Background: Anastomotic leakage (AL) following esophagectomy represents a serious complication that often results in prolonged hospitalization and necessitates repeated interventions, including nothing-by-mouth (NPO) restriction, endoscopic vacuum therapy (EVT), or surgical repair. In this study, we evaluated the patterns and outcomes of AL treatment. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of patients who underwent esophagectomy for esophageal cancer at a single center between 2003 and 2020. Of 3,096 examined cases, 181 patients (5.8%) with AL were included in the study: 114 patients (63%) with cervical anastomosis (CA) and 67 (37%) with intrathoracic anastomosis (TA). Results: The incidence of AL was 11.9% in the CA and 3.2% in the TA group (p<0.001).Among patients with CA who developed AL, 87 (76.3%) were managed with NPO, 15 (13.2%) with EVT, and 12 (10.5%) with surgical repair. Over 90% of patients with cervical AL resumed an oral diet by the time of discharge, regardless of treatment method. Among patients with TA and AL, 36 (53.7%) received NPO, 25 (37.7%) underwent EVT, and 6 (9%) required surgery. Of these, 34 patients who were managed with NPO and 19 with EVT could resume an oral diet. However, only 2 patients who underwent surgery resumed an oral diet, and 2 patients required additional EVT. Conclusion Although patients with CA displayed a higher incidence of AL, their rate of successful oral intake exceeded that of those with TA, regardless of treatment method.Among patients exhibiting AL with TA, EVT was more commonly employed than in CA cases, and it appears effective.

Purpose: This multi-center, retrospective study was conducted to evaluate the long-term survival in patients who underwent surgical resection for small cell lung cancer (SCLC) and to identify the benefit of adjuvant therapy following surgery. Materials and Methods: The data of 213 patients who underwent surgical resection for SCLC at four institutions were retrospectively reviewed. Patients who received neoadjuvant therapy or an incomplete resection were excluded. Results: The mean patient age was 65.29±8.93 years, and 184 patients (86.4%) were male. Lobectomies and pneumonectomies were performed in 173 patients (81.2%), and 198 (93%) underwent systematic mediastinal lymph node dissections. Overall, 170 patients (79.8%) underwent adjuvant chemotherapy, 42 (19.7%) underwent radiotherapy to the mediastinum, and 23 (10.8%) underwent prophylactic cranial irradiation. The median follow-up period was 31.08 months (interquartile range, 13.79 to 64.52 months). The 5-year overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival were 53.4% and 46.9%, respectively. The 5-year OS significantly improved after adjuvant chemotherapy in all patients (57.4% vs. 40.3%, p=0.007), and the survival benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy was significant in patients with negative node pathology (70.8% vs. 39.7%, p=0.004). Adjuvant radiotherapy did not affect the 5-year OS (54.6% vs. 48.5%, p=0.458). Age (hazard ratio [HR], 1.032; p=0.017), node metastasis (HR, 2.190; p < 0.001), and adjuvant chemotherapy (HR, 0.558; p=0.019) were associated with OS. Conclusion Adjuvant chemotherapy after surgical resection in patients with SCLC improved the OS, though adjuvant radiotherapy to the mediastinum did not improve the survival or decrease the locoregional recurrence rate.

Purpose: The purpose of the study was to validate the Korean version of Cancer Survivors’ Unmet Needs (CaSUN) scale among non–small cell lung cancer survivors. Materials and Methods: Participants were recruited from outpatient clinics at the Samsung Medical Center in Seoul, South Korea, from January to October 2020. Participants completed a survey questionnaire that included the CaSUN. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis and Pearson’s correlations were used to evaluate the reliability and validity of the Korean version of the CaSUN (CaSUN-K). We also tested known-group validity using an independent t test or ANOVA. Results: In total, 949 provided informed consent and all of which completed the questionnaire. Among the 949 patients, 529 (55.7%) were male; the mean age and median time since the end of active treatment (standard deviation) was 63.4±8.8 years and the median was 18 months. Although the factor loadings were different from those for the original scale, the Cronbach’s alpha coefficients of the six domains in the CaSUN-K ranged from 0.68 to 0.95, indicating satisfactory internal consistency. In the CFA, the goodness-of-fit indices for the CaSUN-K were high. Moderate correlations demonstrated the convergent validity of CaSUN-K with the relevant questionnaire. More than 60% of the participants reported information-related unmet needs, and the CaSUN-K discriminated between the needs reported by the different subgroups that we analyzed. Conclusion The CaSUN-K is a reliable and valid measure for assessing the unmet needs in a cancer population, thus this tool help population to receive timely, targeted, and relevant care.

Background: There has been no comparison of the determinants of admission route between acute ischemic stroke (AIS) and acute myocardial infarction (AMI). We examined whether factors associated with direct versus transferred-in admission to regional cardiocerebrovascular centers (RCVCs) differed between AIS and AMI. Methods: Using a nationwide RCVC registry, we identified consecutive patients presenting with AMI and AIS between July 2016 and December 2018. We explored factors associated with direct admission to RCVCs in patients with AIS and AMI and examined whether those associations differed between AIS and AMI, including interaction terms between each factor and disease type in multivariable models. To explore the influence of emergency medical service (EMS) paramedics on hospital selection, stratified analyses according to use of EMS were also performed. Results: Among the 17,897 and 8,927 AIS and AMI patients, 66.6% and 48.2% were directly admitted to RCVCs, respectively. Multivariable analysis showed that previous coronary heart disease, prehospital awareness, higher education level, and EMS use increased the odds of direct admission to RCVCs, but the odds ratio (OR) was different between AIS and AMI (for the first 3 factors, AMI > AIS; for EMS use, AMI < AIS). EMS use was the single most important factor for both AIS and AMI (OR, 4.72 vs. 3.90). Hypertension and hyperlipidemia increased, while living alone decreased the odds of direct admission only in AMI;additionally, age (65–74 years), previous stroke, and presentation during non-working hours increased the odds only in AIS. EMS use weakened the associations between direct admission and most factors in both AIS and AMI. Conclusions Various patient factors were differentially associated with direct admission to RCVCs between AIS and AMI. Public education for symptom awareness and use of EMS is essential in optimizing the transportation and hospitalization of patients with AMI and AIS.

Purpose: The Korean Renal Cancer Study Group (KRoCS) provides consensus recommendations on the role of cytoreductive nephrectomy (CRN) in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). Materials and Methods: A group of mRCC experts from the Korean Urological Oncology Society convened at the 2021 KRoCS meeting on CRN for mRCC. Results: The consensus document was developed to address 4 questions related that were judged to be the most relevant to patient care: (1) Is there a role for CRN in patients planning targeted therapy? (2) Is there a role for CRN in patients planning immuno-oncology agents? (3) When is the optimal time of CRN in patients planning systemic treatment? (4) What is the ideal patient selection for CRN? The panelists have come up with following consensus. For mRCC patients, CRN should be considered only in those with IMDC (International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium) favorable and intermediate risk disease, regardless of the systemic treatment plans. Timing of CRN should consider the risk group as well as the number of risk factors, but is generally recommended for after assessing the degree of response to initial systemic treatment. Patients with good performance status, limited metastatic burden on top of resectable primary tumor are candidates recommended for CRN with or without metastasectomy with priority. Conclusions In conclusion, there is still a role for CRN in the multimodality treatment of mRCC. Careful patient selection is of paramount importance. As the treatment landscape of mRCC continues to change, the role of CRN in the current immuno-oncology era will require more exploration.

Background and Objectives: The outcome benefits of β-blockers in chronic coronary artery disease (CAD) have not been fully assessed. We evaluated the prognostic impact of β-blockers on patients with chronic CAD after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Methods: A total of 3,075 patients with chronic CAD were included from the Grand DrugEluting Stent registry. We analyzed β-blocker prescriptions, including doses and types, in each patient at 3-month intervals from discharge. After propensity score matching, 1,170 pairs of patients (β-blockers vs. no β-blockers) were derived. Primary outcome was defined as a composite endpoint of all-cause death and myocardial infarction (MI). We further analyzed the outcome benefits of different doses (low-, medium-, and high-dose) and types (conventional or vasodilating) of β-blockers. Results: During a median (interquartile range) follow-up of 3.1 (3.0–3.1) years, 134 (5.7%) patients experienced primary outcome. Overall, β-blockers demonstrated no significant benefit in primary outcome (hazard ratio [HR], 0.88; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.63–1.24), all-cause death (HR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.60–1.25), and MI (HR, 1.25; 95% CI, 0.49–3.15). In subgroup analysis, β-blockers were associated with a lower risk of all-cause death in patients with previous MI and/ or revascularization (HR, 0.38; 95% CI, 0.14–0.99) (p for interaction=0.045). No significant associations were found for the clinical outcomes with different doses and types of β-blockers. Conclusions Overall, β-blocker therapy was not associated with better clinical outcomes in patients with chronic CAD undergoing PCI. Limited mortality benefit of β-blockers may exist for patients with previous MI and/or revascularization.

Purpose: Survival probability changes over time in cancer survivors. This study examined conditional survival in patients undergoing curative resection for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Materials and Methods: Five-year conditional recurrence-free survival (CRFS), conditional overall survival (COS), and conditional relative survival (CRS) up to 10 years after surgery were calculated in patients who underwent NSCLC resection from 1994 to 2016. These rates were stratified according to age, sex, year of diagnosis, pathological stage, tumor histology, smoking status, comorbidity, and lung function. Results: Five-year CRFS increased from 65.6% at baseline to 90.9% at 10 years after surgery. Early differences in 5-year CRFS according to stratified patient characteristics disappeared, except for age: older patients exhibited persistently lower 5-year CRFS. Five-year COS increased from 72.7% to 78.3% at 8 years and then decreased to 75.4% at 10 years. Five-year CRS increased from 79.0% at baseline to 86.8% at 10 years. Older age and higher pathologic stage were associated with lower 5-year COS and CRS up to 10 years after surgery. Female patients, those with adenocarcinoma histology, non-smokers, patient without comorbidities and had good lung function showed higher COS and CRS. Conclusion CRFS improved over time, but significant risk remained after 5 years. CRS slightly improved over time but did not reach 90%, suggesting significant excess mortality compared to the general population. Age and stage remained significant predictors of conditional survival several years after surgery. Our conditional survival estimates should help clinicians and patients make informed treatment and personal life decisions based on survivorship status.

Background/Aims: Recent data indicate the presence of liver enzyme abnormalities in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We aimed to evaluate the clinical features and treatment outcomes of COVID-19 patients with abnormal liver enzymes. Methods: We performed a retrospective, multicenter study of 874 COVID-19 patients admitted to five tertiary hospitals from February 20 to April 14, 2020. Data on clinical features, laboratory parameters, medications, and treatment outcomes were collected until April 30, 2020, and compared between patients with normal and abnormal aminotransferases. Results: Abnormal aminotransferase levels were observed in 362 patients (41.1%), of which 94 out of 130 (72.3%) and 268 out of 744 (36.0%) belonged to the severe and non-severe COVID-19 categories, respectively. The odds ratios (95% confidence interval) for male patients, patients with a higher body mass index, patients with severe COVID-19 status, and patients with lower platelet counts were 1.500 (1.029 to 2.184, p=0.035), 1.097 (1.012 to 1.189, p=0.024), 2.377 (1.458 to 3.875, p=0.001), and 0.995 (0.993 to 0.998, p>0.001), respectively, indicating an independent association of these variables with elevated aminotransferase levels. Lopinavir/ ritonavir and antibiotic use increased the odds ratio of abnormal aminotransferase levels after admission (1.832 and 2.646, respectively, both p<0.05). The median time to release from quarantine was longer (22 days vs 26 days, p=0.001) and the mortality rate was higher (13.0% vs 2.9%, p<0.001) in patients with abnormal aminotransferase levels. Conclusions Abnormal aminotransferase levels are common in COVID-19 patients and are associated with poor clinical outcomes. Multivariate analysis of patients with normal aminotransferase levels on admission showed that the use of lopinavir/ritonavir and antibiotics was associated with abnormal aminotransferase levels; thus, careful monitoring is needed.

Background/Aims: Recent data indicate the presence of liver enzyme abnormalities in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We aimed to evaluate the clinical features and treatment outcomes of COVID-19 patients with abnormal liver enzymes. Methods: We performed a retrospective, multicenter study of 874 COVID-19 patients admitted to five tertiary hospitals from February 20 to April 14, 2020. Data on clinical features, laboratory parameters, medications, and treatment outcomes were collected until April 30, 2020, and compared between patients with normal and abnormal aminotransferases. Results: Abnormal aminotransferase levels were observed in 362 patients (41.1%), of which 94 out of 130 (72.3%) and 268 out of 744 (36.0%) belonged to the severe and non-severe COVID-19 categories, respectively. The odds ratios (95% confidence interval) for male patients, patients with a higher body mass index, patients with severe COVID-19 status, and patients with lower platelet counts were 1.500 (1.029 to 2.184, p=0.035), 1.097 (1.012 to 1.189, p=0.024), 2.377 (1.458 to 3.875, p=0.001), and 0.995 (0.993 to 0.998, p>0.001), respectively, indicating an independent association of these variables with elevated aminotransferase levels. Lopinavir/ ritonavir and antibiotic use increased the odds ratio of abnormal aminotransferase levels after admission (1.832 and 2.646, respectively, both p<0.05). The median time to release from quarantine was longer (22 days vs 26 days, p=0.001) and the mortality rate was higher (13.0% vs 2.9%, p<0.001) in patients with abnormal aminotransferase levels. Conclusions Abnormal aminotransferase levels are common in COVID-19 patients and are associated with poor clinical outcomes. Multivariate analysis of patients with normal aminotransferase levels on admission showed that the use of lopinavir/ritonavir and antibiotics was associated with abnormal aminotransferase levels; thus, careful monitoring is needed.