum KL-6 levels to predict mortality and evaluated their correlation with mortality. Methods: This retrospective cohort study collected data on serially collected serum KL-6 levels in patients hospitalized with COVID-19 between October 2020 and January 2022 at a single tertiary hospital in South Korea. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve and Youden index were used to determine the cutoff points for the initial and peak KL-6 levels that best predicted 30-day mortality. The association between the initial and peak KL-6 values was assessed by univariate and multivariate logistic regression models. Results: A total of 349 patients were included in this study. The mean initial and peak KL-6 levels were significantly higher in the non-survivor group than in the survivor group. The initial and peak KL-6 values that best predicted 30-day mortality were 491.85 U/mL and 660.05 U/mL, respectively. An initial KL-6 level greater than 491.85 U/mL and a peak KL-6 level greater than 660.05 U/mL were significantly associated with 30-day mortality. Conclusions The initial and peak levels of KL-6 were significantly associated with 30-day mortality in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. These findings suggest that serially monitoring blood KL-6 levels could be a valuable prognostic indicator for COVID-19.

Peyronie’s disease is an acquired condition characterized by penile deformities caused by fibrosis of the penile tunica albuginea, leading to symptoms such as penile pain, erectile dysfunction, and other associated issues. Despite extensive research, the pathophysiology of this condition remains poorly understood, and standardized diagnostic and treatment protocols are lacking. While clinical guidelines from several professional societies exist, they do not consistently account for factors such as patient ethnicity, geography, and socioeconomic status. Thus, the Korean Society for Sexual Medicine and Andrology (KSSMA) aimed to develop recommendations tailored to clinical practice in Korea. These recommendations summarize the latest evidence, including clinical practice guidelines from various international professional societies, and represent the consensus opinion of an expert group within the KSSMA. They encompass all aspects of Peyronie’s disease, including the definition, diagnosis, non-surgical interventions, and surgical treatment options.

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.

Background: This study aimed to determine whether a shorter high-dose rifampicin regimen is non-inferior to the standard 6-month tuberculosis regimen. Methods: This multicenter, randomized, open-label, non-inferiority trial enrolled participants with respiratory specimen positivity by Xpert MTB/RIF assay or Mycobacterium tuberculosis culture without rifampicin-resistance. Participants were randomized at 1:1 to the investigational or control group. The investigational group received high-dose rifampicin (30 mg/kg/day), isoniazid, and pyrazinamide until culture conversion, followed by high-dose rifampicin and isoniazid for 12 weeks. The control group received the standard 6-month regimen. The primary outcome was the rate of unfavorable outcomes at 18 months post-randomization. The non-inferiority margin was set at <6% difference in unfavorable outcomes rates. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04485156) Results: Between 4 November 2020 and 3 January 2022, 76 participants were enrolled. Of these, 58 were included in the modified intention-to-treat analysis. Unfavorable outcomes occurred in 10 (31.3%) of 32 in the control group and 10 (38.5%) of 26 in the investigational group. The difference was 7.2% (95% confidence interval, ∞ to 31.9%), failing to prove non-inferiority. Serious adverse events and grade 3 or higher adverse events did not differ between the groups. Conclusion The shorter high-dose rifampicin regimen failed to demonstrate non-inferiority but had an acceptable safety profile.

Objective: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of coil embolization of venous segments in patients with Type IIa pelvic arteriovenous malformations (AVMs). Materials and Methods: A retrospective study was performed on 13 patients (median age, 43 years, range 20–62 years, 7 males) who underwent transvenous coil embolization for Type IIa pelvic AVM (characterized by multiple arterioles shunting to focal venous segments of a single draining vein) without the use of additional liquid embolic agents from March 2017 to February 2023. Treatment outcomes were analyzed based on clinical evaluations, post angiography findings, and follow-up CT. Results: Fourteen procedures were performed on 13 patients. Except in one patient, all treatments were completed in a single session. Transvenous access was employed in 10 procedures, whereas direct puncture was used in four sessions. The embolization procedures used an average of 55.7 ± 58.5 coils (range, 7–238) and lasted an average of 127.3 ± 39.5 minutes.The technical success rate was 92.9% (of 13/14). All patients reported symptom improvement. Follow-up CT scans showed complete occlusion of the AVM without recurrence in ten of the 13 patients. There was one minor adverse event: a small retroperitoneal hemorrhage, likely related to direct puncture, which resolved spontaneously. No other adverse events were observed. Conclusion Coil embolization of the draining vein segment, without the use of additional liquid embolic agents is a safe and effective method for managing Type IIa pelvic AVM.

Objective: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of coil embolization of venous segments in patients with Type IIa pelvic arteriovenous malformations (AVMs). Materials and Methods: A retrospective study was performed on 13 patients (median age, 43 years, range 20–62 years, 7 males) who underwent transvenous coil embolization for Type IIa pelvic AVM (characterized by multiple arterioles shunting to focal venous segments of a single draining vein) without the use of additional liquid embolic agents from March 2017 to February 2023. Treatment outcomes were analyzed based on clinical evaluations, post angiography findings, and follow-up CT. Results: Fourteen procedures were performed on 13 patients. Except in one patient, all treatments were completed in a single session. Transvenous access was employed in 10 procedures, whereas direct puncture was used in four sessions. The embolization procedures used an average of 55.7 ± 58.5 coils (range, 7–238) and lasted an average of 127.3 ± 39.5 minutes.The technical success rate was 92.9% (of 13/14). All patients reported symptom improvement. Follow-up CT scans showed complete occlusion of the AVM without recurrence in ten of the 13 patients. There was one minor adverse event: a small retroperitoneal hemorrhage, likely related to direct puncture, which resolved spontaneously. No other adverse events were observed. Conclusion Coil embolization of the draining vein segment, without the use of additional liquid embolic agents is a safe and effective method for managing Type IIa pelvic AVM.

Background/Aims: Krebs von den Lungen-6 (KL-6) is associated with prognosis in patients with COVID-19. However, there is limited data on the correlation between the prognosis of COVID-19 and varying KL-6 levels at different time points. We investigated the optimal cutoff values of the initial and peak serum KL-6 levels to predict mortality and evaluated their correlation with mortality. Methods: This retrospective cohort study collected data on serially collected serum KL-6 levels in patients hospitalized with COVID-19 between October 2020 and January 2022 at a single tertiary hospital in South Korea. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve and Youden index were used to determine the cutoff points for the initial and peak KL-6 levels that best predicted 30-day mortality. The association between the initial and peak KL-6 values was assessed by univariate and multivariate logistic regression models. Results: A total of 349 patients were included in this study. The mean initial and peak KL-6 levels were significantly higher in the non-survivor group than in the survivor group. The initial and peak KL-6 values that best predicted 30-day mortality were 491.85 U/mL and 660.05 U/mL, respectively. An initial KL-6 level greater than 491.85 U/mL and a peak KL-6 level greater than 660.05 U/mL were significantly associated with 30-day mortality. Conclusions The initial and peak levels of KL-6 were significantly associated with 30-day mortality in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. These findings suggest that serially monitoring blood KL-6 levels could be a valuable prognostic indicator for COVID-19.

Peyronie’s disease is an acquired condition characterized by penile deformities caused by fibrosis of the penile tunica albuginea, leading to symptoms such as penile pain, erectile dysfunction, and other associated issues. Despite extensive research, the pathophysiology of this condition remains poorly understood, and standardized diagnostic and treatment protocols are lacking. While clinical guidelines from several professional societies exist, they do not consistently account for factors such as patient ethnicity, geography, and socioeconomic status. Thus, the Korean Society for Sexual Medicine and Andrology (KSSMA) aimed to develop recommendations tailored to clinical practice in Korea. These recommendations summarize the latest evidence, including clinical practice guidelines from various international professional societies, and represent the consensus opinion of an expert group within the KSSMA. They encompass all aspects of Peyronie’s disease, including the definition, diagnosis, non-surgical interventions, and surgical treatment options.

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.

Background: This study aimed to determine whether a shorter high-dose rifampicin regimen is non-inferior to the standard 6-month tuberculosis regimen. Methods: This multicenter, randomized, open-label, non-inferiority trial enrolled participants with respiratory specimen positivity by Xpert MTB/RIF assay or Mycobacterium tuberculosis culture without rifampicin-resistance. Participants were randomized at 1:1 to the investigational or control group. The investigational group received high-dose rifampicin (30 mg/kg/day), isoniazid, and pyrazinamide until culture conversion, followed by high-dose rifampicin and isoniazid for 12 weeks. The control group received the standard 6-month regimen. The primary outcome was the rate of unfavorable outcomes at 18 months post-randomization. The non-inferiority margin was set at <6% difference in unfavorable outcomes rates. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04485156) Results: Between 4 November 2020 and 3 January 2022, 76 participants were enrolled. Of these, 58 were included in the modified intention-to-treat analysis. Unfavorable outcomes occurred in 10 (31.3%) of 32 in the control group and 10 (38.5%) of 26 in the investigational group. The difference was 7.2% (95% confidence interval, ∞ to 31.9%), failing to prove non-inferiority. Serious adverse events and grade 3 or higher adverse events did not differ between the groups. Conclusion The shorter high-dose rifampicin regimen failed to demonstrate non-inferiority but had an acceptable safety profile.