Background/Aims: Ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA) is the only well-established and widely used agent for dissolving gallstones. Epidemiological and animal studies have suggested potential therapeutic benefits of n-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFA) for dissolving cholesterol gallstones. We evaluated whether adding PUFA to UDCA improves gallstone dissolution in patients with cholesterol gallstones. Methods: This randomized, prospective, preliminary clinical trial compared the efficacy and safety of UDCA plus PUFA combination therapy (combination group) with those of UDCA monotherapy (monotherapy group). The inclusion criteria were a gallstone diameter ≤15 mm on ultra-sonography, radiolucent stones on plain X-ray, and no to mild symptoms. Gallstone dissolution rates, response rates, and adverse events were evaluated. Results: Of the 59 screened patients, 45 patients completed treatment (24 and 21 in the monotherapy and combination groups, respectively). The gallstone dissolution rate tended to be higher in the combination group than in the monotherapy group (45.7% vs 9.9%, p=0.070). The radiological response rate was also significantly higher in the combination group (90.5% vs 41.7%, p=0.007). In both groups, dissolution and response rates were higher in patients with gallbladder sludge than in those with distinct stones. Four adverse events (two in each group) were observed, none of which were study drug-related or led to drug discontinuation. The incidence of these adverse events was similar in both groups (combination vs monotherapy: 9.5% vs 8.3%, p=0.890). Conclusions UDCA plus PUFA therapy dissolves cholesterol gallstones more effectively than UDCA monotherapy, without significant complications. Further prospective, large-scale studies of this combination therapy are warranted.

Background/Aims: Ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA) is the only well-established and widely used agent for dissolving gallstones. Epidemiological and animal studies have suggested potential therapeutic benefits of n-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFA) for dissolving cholesterol gallstones. We evaluated whether adding PUFA to UDCA improves gallstone dissolution in patients with cholesterol gallstones. Methods: This randomized, prospective, preliminary clinical trial compared the efficacy and safety of UDCA plus PUFA combination therapy (combination group) with those of UDCA monotherapy (monotherapy group). The inclusion criteria were a gallstone diameter ≤15 mm on ultra-sonography, radiolucent stones on plain X-ray, and no to mild symptoms. Gallstone dissolution rates, response rates, and adverse events were evaluated. Results: Of the 59 screened patients, 45 patients completed treatment (24 and 21 in the monotherapy and combination groups, respectively). The gallstone dissolution rate tended to be higher in the combination group than in the monotherapy group (45.7% vs 9.9%, p=0.070). The radiological response rate was also significantly higher in the combination group (90.5% vs 41.7%, p=0.007). In both groups, dissolution and response rates were higher in patients with gallbladder sludge than in those with distinct stones. Four adverse events (two in each group) were observed, none of which were study drug-related or led to drug discontinuation. The incidence of these adverse events was similar in both groups (combination vs monotherapy: 9.5% vs 8.3%, p=0.890). Conclusions UDCA plus PUFA therapy dissolves cholesterol gallstones more effectively than UDCA monotherapy, without significant complications. Further prospective, large-scale studies of this combination therapy are warranted.

Background/Aims: Ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA) is the only well-established and widely used agent for dissolving gallstones. Epidemiological and animal studies have suggested potential therapeutic benefits of n-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFA) for dissolving cholesterol gallstones. We evaluated whether adding PUFA to UDCA improves gallstone dissolution in patients with cholesterol gallstones. Methods: This randomized, prospective, preliminary clinical trial compared the efficacy and safety of UDCA plus PUFA combination therapy (combination group) with those of UDCA monotherapy (monotherapy group). The inclusion criteria were a gallstone diameter ≤15 mm on ultra-sonography, radiolucent stones on plain X-ray, and no to mild symptoms. Gallstone dissolution rates, response rates, and adverse events were evaluated. Results: Of the 59 screened patients, 45 patients completed treatment (24 and 21 in the monotherapy and combination groups, respectively). The gallstone dissolution rate tended to be higher in the combination group than in the monotherapy group (45.7% vs 9.9%, p=0.070). The radiological response rate was also significantly higher in the combination group (90.5% vs 41.7%, p=0.007). In both groups, dissolution and response rates were higher in patients with gallbladder sludge than in those with distinct stones. Four adverse events (two in each group) were observed, none of which were study drug-related or led to drug discontinuation. The incidence of these adverse events was similar in both groups (combination vs monotherapy: 9.5% vs 8.3%, p=0.890). Conclusions UDCA plus PUFA therapy dissolves cholesterol gallstones more effectively than UDCA monotherapy, without significant complications. Further prospective, large-scale studies of this combination therapy are warranted.

Background/Aims: Ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA) is the only well-established and widely used agent for dissolving gallstones. Epidemiological and animal studies have suggested potential therapeutic benefits of n-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFA) for dissolving cholesterol gallstones. We evaluated whether adding PUFA to UDCA improves gallstone dissolution in patients with cholesterol gallstones. Methods: This randomized, prospective, preliminary clinical trial compared the efficacy and safety of UDCA plus PUFA combination therapy (combination group) with those of UDCA monotherapy (monotherapy group). The inclusion criteria were a gallstone diameter ≤15 mm on ultra-sonography, radiolucent stones on plain X-ray, and no to mild symptoms. Gallstone dissolution rates, response rates, and adverse events were evaluated. Results: Of the 59 screened patients, 45 patients completed treatment (24 and 21 in the monotherapy and combination groups, respectively). The gallstone dissolution rate tended to be higher in the combination group than in the monotherapy group (45.7% vs 9.9%, p=0.070). The radiological response rate was also significantly higher in the combination group (90.5% vs 41.7%, p=0.007). In both groups, dissolution and response rates were higher in patients with gallbladder sludge than in those with distinct stones. Four adverse events (two in each group) were observed, none of which were study drug-related or led to drug discontinuation. The incidence of these adverse events was similar in both groups (combination vs monotherapy: 9.5% vs 8.3%, p=0.890). Conclusions UDCA plus PUFA therapy dissolves cholesterol gallstones more effectively than UDCA monotherapy, without significant complications. Further prospective, large-scale studies of this combination therapy are warranted.

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.

Objective: Biliary decompression through bile drainage is a key treatment for common bile duct obstruction with cholangitis. However, the effectiveness of early interventions has not been studied sufficiently in Korea. This study investigated the effectiveness of fast-track biliary decompression. Methods: A group of patients diagnosed with common bile duct obstruction with cholangitis between January 1, 2014, and December 31, 2019, was reviewed retrospectively. We divided them into two groups: before and after the implementation of fast-track biliary decompression. The following items were analyzed in the two groups: time to intervention, number of hospital days, length of stay in the emergency department, and intensive care unit (ICU) admission. Results: Between January 1, 2014, and December 31, 2019, 418 patients were admitted for common bile duct obstruction, and a total of 369 patients were included in this study. Of these, 168 patients visited the hospital prior to implementation of the treatment, and 201 patients visited after implementation. The time to intervention was 6.1 (4.2-11.0) hours in the fast-track group, which was about 9 hours shorter than the other group (P<0.001). There was no statistical difference in the number of hospital days, emergency department length of stay, and ICU admissions (P=0.535, P=0.034, P=0.322). Conclusion The time to intervention was shortened significantly in the fast-track group. However, we did not observe a significant improvement in patient prognosis. It may be possible that the procedure time may need to be shortened for a better prognosis. This should be investigated in future studies.

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: 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: 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.