Background: Complete revascularization has demonstrated better outcomes in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) and multivessel disease. However, in the case of left main (LM) culprit lesion AMI with multivessel disease, there is limited evidence to suggest that complete revascularization is better. Methods: We reviewed 16,831 patients in the Korea Acute Myocardial Infarction Registry who were treated from July 2016 to June 2020, and 399 patients were enrolled with LM culprit lesion AMI treated with percutaneous coronary intervention. We categorized the patients as those treated with complete revascularization (n=295) or incomplete revascularization (n=104). The study endpoint was major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE), a composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, ischemia-driven revascularization, stent thrombosis, and stroke. We performed propensity score matching (PSM) and analyzed the incidence of MACCE at 1 year. Results: After PSM, the two groups were well balanced. There was no significant difference between the two groups in MACCE at 1 year (12.1% vs. 15.2%; hazard ratio, 1.28; 95% confidence interval, 0.60–2.74; p=0.524) after PSM. The components of MACCE and major bleeding were also not significantly different. Conclusion There was no significant difference in clinical outcomes between the groups treated with complete or incomplete revascularization for LM culprit lesion AMI with multivessel disease.

Background: Complete revascularization has demonstrated better outcomes in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) and multivessel disease. However, in the case of left main (LM) culprit lesion AMI with multivessel disease, there is limited evidence to suggest that complete revascularization is better. Methods: We reviewed 16,831 patients in the Korea Acute Myocardial Infarction Registry who were treated from July 2016 to June 2020, and 399 patients were enrolled with LM culprit lesion AMI treated with percutaneous coronary intervention. We categorized the patients as those treated with complete revascularization (n=295) or incomplete revascularization (n=104). The study endpoint was major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE), a composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, ischemia-driven revascularization, stent thrombosis, and stroke. We performed propensity score matching (PSM) and analyzed the incidence of MACCE at 1 year. Results: After PSM, the two groups were well balanced. There was no significant difference between the two groups in MACCE at 1 year (12.1% vs. 15.2%; hazard ratio, 1.28; 95% confidence interval, 0.60–2.74; p=0.524) after PSM. The components of MACCE and major bleeding were also not significantly different. Conclusion There was no significant difference in clinical outcomes between the groups treated with complete or incomplete revascularization for LM culprit lesion AMI with multivessel disease.

Background: Complete revascularization has demonstrated better outcomes in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) and multivessel disease. However, in the case of left main (LM) culprit lesion AMI with multivessel disease, there is limited evidence to suggest that complete revascularization is better. Methods: We reviewed 16,831 patients in the Korea Acute Myocardial Infarction Registry who were treated from July 2016 to June 2020, and 399 patients were enrolled with LM culprit lesion AMI treated with percutaneous coronary intervention. We categorized the patients as those treated with complete revascularization (n=295) or incomplete revascularization (n=104). The study endpoint was major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE), a composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, ischemia-driven revascularization, stent thrombosis, and stroke. We performed propensity score matching (PSM) and analyzed the incidence of MACCE at 1 year. Results: After PSM, the two groups were well balanced. There was no significant difference between the two groups in MACCE at 1 year (12.1% vs. 15.2%; hazard ratio, 1.28; 95% confidence interval, 0.60–2.74; p=0.524) after PSM. The components of MACCE and major bleeding were also not significantly different. Conclusion There was no significant difference in clinical outcomes between the groups treated with complete or incomplete revascularization for LM culprit lesion AMI with multivessel disease.

Background: Complete revascularization has demonstrated better outcomes in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) and multivessel disease. However, in the case of left main (LM) culprit lesion AMI with multivessel disease, there is limited evidence to suggest that complete revascularization is better. Methods: We reviewed 16,831 patients in the Korea Acute Myocardial Infarction Registry who were treated from July 2016 to June 2020, and 399 patients were enrolled with LM culprit lesion AMI treated with percutaneous coronary intervention. We categorized the patients as those treated with complete revascularization (n=295) or incomplete revascularization (n=104). The study endpoint was major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE), a composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, ischemia-driven revascularization, stent thrombosis, and stroke. We performed propensity score matching (PSM) and analyzed the incidence of MACCE at 1 year. Results: After PSM, the two groups were well balanced. There was no significant difference between the two groups in MACCE at 1 year (12.1% vs. 15.2%; hazard ratio, 1.28; 95% confidence interval, 0.60–2.74; p=0.524) after PSM. The components of MACCE and major bleeding were also not significantly different. Conclusion There was no significant difference in clinical outcomes between the groups treated with complete or incomplete revascularization for LM culprit lesion AMI with multivessel disease.

Background and Objectives: Tonsillectomy is one of the most common operative procedures performed in children by otolaryngologists. However, many surgeons demand excessive fasting from their patients for the fear of pulmonary aspiration and postoperative bleeding after surgery. This study was performed to investigate the effect of early feeding after tonsillectomy on acute postoperative pain, vomiting and postoperative bleeding in children.Subjects and Method Data were collected via retrospective medical chart review. A total of 121 patients under the age of 12, who underwent tonsillectomy along with adenoidectomy in our hospital, were included in this study. The patients were divided into two groups according to the time of first water or liquid intake and first diet, respectively. Operation time, anesthesia time, state of appetite at the beginning of a soft diet, degree of postoperative pain, the requirement of intravenous analgesics and incidence of vomiting during hospitalization and incidence of postoperative bleeding were compared. Results: There was no significant difference in the degree of pain, the requirement of intravenous analgesics, the incidence of vomiting or postoperative bleeding according to the time of first water or liquid intake. In addition, there was no difference in the degree of appetite and pain, the requirement of intravenous analgesics, incidence of vomiting or postoperative bleeding according to the time of first diet. Conclusion Initiating feeding as early as possible after tonsillectomy does not appear to increase acute postoperative pain, vomiting or postoperative bleeding.

Purpose: Endotension is a rare late complication characterized by an increase in sac size without any type of endoleak following endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR). Due to its rarity, few studies have demonstrated the mechanism behind and the management of endotension. In this study, we aimed to better understand the treatment and the long-term outcome of endotension in a single-center cohort. Materials and Methods: This study was designed for a retrospective review of the patients diagnosed with endotension between January 2006 and December 2017.The study patients were categorized into two groups (primary versus secondary) based on the presence of any type of endoleak before the diagnosis of endotension. We collected data related to endotension treatment, intraoperative findings, and long-term outcomes. Results: In a cohort of 15 patients diagnosed with endotension following EVAR, eight were classified into the primary endotension (PE) group without prior endoleak, and seven exhibited secondary endotension (SE). Among the eight PE patients, endovascular intervention for a preemptive purpose was conducted in six patients; however, three (50%) showed continuous sac expansion and finally received open conversion. Overall, eight patients (five in PE and three in SE) underwent open conversion, and one (12.5%) presented with an undetected endoleak during the operative findings. Postoperative morbidity was observed in three patients with no operative mortality. Conclusion Endotension can be managed initially through simple observation for changes on serial images, along with preemptive endovascular intervention.However, surgical intervention should be considered for patients with specific indications including continuous aneurysm sac enlargement, presence of symptoms, suspicions of migration of stent-graft with endoleak, and infection.

Purpose: Although endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) has been shown to be superior to open surgical repair (OSR) for abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) treatment, no large-scale studies in the Korean population have compared outcomes and costs. Methods: The National Health Insurance Service database in Korea was screened to identify AAA patients treated with EVAR or OSR from 2008 to 2019. Perioperative, early postoperative, and long-term survival were compared, as were reinterventions and complications. Patients were followed-up through 2020. Results: Of the 13,631 patients identified, 2,935 underwent OSR and 10,696 underwent EVAR. Perioperative mortality rate was lower in the EVAR group (4.2% vs. 8.0%, P < 0.001) even after excluding patients with ruptured AAA (2.7% vs.3.3%, P = 0.003). However, long-term mortality rate per 100 person-years was significantly higher in the EVAR than in the OSR group (9.0 vs. 6.4, P < 0.001), and all-cause mortality was lower in the OSR group (hazard ratio, 0.9; 95% confidence interval, 0.87–0.97, P = 0.008). EVAR had a higher AAA-related reintervention rate per 100 person-years (1.75 vs. 0.52), and AAA-related reintervention costs were almost 10-fold higher with EVAR (US dollar [USD] 6,153,463) than with OSR (USD 624,216). Conclusion While EVAR may have short-term advantages, OSR may provide better long-term outcomes and costeffectiveness for AAA treatment in the Korean population, under the medical expense system in Korea.

Purpose: We compared the surgical outcomes and complications of conventional, sutured scleral fixation and flanged intrascleral intraocular lens (IOL) fixation. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed the medical records of patients who underwent conventional, sutured scleral fixation or flanged intrascleral IOL fixation and who were then observed for more than 6 months. The best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), operation time, spherical equivalent (SEQ), astigmatism, and postoperative complications were recorded up to 6 months after surgery. Results: Of sixty-nine enrolled eyes, 39 underwent conventional, sutured scleral fixation (“sutured” group) and 30 flanged intrascleral IOL fixation (“sutureless” group). The operation time was significantly shorter in the sutureless group than in the sutured group (56.3 ± 11.8 vs. 77.7 ± 17.9 minutes, p < 0.001). In both groups, the BCVA and SEQ improved significantly at all visits after surgery compared to the baseline values p < 0.05). There was no between-group difference in BCVA, SEQ, astigmatism, or complications. Conclusions Compared to conventional, sutured scleral fixation, flanged intrascleral IOL fixation afforded equivalent improvements in visual acuity but with a shorter surgical duration. Therefore, flanged intrascleral IOL fixation is a useful alternative to conventional, sutured scleral fixation.

Background: Ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (rAAA) is a serious complication of abdominal aortic aneurysm associated with high operative mortality and morbidity rates. The present study evaluated the perioperative and long-term outcomes of Korean patients with rAAA based on national health insurance claims data. Methods: The National Health Insurance Service (NHIS) database was searched retrospectively to identify patients with rAAA who underwent endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) and open surgical repair (OSR) from 2009 to 2018. Perioperative (≤ 30 days), early postoperative (≤ 3 month), and long-term (> 3 month) survival, reinterventions, and complications were assessed. Results: The search identified 1,034 patients with rAAA, including 594 who underwent EVAR and 440 who underwent OSR. When the study period was divided into two, the total numbers of patients with rAAA, patients who underwent EVAR, and octogenarians were higher during the second half. The perioperative mortality rate was 29.8% in the EVAR and 35.0% in the OSR group (P = 0.028). Hartmann’s procedure for bowel infarction was performed more frequently in the OSR than in the EVAR group (adjusted odds ratio, 6.28; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.33–21.84; P = 0.001), but other complication rates did not differ significantly. All-cause mortality during the entire observation period did not differ significantly in the EVAR and OSR groups (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.17; 95% CI, 0.98–1.41; P = 0.087). Abdominal aortic aneurysm-related reintervention rate was significantly lower in the OSR group (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.31; 95% CI, 0.14–0.70; P = 0.005). Conclusion Although EVAR showed somewhat superior perioperative outcomes for rAAA, the long-term outcomes of EVAR after excluding initial 3 months were significantly worse than OSR. When anatomically feasible for both treatments, the perioperative mortality risk and reasonable prospects of long-term survival should be considered in rAAA.

Purpose: The incidence and prognostic implications of atrial fibrillation (AF) in patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS) undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) are controversial, especially for Korean patients. Furthermore, the pattern of antithrombotic therapy for these patients is unknown. The present study sought to identify the impact of AF on Korean patients undergoing TAVI and demonstrate the status of antithrombotic therapy for these patients. Materials and Methods: A total of 660 patients who underwent TAVI for severe AS were recruited from the nationwide K-TAVI registry in Korea. The enrolled patients were stratified into sinus rhythm (SR) and AF groups. The primary endpoint was all-cause death at 1-year. Results: AF was recorded in 135 patients [pre-existing AF 108 (16.4%) and new-onset AF 27 (4.1%)]. The rate of all-cause death at 1 year was significantly higher in patients with AF than in those with SR [16.2% vs. 6.4%, adjusted hazard ratio (HR): 2.207, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.182–4.120, p=0.013], regardless of the onset timing of AF. The rate of new pacemaker insertion at 1 year was also significantly higher in patients with AF than in those with SR (14.0% vs. 5.5%, adjusted HR: 3.137, 95%CI: 1.621–6.071, p=0.001).Among AF patients, substantial number of patients received the combination of multiple antithrombotic agents (77.8%), and the most common combination was that of aspirin and clopidogrel (38.1%). Conclusion AF was an independent predictor of 1-year mortality and new pacemaker insertion in Korean patients undergoing TAVI.