Objective: To assess the success rate and proximity of miniscrews to the root using surgical guides produced by integrating data obtained from conebeam computed tomography and intraoral scanned models. Methods: This retrospective study involved 113 patients (224 miniscrews) who underwent miniscrew placement as part of their orthodontic treatment. Two operators placed miniscrews between the buccal alveolar bone of each patient and assessed initial stability by measuring the Periotest value (PTV) and insertion torque (IT). Patients were divided into two groups based on the miniscrew insertion method: manual group (MG) and surgical guide group (SG). Root proximity was assessed using periapical radiography, and miniscrews that remained in place for over 6 months were considered successful. Results: There was a statistically significant difference in the Kaplan–Meier survival curves between the groups (P < 0.05). The success rates of the miniscrews were 79.1% and 90.5% for the MG and SG, respectively (P < 0.05). The root contact rate also differed significantly between the groups (MG, 17.5%; SG, 0.1%; P < 0.001). However, the PTV and IT did not show significant differences between the groups. Conclusions Proximity to the root and utilization of surgical guides have the most direct impact on the success rate of miniscrews. Root proximity can be effectively reduced using surgical guides. Therefore, the use of a miniscrew surgical guide is recommended to increase the success rate of miniscrews as stable anchorage devices, particularly in cases with narrow interradicular space.

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: 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: Trapeziectomy with suspension arthroplasty is a reliable treatment for thumb carpometacarpal (CMC) osteoarthritis.We modified the suture suspension technique to add further support to maintain the arthroplasty space by interposition of the dermal allograft. Our aim was to investigate the surgical outcomes of our technique of suspension arthroplasty with dermal allograft interposition (SADI) compared with those of traditional ligament reconstruction with tendon interposition (LRTI) using a half-sling of the flexor carpi radialis (FCR) tendon. Methods: This retrospective study enrolled 26 patients (29 thumbs) with thumb CMC arthritis who underwent trapeziectomy with traditional LRTI using the FCR tendon (15 thumbs; LRTI group) or SADI (14 thumbs; SADI group) between January 2017 and May 2022. Patient-reported outcomes (visual analog scale; the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand score; and patient-rated wrist evaluation), grip strength, and scaphometacarpal distance were measured at baseline and 3 and 12 months postoperatively. The operation time was checked by reviewing medical records. All measurements were compared between the 2 groups. Results: Between baseline and 12-month postoperative follow-up, all patient-reported outcomes significantly improved in both groups. Patient-reported outcomes, grip strength, and scaphometacarpal distance showed no differences between the 2 groups at all follow-up assessments, except for the scaphometacarpal distance being significantly greater in the SADI group at 3 months postoperatively. The operation time was significantly shorter in the SADI group. No complication was observed in either group. Conclusions Our modified suture suspension arthroplasty technique using dermal allograft interposition results in markedly shorter surgical times with similar surgical outcomes compared with those of traditional LRTI using the FCR tendon. This procedure appears to be an effective alternative treatment for thumb CMC arthritis.

Background: Active surveillance (AS) has emerged as a viable management strategy for low-risk papillary thyroid microcarcinoma (PTMC), following pioneering trials at Kuma Hospital and the Cancer Institute Hospital in Japan. Numerous prospective cohort studies have since validated AS as a management option for low-risk PTMC, leading to its inclusion in thyroid cancer guidelines across various countries. From 2016 to 2020, the Multicenter Prospective Cohort Study of Active Surveillance on Papillary Thyroid Microcarcinoma (MAeSTro) enrolled 1,177 patients, providing comprehensive data on PTMC progression, sonographic predictors of progression, quality of life, surgical outcomes, and cost-effectiveness when comparing AS to immediate surgery. The second phase of MAeSTro (MAeSTro-EXP) expands AS to low-risk papillary thyroid carcinoma (PTC) tumors larger than 1 cm, driven by the hypothesis that overall risk assessment outweighs absolute tumor size in surgical decision-making. Methods: This protocol aims to address whether limiting AS to tumors smaller than 1 cm may result in unnecessary surgeries for low-risk PTCs detected during their rapid initial growth phase. By expanding the AS criteria to include tumors up to 1.5 cm, while simultaneously refining and standardizing the criteria for risk assessment and disease progression, we aim to minimize overtreatment and maintain rigorous monitoring to improve patient outcomes. Conclusion This study will contribute to optimizing AS guidelines and enhance our understanding of the natural course and appropriate management of low-risk PTCs. Additionally, MAeSTro-EXP involves a multinational collaboration between South Korea and Australia. This cross-country study aims to identify cultural and racial differences in the management of low-risk PTC, thereby enriching the global understanding of AS practices and their applicability across diverse populations.

Purpose: This study compared the outcomes of haploidentical-related donor (HRD) and umbilical cord blood (UCB) hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) in pediatric patients with hematologic malignancies. Methods: Data on patients who underwent HRD HSCT with post-transplant cyclophosphamide (n = 41) and UCB HSCT (n = 24) after targeted busulfan-based myeloablative conditioning with intensive pharmacokinetic monitoring between 2009 and 2018 were retrospectively analyzed. Results: The median follow-up durations in the HRD and UCB groups were 7.0 and 10.9 years, respectively. The cumu‑ lative incidence of acute graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) grades II–IV and moderate-to-severe chronic GVHD did not differ significantly between the groups. However, the HRD group demonstrated significantly lower rates of acute GVHD grades III–IV (4.9% vs. 29.2%, p = 0.009) and non-relapse mortality (2.6% vs. 34.2%, p < 0.001) but a higher relapse incidence (32.1% vs. 8.8%, p = 0.004) than the UCB group. The 5-year event-free and overall survival rates were 65.8% and 54.2% (p = 0.204) and 78.0% and 65.7% (p = 0.142) for the HRD and UCB groups, respectively. Multivariate analysis identified disease status as a significant risk factor for overall survival (hazard ratio, 3.24; p = 0.016). Additionally, UCB HSCT exhibited a trend toward worse event-free survival compared to HRD HSCT (hazard ratio, 2.63; p = 0.05). Conclusions These findings indicate that HRD HSCT with post-transplant cyclophosphamide provides promising outcomes compared to UCB HSCT in pediatric patients, with a trend toward improved survival over a long-term follow-up period exceeding a median of 7 years. Thus, HRD HSCT may be a valuable option for pediatric patients with‑ out human leukocyte antigen-matched donors.

Objective: To assess the success rate and proximity of miniscrews to the root using surgical guides produced by integrating data obtained from conebeam computed tomography and intraoral scanned models. Methods: This retrospective study involved 113 patients (224 miniscrews) who underwent miniscrew placement as part of their orthodontic treatment. Two operators placed miniscrews between the buccal alveolar bone of each patient and assessed initial stability by measuring the Periotest value (PTV) and insertion torque (IT). Patients were divided into two groups based on the miniscrew insertion method: manual group (MG) and surgical guide group (SG). Root proximity was assessed using periapical radiography, and miniscrews that remained in place for over 6 months were considered successful. Results: There was a statistically significant difference in the Kaplan–Meier survival curves between the groups (P < 0.05). The success rates of the miniscrews were 79.1% and 90.5% for the MG and SG, respectively (P < 0.05). The root contact rate also differed significantly between the groups (MG, 17.5%; SG, 0.1%; P < 0.001). However, the PTV and IT did not show significant differences between the groups. Conclusions Proximity to the root and utilization of surgical guides have the most direct impact on the success rate of miniscrews. Root proximity can be effectively reduced using surgical guides. Therefore, the use of a miniscrew surgical guide is recommended to increase the success rate of miniscrews as stable anchorage devices, particularly in cases with narrow interradicular space.

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: 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.