Background and Objectives: Outcomes of deferring percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) without invasive physiologic assessment for intermediate coronary lesions is uncertain.We sought to compare long-term outcomes between medical treatment and PCI of intermediate lesions without invasive physiologic assessment. Methods: A total of 899 patients with intermediate coronary lesions between 50% and 70% diameter-stenosis were randomized to the conservative group (n=449) or the aggressive group (n=450). For intermediate lesions, PCI was performed in the aggressive group, but was deferred in the conservative group. The primary endpoint was major adverse cardiac events (MACE, a composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction [MI], or ischemia-driven any revascularization) at 3 years. Results: The number of treated lesions per patient was 0.8±0.9 in the conservative group and 1.7±0.9 in the aggressive group (p=0.001). At 3 years, the conservative group had a significantly higher incidence of MACE than the aggressive group (13.8% vs. 9.3%; hazard ratio [HR], 1.49; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.00–2.21; p=0.049), mainly driven by revascularization of target intermediate lesion (6.5% vs. 1.1%; HR, 5.69; 95% CI, 2.20–14.73;p<0.001). Between 1 and 3 years after the index procedure, compared to the aggressive group, the conservative group had significantly higher incidence of cardiac death or MI (3.2% vs.0.7%; HR, 4.34; 95% CI, 1.24–15.22; p=0.022) and ischemia-driven any revascularization. Conclusions For intermediate lesions, medical therapy alone, guided only by angiography, was associated with a higher risk of MACE at 3 years compared with performing PCI, mainly due to increased revascularization.

Background and Objectives: Outcomes of deferring percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) without invasive physiologic assessment for intermediate coronary lesions is uncertain.We sought to compare long-term outcomes between medical treatment and PCI of intermediate lesions without invasive physiologic assessment. Methods: A total of 899 patients with intermediate coronary lesions between 50% and 70% diameter-stenosis were randomized to the conservative group (n=449) or the aggressive group (n=450). For intermediate lesions, PCI was performed in the aggressive group, but was deferred in the conservative group. The primary endpoint was major adverse cardiac events (MACE, a composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction [MI], or ischemia-driven any revascularization) at 3 years. Results: The number of treated lesions per patient was 0.8±0.9 in the conservative group and 1.7±0.9 in the aggressive group (p=0.001). At 3 years, the conservative group had a significantly higher incidence of MACE than the aggressive group (13.8% vs. 9.3%; hazard ratio [HR], 1.49; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.00–2.21; p=0.049), mainly driven by revascularization of target intermediate lesion (6.5% vs. 1.1%; HR, 5.69; 95% CI, 2.20–14.73;p<0.001). Between 1 and 3 years after the index procedure, compared to the aggressive group, the conservative group had significantly higher incidence of cardiac death or MI (3.2% vs.0.7%; HR, 4.34; 95% CI, 1.24–15.22; p=0.022) and ischemia-driven any revascularization. Conclusions For intermediate lesions, medical therapy alone, guided only by angiography, was associated with a higher risk of MACE at 3 years compared with performing PCI, mainly due to increased revascularization.

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: Infantile hemangioma (IH) is a common benign vascular tumor that occurs during infancy. Oral propranolol is used as a first-line treatment. However, standardized guidelines for evaluating treatment efficacy, particularly the appropriate timing and parameters for Doppler ultrasound (US), have not been established. This study reports on the evaluation of therapeutic efficacy of oral propranolol solution in IH patients using Doppler US, and aims to propose the appropriate timing and parameters for using Doppler US based on this experience. Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted on 120 patients with IH who were treated with oral propranolol solution and maintained for over 6 months from May 2017 to April 2023. Doppler US evaluation of IH was performed at diagnosis, 1-2 and 6-12 months after treatment initiation, and 6 months post-therapy cessation. A complete response (CR) was identified as a reduction in vascularity along with a decrease in longest diameter (LD) or thickness of 50% or more. Recurrence was evaluated based on increased vascularity or size 6 months after treatment discontinuation. Results: Of 120 patients with IH, 82 females and 38 males were analyzed. IH was first detected at a median age of 12 days (range, 1-240 days), and treatment began at 76 days (range, 27-570 days), continuing for an average of 10.4 months (range, 5-24 months). Initial Doppler US measurements showed an LD of 2.65±1.52 cm and a thickness of 0.79±0.55 cm, with prominent vascularity. After 1-2 months of treatment, LD and thickness decreased by 12.9% and 25.9%, respectively. By 6-12 months, reductions reached 37.2% and 53.6%. CR occurred in 77 patients (64.2%) after 6-12 months of treatment. Eleven patients (9.2%) experienced a recurrence. Conclusion Doppler US is a valuable modality for evaluating the characteristics, treatment response, and recurrence of IH treated with oral propranolol.

Background: and Purpose: This clinical practice guideline provides evidence-based recommendations for treatment of dementia, focusing on cholinesterase inhibitors and N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) receptor antagonists for Alzheimer’s disease (AD) and other types of dementia. Methods: Using the Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcomes (PICO) framework, we developed key clinical questions and conducted systematic literature reviews. A multidisciplinary panel of experts, organized by the Korean Dementia Association, evaluated randomized controlled trials and observational studies. Recommendations were graded for evidence quality and strength using Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology. Results: Three main recommendations are presented: (1) For AD, cholinesterase inhibitors (donepezil, rivastigmine, galantamine) are strongly recommended for improving cognition and daily function based on moderate evidence; (2) Cholinesterase inhibitors are conditionally recommended for vascular dementia and Parkinson’s disease dementia, with a strong recommendation for Lewy body dementia; (3) For moderate to severe AD, NMDA receptor antagonist (memantine) is strongly recommended, demonstrating significant cognitive and functional improvements. Both drug classes showed favorable safety profiles with manageable side effects. Conclusions This guideline offers standardized, evidence-based pharmacologic recommendations for dementia management, with specific guidance on cholinesterase inhibitors and NMDA receptor antagonists. It aims to support clinical decision-making and improve patient outcomes in dementia care. Further updates will address emerging treatments, including amyloid-targeting therapies, to reflect advances in dementia management.

Purpose: This study aimed to project cancer incidence and mortality for 2025 to estimate Korea’s current cancer burden. Materials and Methods: Cancer incidence data from 1999 to 2022 were obtained from the Korea National Cancer Incidence Database, while cancer mortality data from 1993 to 2023 were acquired from Statistics Korea. Cancer incidence and mortality were projected by fitting a linear regression model to observed age-specific cancer rates against their respective years and then by multiplying the projected age-specific rates by the anticipated age-specific population for 2025. A joinpoint regression model was applied to identify significant changes in trends, using only the most recent trend data for predictions. Results: A total of 304,754 new cancer cases and 84,019 cancer deaths are expected in Korea in 2025. The most commonly diagnosed cancer is projected to be thyroid cancer, followed by the colorectal, lung, breast, prostate and stomach cancers. These six cancers are expected to account for 63.8% of the total cancer burden. Lung cancer is expected to be the leading cause of cancer-related deaths, followed by liver, colorectal, pancreatic, stomach, and gallbladder cancers, together comprising 66.6% of total cancer deaths. Conclusion The increasing incidence of female breast cancer and the rise in prostate and pancreatic cancers are expected to continue. As aging accelerates, cancer commonly found in older adults are projected to rise significantly.

Purpose: The current study provides national cancer statistics and their secular trends in Korea, including incidence, mortality, survival, and prevalence in 2022, with international comparisons. Materials and Methods: Cancer incidence, survival, and prevalence rates were calculated using the Korea National Cancer Incidence Database (1999-2022), with survival follow-up until December 31, 2023. Mortality data obtained from Statistics Korea, while international comparisons were based on GLOBOCAN data. Results: In 2022, 282,047 newly diagnosed cancer cases (age-standardized rate [ASR], 287.0 per 100,000) and 83,378 deaths from cancer (ASR, 65.7 per 100,000) were reported. The proportion of localized-stage cancers increased from 45.6% in 2005 to 50.9% in 2022. Stomach, colorectal, and breast cancer showed increased localized-stage diagnoses by 18.1, 18.5, and 9.9 percentage points, respectively. Compared to 2001-2005, the 5-year relative survival (2018-2022) increased by 20.4 percentage points for stomach cancer, 7.6 for colorectal cancer, and 5.6 for breast cancer. Korea had the lowest cancer mortality among countries with similar incidence rates and the lowest mortality-to-incidence (M/I) ratios for these cancers. The 5-year relative survival (2018-2022) was 72.9%, contributing to over 2.59 million prevalent cases in 2022. Conclusion Since the launch of the National Cancer Screening Program in 2002, early detection has improved, increasing the diagnosis of localized-stage cancers and survival rates. Korea recorded the lowest M/I ratio among major comparison countries, demonstrating the effectiveness of its National Cancer Control Program.

Background: s/Aims: We compared the postoperative outcomes of single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC) with those of single-incision robotic cholecystectomy (SIRC) using the da Vinci Xi and SP systems. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed data from 206 patients who underwent these procedures by a single surgeon between August 2020 and April 2022. Propensity score matching was used to adjust for confounders and evaluate outcomes. Results: SILC exhibited shorter operation times compared to SIRC with Xi and SP (44.9 ± 14.5 min vs. 55.3 ± 12.2 min vs. 55.2 ± 16.2 min, p < 0.001). SIRC with Xi had shorter docking times (6.2 ± 2.8 min vs. 10.3 ± 2.3 min, p < 0.001), while SIRC with SP demonstrated reduced console times (11.2 ± 2.4 min vs. 18.6 ± 8.0 min, p < 0.001). Pain scores and complications did not significantly differ between the groups. Conclusions Both SILC and SIRC showed comparable outcomes, with the SP system providing advantages such as reduced console time and fully articulated arms, likely reducing surgeon stress.

Elastofibroma is a rare soft tissue tumor that most commonly occurs in the subscapular region. It has also been reported in several other anatomical locations. To our knowledge, no previous reports have described elastofibromas in the anterior aspect of the face. A 36-year-old man with intellectual disability was referred to our department for the evaluation of a painless multinodular lesion on the philtrum. The lesion was initially misdiagnosed as a dermatologic condition by the department of dermatology and was treated accordingly, however, it worsened, prompting referral to our department. We performed a surgical excision of the lesion and reconstructed the resulting skin defect with a skin graft. Histopathological examination confirmed the diagnosis of elastofibroma. This case underscores the importance of including elastofibroma in the differential diagnosis of facial neoplasms, particularly when the presentation is phymatous.

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.