Purpose: Several types of dermal fillers have been recently introduced and used for penile augmentation (PA). However, few studies have compared outcomes after the injection of different fillers. This study aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of hyaluronic acid (HLA), polylactic acid (PLA), and polymethyl methacrylate (PMA) filler injections, which are the most commonly used for aesthetic purposes. Materials and Methods: This prospective study was conducted for 24 weeks after a filler injection by a surgeon between March 2017 and December 2021. Healthy adult men complaining of small penis were enrolled. Penile girth, satisfaction, and injection-associated adverse events (AEs) were assessed at baseline and 4, 12, and 24 weeks after injection. Results: Of the 301 men who received filler injections, 125, 134, and 42 received HLA, PLA, and PMA fillers, respectively. The augmentation effect was in the order of PMA, HLA, and PLA, respectively, at 24 weeks (PMA vs. HLA, p<0.001; HLA vs. PLA, p=0.006). Satisfaction levels increased significantly at 24 weeks in all groups (each with p<0.001). However, the increase in satisfaction levels was smaller in the PMA group (PMA vs. HLA or PLA, p<0.05, for both penile appearance and sexual life). No serious or systemic AEs were recorded. Filler injection-associated local AEs in the HLA, PLA, and PMA groups occurred in 9 (7.2%), 16 (11.9%), and 6 (14.3%) men, respectively. There was no significant difference in AEs among the groups (p=0.299). Conclusions The augmentative effect was greater in the PMA group than in the HLA and PLA groups, whereas the increase in satisfaction levels was smaller in the PMA group. Our study demonstrated the clinical course of different types of fillers and suggests that the filler type should be selected after detailed counseling considering individual characteristics and preferences.

Purpose: Several types of dermal fillers have been recently introduced and used for penile augmentation (PA). However, few studies have compared outcomes after the injection of different fillers. This study aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of hyaluronic acid (HLA), polylactic acid (PLA), and polymethyl methacrylate (PMA) filler injections, which are the most commonly used for aesthetic purposes. Materials and Methods: This prospective study was conducted for 24 weeks after a filler injection by a surgeon between March 2017 and December 2021. Healthy adult men complaining of small penis were enrolled. Penile girth, satisfaction, and injection-associated adverse events (AEs) were assessed at baseline and 4, 12, and 24 weeks after injection. Results: Of the 301 men who received filler injections, 125, 134, and 42 received HLA, PLA, and PMA fillers, respectively. The augmentation effect was in the order of PMA, HLA, and PLA, respectively, at 24 weeks (PMA vs. HLA, p<0.001; HLA vs. PLA, p=0.006). Satisfaction levels increased significantly at 24 weeks in all groups (each with p<0.001). However, the increase in satisfaction levels was smaller in the PMA group (PMA vs. HLA or PLA, p<0.05, for both penile appearance and sexual life). No serious or systemic AEs were recorded. Filler injection-associated local AEs in the HLA, PLA, and PMA groups occurred in 9 (7.2%), 16 (11.9%), and 6 (14.3%) men, respectively. There was no significant difference in AEs among the groups (p=0.299). Conclusions The augmentative effect was greater in the PMA group than in the HLA and PLA groups, whereas the increase in satisfaction levels was smaller in the PMA group. Our study demonstrated the clinical course of different types of fillers and suggests that the filler type should be selected after detailed counseling considering individual characteristics and preferences.

Purpose: Several types of dermal fillers have been recently introduced and used for penile augmentation (PA). However, few studies have compared outcomes after the injection of different fillers. This study aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of hyaluronic acid (HLA), polylactic acid (PLA), and polymethyl methacrylate (PMA) filler injections, which are the most commonly used for aesthetic purposes. Materials and Methods: This prospective study was conducted for 24 weeks after a filler injection by a surgeon between March 2017 and December 2021. Healthy adult men complaining of small penis were enrolled. Penile girth, satisfaction, and injection-associated adverse events (AEs) were assessed at baseline and 4, 12, and 24 weeks after injection. Results: Of the 301 men who received filler injections, 125, 134, and 42 received HLA, PLA, and PMA fillers, respectively. The augmentation effect was in the order of PMA, HLA, and PLA, respectively, at 24 weeks (PMA vs. HLA, p<0.001; HLA vs. PLA, p=0.006). Satisfaction levels increased significantly at 24 weeks in all groups (each with p<0.001). However, the increase in satisfaction levels was smaller in the PMA group (PMA vs. HLA or PLA, p<0.05, for both penile appearance and sexual life). No serious or systemic AEs were recorded. Filler injection-associated local AEs in the HLA, PLA, and PMA groups occurred in 9 (7.2%), 16 (11.9%), and 6 (14.3%) men, respectively. There was no significant difference in AEs among the groups (p=0.299). Conclusions The augmentative effect was greater in the PMA group than in the HLA and PLA groups, whereas the increase in satisfaction levels was smaller in the PMA group. Our study demonstrated the clinical course of different types of fillers and suggests that the filler type should be selected after detailed counseling considering individual characteristics and preferences.

Purpose: Several types of dermal fillers have been recently introduced and used for penile augmentation (PA). However, few studies have compared outcomes after the injection of different fillers. This study aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of hyaluronic acid (HLA), polylactic acid (PLA), and polymethyl methacrylate (PMA) filler injections, which are the most commonly used for aesthetic purposes. Materials and Methods: This prospective study was conducted for 24 weeks after a filler injection by a surgeon between March 2017 and December 2021. Healthy adult men complaining of small penis were enrolled. Penile girth, satisfaction, and injection-associated adverse events (AEs) were assessed at baseline and 4, 12, and 24 weeks after injection. Results: Of the 301 men who received filler injections, 125, 134, and 42 received HLA, PLA, and PMA fillers, respectively. The augmentation effect was in the order of PMA, HLA, and PLA, respectively, at 24 weeks (PMA vs. HLA, p<0.001; HLA vs. PLA, p=0.006). Satisfaction levels increased significantly at 24 weeks in all groups (each with p<0.001). However, the increase in satisfaction levels was smaller in the PMA group (PMA vs. HLA or PLA, p<0.05, for both penile appearance and sexual life). No serious or systemic AEs were recorded. Filler injection-associated local AEs in the HLA, PLA, and PMA groups occurred in 9 (7.2%), 16 (11.9%), and 6 (14.3%) men, respectively. There was no significant difference in AEs among the groups (p=0.299). Conclusions The augmentative effect was greater in the PMA group than in the HLA and PLA groups, whereas the increase in satisfaction levels was smaller in the PMA group. Our study demonstrated the clinical course of different types of fillers and suggests that the filler type should be selected after detailed counseling considering individual characteristics and preferences.

Purpose: Several types of dermal fillers have been recently introduced and used for penile augmentation (PA). However, few studies have compared outcomes after the injection of different fillers. This study aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of hyaluronic acid (HLA), polylactic acid (PLA), and polymethyl methacrylate (PMA) filler injections, which are the most commonly used for aesthetic purposes. Materials and Methods: This prospective study was conducted for 24 weeks after a filler injection by a surgeon between March 2017 and December 2021. Healthy adult men complaining of small penis were enrolled. Penile girth, satisfaction, and injection-associated adverse events (AEs) were assessed at baseline and 4, 12, and 24 weeks after injection. Results: Of the 301 men who received filler injections, 125, 134, and 42 received HLA, PLA, and PMA fillers, respectively. The augmentation effect was in the order of PMA, HLA, and PLA, respectively, at 24 weeks (PMA vs. HLA, p<0.001; HLA vs. PLA, p=0.006). Satisfaction levels increased significantly at 24 weeks in all groups (each with p<0.001). However, the increase in satisfaction levels was smaller in the PMA group (PMA vs. HLA or PLA, p<0.05, for both penile appearance and sexual life). No serious or systemic AEs were recorded. Filler injection-associated local AEs in the HLA, PLA, and PMA groups occurred in 9 (7.2%), 16 (11.9%), and 6 (14.3%) men, respectively. There was no significant difference in AEs among the groups (p=0.299). Conclusions The augmentative effect was greater in the PMA group than in the HLA and PLA groups, whereas the increase in satisfaction levels was smaller in the PMA group. Our study demonstrated the clinical course of different types of fillers and suggests that the filler type should be selected after detailed counseling considering individual characteristics and preferences.

Background: In early 2024, there was an issue with the supply of the anti-D reagent for blood typing. This reduced the anti-D reagent in our laboratory below the minimum stock level. We validated the appropriateness of using diluted anti-D reagents as a contingency plan in the event of an anti-D reagent shortage. Methods: A total of eight dilutions, ranging from 2X to 256X, were prepared by serial dilution of the low-protein monoclonal anti-D reagent. The original anti-D reagent and the eight anti-D dilutions were used to perform RhD typing by the tube and plate methods. To further evaluate the reactivity and stability of the 8-fold diluted anti-D reagent, RhD typing was performed on internal quality control red blood cells and RhD-positive patient specimens for 30 days. Results: The maximum dilution that gave the same results as the original anti-D reagent in both the tube and plate methods was 8X. The 8X anti-D dilution was tested against internal quality control red blood cells and patient specimens. It showed the same result as the original anti-D reagent, with reactivity remaining constant over 30 days. Conclusion We have confirmed the appropriateness of using a diluted low-protein monoclonal anti-D reagent for RhD typing. Therefore, we suggest that the diluted anti-D method can be considered for priority use in emergencies when the anti-D reagent is in short supply. Although 8X is suggested as an appropriate dilution factor in this study, this may vary depending on the type of product used in each laboratory and the laboratory conditions.

New Korean guidelines for the diagnosis and management of dry eye disease were developed based on literature reviews by the Korean Dry Eye Guideline Establishment Committee, a previous dry eye guideline by Korean Corneal Disease Study Group, a survey of Korean Dry Eye Society (KDES) members, and KDES consensus meetings. The new definition of dry eye was also proposed by KDES regular members. The new definition by the regular members of the KDES is as follows: “Dry eye is a disease of the ocular surface characterized by tear film abnormalities and ocular symptoms.” The combination of ocular symptoms and an unstable tear film (tear breakup time <7 seconds) was considered as essential components for the diagnosis of dry eye. Schirmer test and ocular surface staining were considered adjunctive diagnostic criteria. The treatment guidelines consisted of a simplified stepwise approach according to aqueous deficiency dominant, evaporation dominant, and altered tear distribution subtypes. New Korean guidelines can be used as a simple, valid, and accessible tool for the diagnosis and management of dry eye disease in clinical practice.

Background: The position of the eyebrows is critical when planning blepharoptosis surgery. However, insufficient scholarly attention has been paid to the details of postoperative eyebrow height changes at each anatomical landmark. This study investigated the effect of blepharoptosis surgery on brow height and evaluated the change in brow position. Methods: After a retrospective review of 247 patients, this study analyzed 53 patients (106 eyelids) who underwent levator and Müller’s complex advancement between March 2010 and January 2022. Brow heights were measured from the distance between the upper brow margin of each landmark and horizontal line of pupillary center on a digital photograph. Results: The mean change of eyebrow lowering was 1.54 mm (P<0.001) at the medial canthus, 1.29 mm (P<0.001) at the medial limbus, 1.44 mm (P<0.001) at the center of the pupil, 1.40 mm (P<0.001) at the lateral limbus, 1.15 mm (P=0.001) at the lateral canthus, and 0.75 mm (P=0.021) at the lateral eyebrow end. The brow change was most prominent at medial canthus and least prominent at the lateral brow end. The preoperative brow position was only statistically significant factor predicting brow height descent after surgery according to multiple linear regression analysis (R2=0.305, B=–0.375, P<0.001). Conclusions The eyebrows lowered in most patients after blepharoptosis surgery. The preoperative brow position is the most important factor in predicting the change in brow height after blepharoptosis surgery.

Purpose: To evaluate the effect of the Active Sentry handpiece of the Centurion Vision System compared to the Centurion Ozil handpiece for phacoemulsification in cataract surgery. Methods: A retrospective study was conducted on 281 patients (449 eyes) who underwent cataract surgery between August 2020 and June 2021. Preoperative measurements, intraoperative parameters, complication rate, and postoperative outcomes were compared between the Active Sentry handpiece and the Centurion Ozil handpiece groups. Additionally, the parameters were compared in different cataract severity groups and multiple predictive factors for the number of active surge mitigation (ASM) actuations were assessed with the Active Sentry handpiece. Results: There were 198 eyes in the Active Sentry group and 251 eyes in the Centurion Ozil group. There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups, as the cumulative dissipated energy in the Active Sentry and Centurion Ozil groups were 8.32 ± 7.74 and 7.87 ± 9.25 μJ, respectively (p = 0.576). Total surgery time, ultrasound usage time, aspiration time, amount of fluid aspirated, postoperative corrected distant visual acuity, and postoperative decrease in corneal endothelial cell density were comparable between the two groups. The significant contributors to the number of ASM actuations were age, preoperative corrected distant visual acuity, axial length, and total ultrasound time. Conclusions There was no clear advantage of the Active Sentry handpiece compared to the Centurion Ozil handpiece. ASM actuation increases with age, poor visual acuity before surgery, short axial length, and prolonged ultrasound usage time. It is expected that in more severe and high-risk cataract surgery, the Active Sentry handpiece functions more effectively, possibly affecting the safety and prognosis.

Purpose: To evaluate the long-term maintenance rate and associated factors of silicone punctal plugs in patients with Sjögren’s syndrome (SS). Materials and Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of 163 patients with SS who underwent silicone punctal plug insertion between December 2013 and July 2021 at Severance Hospital. The status of punctal plug insertions was classified into the following three categories by the clinician: maintenance, spontaneous loss, and intended removal. Cox proportional hazards model was used to evaluate the risk factors for spontaneous loss. Results: The mean maintenance period was 12.8±15.3 (median 7.07) months. The rate of spontaneous loss was 58%, and the rate of punctal plug removal by the clinician was 14%. The number of prior plug insertions was a risk factor for spontaneous loss [hazard ratio (HR) 1.055, p=0.035]. The upper eyelid punctum was at a higher risk than the lower one (p=0.042). Small-sized plugs showed a significantly higher risk for spontaneous loss than large-sized ones (HR 1.287, p=0.035). Flow-controller type plugs were more vulnerable to spontaneous loss than complete occluders [Micro FlowTM vs. EagleFlex® (HR 2.707, p=0.008) and Micro FlowTM vs. UltraplugTM (HR 3.402, p=0.005)]. The most common reason for removal was tear overflow (5.6%). Conclusion In repeated insertion, characteristics of the punctal plug, including the type and size, and location of plug insertion, influenced the spontaneous loss of plugs. The management of punctal plugs, including insertion, maintenance, and removal, requires personalized strategies for versatile situations.