1.Comparison of Statin With Ezetimibe Combination Therapy Versus Statin Monotherapy for Primary Prevention in Middle-Aged Adults
Jung-Joon CHA ; Soon Jun HONG ; Subin LIM ; Ju Hyeon KIM ; Hyung Joon JOO ; Jae Hyoung PARK ; Cheol Woong YU ; Do-Sun LIM ; Jang Young KIM ; Jin-Ok JEONG ; Jeong-Hun SHIN ; Chi Young SHIM ; Jong-Young LEE ; Young-Hyo LIM ; Sung Ha PARK ; Eun Joo CHO ; Hasung KIM ; Jungkuk LEE ; Ki-Chul SUNG ;
Korean Circulation Journal 2024;54(9):534-544
		                        		
		                        			 Background and Objectives:
		                        			Lipid lowering therapy is essential to reduce the risk of major cardiovascular events; however, limited evidence exists regarding the use of statin with ezetimibe as primary prevention strategy for middle-aged adults. We aimed to investigate the impact of single pill combination therapy on clinical outcomes in relatively healthy middleaged patients when compared with statin monotherapy. 
		                        		
		                        			Methods:
		                        			Using the Korean National Health Insurance Service database, a propensity score match analysis was performed for baseline characteristics of 92,156 patients categorized into combination therapy (n=46,078) and statin monotherapy (n=46,078) groups. Primary outcome was composite outcomes, including death, coronary artery disease, and ischemic stroke. And secondary outcome was all-cause death. The mean follow-up duration was 2.9±0.3 years. 
		                        		
		                        			Results:
		                        			The 3-year composite outcomes of all-cause death, coronary artery disease, and ischemic stroke demonstrated no significant difference between the 2 groups (10.3% vs.10.1%; hazard ratio [HR], 1.022; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.980–1.064; p=0.309).Meanwhile, the 3-year all-cause death rate was lower in the combination therapy group than in the statin monotherapy group (0.2% vs. 0.4%; p<0.001), with a significant HR of 0.595 (95% CI, 0.460–0.769; p<0.001). Single pill combination therapy exhibited consistently lower mortality rates across various subgroups. 
		                        		
		                        			Conclusions
		                        			Compared to the statin monotherapy, the combination therapy for primary prevention showed no difference in composite outcomes but may reduce mortality risk in relatively healthy middle-aged patients. However, since the study was observational, further randomized clinical trials are needed to confirm these findings. 
		                        		
		                        		
		                        		
		                        	
2.Comparison of Statin With Ezetimibe Combination Therapy Versus Statin Monotherapy for Primary Prevention in Middle-Aged Adults
Jung-Joon CHA ; Soon Jun HONG ; Subin LIM ; Ju Hyeon KIM ; Hyung Joon JOO ; Jae Hyoung PARK ; Cheol Woong YU ; Do-Sun LIM ; Jang Young KIM ; Jin-Ok JEONG ; Jeong-Hun SHIN ; Chi Young SHIM ; Jong-Young LEE ; Young-Hyo LIM ; Sung Ha PARK ; Eun Joo CHO ; Hasung KIM ; Jungkuk LEE ; Ki-Chul SUNG ;
Korean Circulation Journal 2024;54(9):534-544
		                        		
		                        			 Background and Objectives:
		                        			Lipid lowering therapy is essential to reduce the risk of major cardiovascular events; however, limited evidence exists regarding the use of statin with ezetimibe as primary prevention strategy for middle-aged adults. We aimed to investigate the impact of single pill combination therapy on clinical outcomes in relatively healthy middleaged patients when compared with statin monotherapy. 
		                        		
		                        			Methods:
		                        			Using the Korean National Health Insurance Service database, a propensity score match analysis was performed for baseline characteristics of 92,156 patients categorized into combination therapy (n=46,078) and statin monotherapy (n=46,078) groups. Primary outcome was composite outcomes, including death, coronary artery disease, and ischemic stroke. And secondary outcome was all-cause death. The mean follow-up duration was 2.9±0.3 years. 
		                        		
		                        			Results:
		                        			The 3-year composite outcomes of all-cause death, coronary artery disease, and ischemic stroke demonstrated no significant difference between the 2 groups (10.3% vs.10.1%; hazard ratio [HR], 1.022; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.980–1.064; p=0.309).Meanwhile, the 3-year all-cause death rate was lower in the combination therapy group than in the statin monotherapy group (0.2% vs. 0.4%; p<0.001), with a significant HR of 0.595 (95% CI, 0.460–0.769; p<0.001). Single pill combination therapy exhibited consistently lower mortality rates across various subgroups. 
		                        		
		                        			Conclusions
		                        			Compared to the statin monotherapy, the combination therapy for primary prevention showed no difference in composite outcomes but may reduce mortality risk in relatively healthy middle-aged patients. However, since the study was observational, further randomized clinical trials are needed to confirm these findings. 
		                        		
		                        		
		                        		
		                        	
3.Comparison of Statin With Ezetimibe Combination Therapy Versus Statin Monotherapy for Primary Prevention in Middle-Aged Adults
Jung-Joon CHA ; Soon Jun HONG ; Subin LIM ; Ju Hyeon KIM ; Hyung Joon JOO ; Jae Hyoung PARK ; Cheol Woong YU ; Do-Sun LIM ; Jang Young KIM ; Jin-Ok JEONG ; Jeong-Hun SHIN ; Chi Young SHIM ; Jong-Young LEE ; Young-Hyo LIM ; Sung Ha PARK ; Eun Joo CHO ; Hasung KIM ; Jungkuk LEE ; Ki-Chul SUNG ;
Korean Circulation Journal 2024;54(9):534-544
		                        		
		                        			 Background and Objectives:
		                        			Lipid lowering therapy is essential to reduce the risk of major cardiovascular events; however, limited evidence exists regarding the use of statin with ezetimibe as primary prevention strategy for middle-aged adults. We aimed to investigate the impact of single pill combination therapy on clinical outcomes in relatively healthy middleaged patients when compared with statin monotherapy. 
		                        		
		                        			Methods:
		                        			Using the Korean National Health Insurance Service database, a propensity score match analysis was performed for baseline characteristics of 92,156 patients categorized into combination therapy (n=46,078) and statin monotherapy (n=46,078) groups. Primary outcome was composite outcomes, including death, coronary artery disease, and ischemic stroke. And secondary outcome was all-cause death. The mean follow-up duration was 2.9±0.3 years. 
		                        		
		                        			Results:
		                        			The 3-year composite outcomes of all-cause death, coronary artery disease, and ischemic stroke demonstrated no significant difference between the 2 groups (10.3% vs.10.1%; hazard ratio [HR], 1.022; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.980–1.064; p=0.309).Meanwhile, the 3-year all-cause death rate was lower in the combination therapy group than in the statin monotherapy group (0.2% vs. 0.4%; p<0.001), with a significant HR of 0.595 (95% CI, 0.460–0.769; p<0.001). Single pill combination therapy exhibited consistently lower mortality rates across various subgroups. 
		                        		
		                        			Conclusions
		                        			Compared to the statin monotherapy, the combination therapy for primary prevention showed no difference in composite outcomes but may reduce mortality risk in relatively healthy middle-aged patients. However, since the study was observational, further randomized clinical trials are needed to confirm these findings. 
		                        		
		                        		
		                        		
		                        	
4.Comparison of Statin With Ezetimibe Combination Therapy Versus Statin Monotherapy for Primary Prevention in Middle-Aged Adults
Jung-Joon CHA ; Soon Jun HONG ; Subin LIM ; Ju Hyeon KIM ; Hyung Joon JOO ; Jae Hyoung PARK ; Cheol Woong YU ; Do-Sun LIM ; Jang Young KIM ; Jin-Ok JEONG ; Jeong-Hun SHIN ; Chi Young SHIM ; Jong-Young LEE ; Young-Hyo LIM ; Sung Ha PARK ; Eun Joo CHO ; Hasung KIM ; Jungkuk LEE ; Ki-Chul SUNG ;
Korean Circulation Journal 2024;54(9):534-544
		                        		
		                        			 Background and Objectives:
		                        			Lipid lowering therapy is essential to reduce the risk of major cardiovascular events; however, limited evidence exists regarding the use of statin with ezetimibe as primary prevention strategy for middle-aged adults. We aimed to investigate the impact of single pill combination therapy on clinical outcomes in relatively healthy middleaged patients when compared with statin monotherapy. 
		                        		
		                        			Methods:
		                        			Using the Korean National Health Insurance Service database, a propensity score match analysis was performed for baseline characteristics of 92,156 patients categorized into combination therapy (n=46,078) and statin monotherapy (n=46,078) groups. Primary outcome was composite outcomes, including death, coronary artery disease, and ischemic stroke. And secondary outcome was all-cause death. The mean follow-up duration was 2.9±0.3 years. 
		                        		
		                        			Results:
		                        			The 3-year composite outcomes of all-cause death, coronary artery disease, and ischemic stroke demonstrated no significant difference between the 2 groups (10.3% vs.10.1%; hazard ratio [HR], 1.022; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.980–1.064; p=0.309).Meanwhile, the 3-year all-cause death rate was lower in the combination therapy group than in the statin monotherapy group (0.2% vs. 0.4%; p<0.001), with a significant HR of 0.595 (95% CI, 0.460–0.769; p<0.001). Single pill combination therapy exhibited consistently lower mortality rates across various subgroups. 
		                        		
		                        			Conclusions
		                        			Compared to the statin monotherapy, the combination therapy for primary prevention showed no difference in composite outcomes but may reduce mortality risk in relatively healthy middle-aged patients. However, since the study was observational, further randomized clinical trials are needed to confirm these findings. 
		                        		
		                        		
		                        		
		                        	
5.Impact of Infection Prevention Programs on Catheter-Associated Urinary Tract Infections Analyzed in Multicenter Study
Sun Hee NA ; Joong Sik EOM ; Yu Bin SEO ; Sun Hee PARK ; Young Keun KIM ; Wonkeun SONG ; Eunjung LEE ; Sung Ran KIM ; Hyeon Mi YOO ; Heekyung CHUN ; Myoung Jin SHIN ; Su Hyun KIM ; Ji Youn CHOI ; Nan hyoung CHO ; Jin Hwa KIM ; Hee-jung SON ; Su ha HAN ; Jacob LEE
Journal of Korean Medical Science 2024;39(18):e151-
		                        		
		                        			 Background:
		                        			Catheter-associated urinary tract infections (CAUTIs) account for a large proportion of healthcare-associated infections and have a significant impact on morbidity, length of hospital stay, and mortality. Adherence to the recommended infection prevention practices can effectively reduce the incidence of CAUTIs. This study aimed to assess the characteristics of CAUTIs and the efficacy of prevention programs across hospitals of various sizes. 
		                        		
		                        			Methods:
		                        			Intervention programs, including training, surveillance, and monitoring, were implemented. Data on the microorganisms responsible for CAUTIs, urinary catheter utilization ratio, rate of CAUTIs per 1,000 device days, and factors associated with the use of indwelling catheters were collected from 2017 to 2019. The incidence of CAUTIs and associated data were compared between university hospitals and small- and medium-sized hospitals. 
		                        		
		                        			Results:
		                        			Thirty-two hospitals participated in the study, including 21 university hospitals and 11 small- and medium-sized hospitals. The microorganisms responsible for CAUTIs and their resistance rates did not differ between the two groups. In the first quarter of 2018, the incidence rate was 2.05 infections/1,000 device-days in university hospitals and 1.44 infections/1,000 device-days in small- and medium-sized hospitals. After implementing interventions, the rate gradually decreased in the first quarter of 2019, with 1.18 infections/1,000 device-days in university hospitals and 0.79 infections/1,000 device-days in small- and medium-sized hospitals. However, by the end of the study, the infection rate increased to 1.74 infections/1,000 device-days in university hospitals and 1.80 infections/1,000 device-days in small- and medium-sized hospitals. 
		                        		
		                        			Conclusion
		                        			We implemented interventions to prevent CAUTIs and evaluated their outcomes. The incidence of these infections decreased in the initial phases of the intervention when adequate support and personnel were present. The rate of these infections may be reduced by implementing active interventions such as consistent monitoring and adherence to guidelines for preventing infections. 
		                        		
		                        		
		                        		
		                        	
6.The COVID-19 Vaccine Safety Research Center: a cornerstone for strengthening safety evidence for COVID-19 vaccination in the Republic of Korea
Na-Young JEONG ; Hyesook PARK ; Sanghoon OH ; Seung Eun JUNG ; Dong-Hyun KIM ; Hyoung-Shik SHIN ; Hee Chul HAN ; Jong-Koo LEE ; Jun Hee WOO ; Jaehun JUNG ; Joongyub LEE ; Ju-Young SHIN ; Sun-Young JUNG ; Byung-Joo PARK ; Nam-Kyong CHOI
Osong Public Health and Research Perspectives 2024;15(2):97-106
		                        		
		                        			
		                        			 The COVID-19 Vaccine Safety Research Committee (CoVaSC) was established in November 2021 to address the growing need for independent, in-depth scientific evidence on adverse events (AEs) following coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination. This initiative was requested by the Korea Disease Control and Prevention Agency and led by the National Academy of Medicine of Korea. In September 2022, the COVID-19 Vaccine Safety Research Center was established, strengthening CoVaSC’s initiatives. The center has conducted various studies on the safety of COVID-19 vaccines. During CoVaSC’s second research year, from September 29, 2022 to July 19, 2023, the center was restructured into 4 departments: Epidemiological Research, Clinical Research, Communication & Education, and International Cooperation & Policy Research. Its main activities include (1) managing CoVaSC and the COVID-19 Vaccine Safety Research Center, (2) surveying domestic and international trends in AE causality investigation, (3) assessing AEs following COVID-19 vaccination, (4) fostering international collaboration and policy research, and (5) organizing regular fora and training sessions for the public and clinicians. Causality assessments have been conducted for 27 diseases, and independent research has been conducted after organizing ad hoc committees comprising both epidemiologists and clinical experts on each AE of interest. The research process included protocol development, data analysis, interpretation of results, and causality assessment. These research outcomes have been shared transparently with the public and healthcare experts through various fora. The COVID-19 Vaccine Safety Research Center plans to continue strengthening and expanding its research activities to provide reliable, high-quality safety information to the public. 
		                        		
		                        		
		                        		
		                        	
7.Association between Obesity and Heart Failure and Related Atrial Fibrillation: Patient-Level Data Comparisons of Two Cohort Studies
Young Shin LEE ; Pil-Sung YANG ; Eunsun JANG ; Daehoon KIM ; Hee Tae YU ; Tae-Hoon KIM ; Jae-Sun UHM ; Jung-Hoon SUNG ; Hui-Nam PAK ; Moon-Hyoung LEE ; Boyoung JOUNG
Yonsei Medical Journal 2024;65(1):10-18
		                        		
		                        			 Purpose:
		                        			Heart failure (HF) and atrial fibrillation (AF) frequently coexist, with over 50% patients with HF having AF, while onethird of those with AF develop HF. Differences in obesity-mediated association between HF and HF-related AF among Asians and Europeans were evaluated. 
		                        		
		                        			Materials and Methods:
		                        			Using the Korean National Health Insurance Service-Health Screening (K-NHIS-HealS) cohort and the UK Biobank, we included 394801 Korean and 476883 UK adults, respectively aged 40–70 years. The incidence and risk of HF were evaluated based on body mass index (BMI). 
		                        		
		                        			Results:
		                        			The proportion of obese individuals was significantly higher in the UK Biobank cohort than in the K-NHIS-HealS cohort (24.2% vs. 2.7%, p<0.001). The incidence of HF and HF-related AF was higher among the obese in the UK than in Korea. The risk of HF was higher among the British than in Koreans, with adjusted hazard ratios of 1.82 [95% confidence interval (CI), 1.30–2.55] in KNHIS-HealS and 2.00 (95% CI, 1.69–2.37) in UK Biobank in obese participants (p for interaction <0.001). A 5-unit increase in BMI was associated with a 44% greater risk of HF-related AF in the UK Biobank cohort (p<0.001) but not in the K-NHIS-HealS cohort (p=0.277). 
		                        		
		                        			Conclusion
		                        			Obesity was associated with an increased risk of HF and HF-related AF in both Korean and UK populations. The higher incidence in the UK population was likely due to the higher proportion of obese individuals. 
		                        		
		                        		
		                        		
		                        	
8.Impact of Coronavirus Disease 2019 on Gastric Cancer Diagnosis and Stage:A Single-Institute Study in South Korea
Moonki HONG ; Mingee CHOI ; JiHyun LEE ; Kyoo Hyun KIM ; Hyunwook KIM ; Choong-Kun LEE ; Hyo Song KIM ; Sun Young RHA ; Gyu Young PIH ; Yoon Jin CHOI ; Da Hyun JUNG ; Jun Chul PARK ; Sung Kwan SHIN ; Sang Kil LEE ; Yong Chan LEE ; Minah CHO ; Yoo Min KIM ; Hyoung-Il KIM ; Jae-Ho CHEONG ; Woo Jin HYUNG ; Jaeyong SHIN ; Minkyu JUNG
Journal of Gastric Cancer 2023;23(4):574-583
		                        		
		                        			 Purpose:
		                        			Gastric cancer (GC) is among the most prevalent and fatal cancers worldwide.National cancer screening programs in countries with high incidences of this disease provide medical aid beneficiaries with free-of-charge screening involving upper endoscopy to detect early-stage GC. However, the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has caused major disruptions to routine healthcare access. Thus, this study aimed to assess the impact of COVID-19 on the diagnosis, overall incidence, and stage distribution of GC. 
		                        		
		                        			Materials and Methods:
		                        			We identified patients in our hospital cancer registry who were diagnosed with GC between January 2018 and December 2021 and compared the cancer stage at diagnosis before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. Subgroup analyses were conducted according to age and sex. The years 2018 and 2019 were defined as the “before COVID” period, and the years 2020 and 2021 as the “during COVID” period. 
		                        		
		                        			Results:
		                        			Overall, 10,875 patients were evaluated; 6,535 and 4,340 patients were diagnosed before and during the COVID-19 period, respectively. The number of diagnoses was lower during the COVID-19 pandemic (189 patients/month vs. 264 patients/month) than before it.Notably, the proportion of patients with stages 3 or 4 GC in 2021 was higher among men and patients aged ≥40 years. 
		                        		
		                        			Conclusions
		                        			During the COVID-19 pandemic, the overall number of GC diagnoses decreased significantly in a single institute. Moreover, GCs were in more advanced stages at the time of diagnosis. Further studies are required to elucidate the relationship between the COVID-19 pandemic and the delay in the detection of GC worldwide. 
		                        		
		                        		
		                        		
		                        	
9.Korea’s Health Expenditures as a Share of Gross Domestic Product Over-Passing the OECD Average
Hyoung-Sun JEONG ; Jeongwoo SHIN ; Seunghee KIM ; Myunghwa KIM ; Heenyun KIM ; Mikyung CHEON ; Jihye PARK ; Sang-Hyun KIM ; Sei-Jong BAEK
Health Policy and Management 2023;33(3):243-252
		                        		
		                        			
		                        			 This paper aims to introduce Korea’s total current health expenditure (CHE) and National Health Accounts of the year 2021 and their 2022 preliminary figures constructed on the basis of the System of Health Accounts 2011. As CHE includes expenditures for prevention, tracking, and treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and compensation for losses to medical institutions from 2020, the details are also introduced. Korea’s total CHE in 2021 is 193.3 trillion won, which is 9.3% of gross domestic product (GDP). The preliminary figure in 2022, 209.0 trillion won, exceeded the 200 trillion won line for the first time, and its “ratio to GDP” of 9.7% is expected to exceed the average of Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development member countries for the first time. Korea’s health expenditures, which were well controlled until the end of the 20th century, have increased at an alarming rate since the beginning of the 21st century, threatening the sustainability of national health insurance. The increase in health expenditure after 2020 is partly due to a temporary increase in response to COVID-19. However, when considering the structure of Korea’s health insurance price hike, where the ratchet effect of increased medical expenses works particularly strongly, it is unlikely that the accelerating growth trend that has lasted for more than 20 years will stop easily. More aggressive policies to control medical expenses are required in the national health insurance which not only constitutes the main financing sources of the Korean health system but also has the most powerful policy means in effect for changes in the health care provision. 
		                        		
		                        		
		                        		
		                        	
10.A Case of Metastatic Prostate Cancer to the Thyroid Gland with Features of Anaplastic Thyroid Cancer
So Yeon LEE ; Yeong Joon KIM ; Sun-Ju OH ; Hyoung Shin LEE
International Journal of Thyroidology 2023;16(2):190-194
		                        		
		                        			
		                        			 Prostate cancer is one of the most frequent malignancies in men, and it has metastasis mainly to bones and lungs. Metastasis to cervical region is rare, and thyroid gland is one of the rarest organs with only few reports. In this case, we discuss a rare case of metastatic prostate cancer to thyroid gland and cervical lymph nodes, showing features similar to those of anaplastic thyroid cancer. A 73-year-old man with a history of prostate cancer was referred to our hospital with neck mass suggestive of anaplastic thyroid cancer, detected by fine-needle aspiration. Further examinations, including core needle biopsy, were done and it was confirmed as metastasis of prostate cancer. We focused on shortcomings of fine-needle aspiration and advantages of core-needle biopsy to avoid misdiagnosis. In addition, before diagnosis of head and neck cancer, patient’s history of other carcinomas must always be considered during differential diagnosis of metastatic lesions. 
		                        		
		                        		
		                        		
		                        	
            
Result Analysis
Print
Save
E-mail