Since the role of the liver in metabolic dysfunction, including type 2 diabetes mellitus, was demonstrated, studies on non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) and metabolic dysfunction-associated fatty liver disease (MAFLD) have shown associations between fatty liver disease and other metabolic diseases. Unlike the exclusionary diagnostic criteria of NAFLD, MAFLD diagnosis is based on the presence of metabolic dysregulation in fatty liver disease. Renaming NAFLD as MAFLD also introduced simpler diagnostic criteria. In 2023, a new nomenclature, steatotic liver disease (SLD), was proposed. Similar to MAFLD, SLD diagnosis is based on the presence of hepatic steatosis with at least one cardiometabolic dysfunction. SLD is categorized into metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD), metabolic dysfunction and alcohol-related/-associated liver disease, alcoholrelated liver disease, specific etiology SLD, and cryptogenic SLD. The term MASLD has been adopted by a number of leading national and international societies due to its concise diagnostic criteria, exclusion of other concomitant liver diseases, and lack of stigmatizing terms. This article reviews the diagnostic criteria, clinical relevance, and differences among NAFLD, MAFLD, and MASLD from a diabetologist’s perspective and provides a rationale for adopting SLD/MASLD in the Fatty Liver Research Group of the Korean Diabetes Association.

Since the role of the liver in metabolic dysfunction, including type 2 diabetes mellitus, was demonstrated, studies on non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) and metabolic dysfunction-associated fatty liver disease (MAFLD) have shown associations between fatty liver disease and other metabolic diseases. Unlike the exclusionary diagnostic criteria of NAFLD, MAFLD diagnosis is based on the presence of metabolic dysregulation in fatty liver disease. Renaming NAFLD as MAFLD also introduced simpler diagnostic criteria. In 2023, a new nomenclature, steatotic liver disease (SLD), was proposed. Similar to MAFLD, SLD diagnosis is based on the presence of hepatic steatosis with at least one cardiometabolic dysfunction. SLD is categorized into metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD), metabolic dysfunction and alcohol-related/-associated liver disease, alcoholrelated liver disease, specific etiology SLD, and cryptogenic SLD. The term MASLD has been adopted by a number of leading national and international societies due to its concise diagnostic criteria, exclusion of other concomitant liver diseases, and lack of stigmatizing terms. This article reviews the diagnostic criteria, clinical relevance, and differences among NAFLD, MAFLD, and MASLD from a diabetologist’s perspective and provides a rationale for adopting SLD/MASLD in the Fatty Liver Research Group of the Korean Diabetes Association.

Since the role of the liver in metabolic dysfunction, including type 2 diabetes mellitus, was demonstrated, studies on non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) and metabolic dysfunction-associated fatty liver disease (MAFLD) have shown associations between fatty liver disease and other metabolic diseases. Unlike the exclusionary diagnostic criteria of NAFLD, MAFLD diagnosis is based on the presence of metabolic dysregulation in fatty liver disease. Renaming NAFLD as MAFLD also introduced simpler diagnostic criteria. In 2023, a new nomenclature, steatotic liver disease (SLD), was proposed. Similar to MAFLD, SLD diagnosis is based on the presence of hepatic steatosis with at least one cardiometabolic dysfunction. SLD is categorized into metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD), metabolic dysfunction and alcohol-related/-associated liver disease, alcoholrelated liver disease, specific etiology SLD, and cryptogenic SLD. The term MASLD has been adopted by a number of leading national and international societies due to its concise diagnostic criteria, exclusion of other concomitant liver diseases, and lack of stigmatizing terms. This article reviews the diagnostic criteria, clinical relevance, and differences among NAFLD, MAFLD, and MASLD from a diabetologist’s perspective and provides a rationale for adopting SLD/MASLD in the Fatty Liver Research Group of the Korean Diabetes Association.

Since the role of the liver in metabolic dysfunction, including type 2 diabetes mellitus, was demonstrated, studies on non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) and metabolic dysfunction-associated fatty liver disease (MAFLD) have shown associations between fatty liver disease and other metabolic diseases. Unlike the exclusionary diagnostic criteria of NAFLD, MAFLD diagnosis is based on the presence of metabolic dysregulation in fatty liver disease. Renaming NAFLD as MAFLD also introduced simpler diagnostic criteria. In 2023, a new nomenclature, steatotic liver disease (SLD), was proposed. Similar to MAFLD, SLD diagnosis is based on the presence of hepatic steatosis with at least one cardiometabolic dysfunction. SLD is categorized into metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD), metabolic dysfunction and alcohol-related/-associated liver disease, alcoholrelated liver disease, specific etiology SLD, and cryptogenic SLD. The term MASLD has been adopted by a number of leading national and international societies due to its concise diagnostic criteria, exclusion of other concomitant liver diseases, and lack of stigmatizing terms. This article reviews the diagnostic criteria, clinical relevance, and differences among NAFLD, MAFLD, and MASLD from a diabetologist’s perspective and provides a rationale for adopting SLD/MASLD in the Fatty Liver Research Group of the Korean Diabetes Association.

Ischemic heart disease remains the primary cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide.Despite significant advancements in pharmacological and revascularization techniques in the late 20th century, heart failure prevalence after myocardial infarction has gradually increased over the last 2 decades. After ischemic injury, pathological remodeling results in cardiomyocytes (CMs) loss and fibrosis, which leads to impaired heart function.Unfortunately, there are no clinical therapies to regenerate CMs to date, and the adult heart’s limited turnover rate of CMs hinders its ability to self-regenerate. In this review, we present novel therapeutic strategies to regenerate injured myocardium, including (1) reconstruction of cardiac niche microenvironment, (2) recruitment of functional CMs by promoting their proliferation or differentiation, and (3) organizing 3-dimensional tissue construct beyond the CMs. Additionally, we highlight recent mechanistic insights that govern these strategies and identify current challenges in translating these approaches to human patients.

Objective: Incontrovertible disease markers are absent in delirium. This study investigated the usefulness of quantitative electroencephalography (qEEG) in diagnosing delirium. Methods: This retrospective case-control study reviewed medical records and qEEG data of 69 age/sex-matched patients (delirium group, n=30; control group, n=39). The first minute of artifact-free EEG data with eyes closed was selected. Nineteen electrodes’ sensitivity, specificity, and correlation with delirium rating scale-revised-98 were analyzed. Results: On comparing the means of absolute power by frontal, central, and posterior regions, the delta and theta powers showed significant differences (p<0.001) in all regions, and the magnitude of the absolute power was higher in the delirium group than in the control group; only the posterior region showed a significant (p<0.001) difference in beta power. The spectral power of theta at the frontal region (area under the curve [AUC]=0.84) and theta at the central and posterior regions (AUC=0.83) showed 90% sensitivity and 79% specificity, respectively, in differentiating delirious patients and controls. The beta power of the central region showed a significant negative correlation with delirium severity (R=-0.457, p=0.011). Conclusion Power spectrum analysis of qEEG showed high accuracy in screening delirium among patients. The study suggests qEEG as a potential aid in diagnosing delirium.

Objectives: ：This study assessed the psychological impact of quarantine during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak. Methods: ：A total of 2080 participants filled the self-report questionnaire from March 17 to April 20, 2020 in Daegu, Republic of Korea. An online link was sent to currently or previously quarantined participants. The self-report questionnaire included patient health questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9), generalized anxiety disorder-7 (GAD-7), primary care post-traumatic stress disorder screen for diagnostic and statistical manual-5 (PTSD-PC), state-trait anger expression inventory (STAXI), and P4 suicidality screener scale (P4). PHQ-9 score of 5 or more and 9 or less indicates mild to moderate depressive symptoms, and 10 or more indicates severe depressive symptoms; A GAD-7 score of 5 or more and 14 or less indicates mild to moderate anxiety symptoms, and a score of 15 or more indicates severe anxiety symptoms; A PTSD-PC-5 score of 2 indicates mild to moderate PTSD; a score of 3 or higher indicates severe PTSD; A STAXI score of 14 or higher indicates severe anger symptoms; In P4, the cut-off points for each self-report questionnaire were set as mild suicidal thoughts at 1 point or more and 2 points or less, and severe suicide thoughts at 3 or more points. Logistic regression analyses were used to explore COVID-19-related risk factors. Results: ：The prevalence of mental health symptoms among the survey respondents was at 52.5% for depression, 44.5% for anxiety, 39.4% for post-traumatic stress, 31.6% for anger, and 10.9% for suicidal ideation. Participants with confirmed or suspected COVID-19 family members showed a high risk for symptoms of anxiety, posttraumatic stress, and anger. Participants with financial loss had increased symptoms of depression, anxiety, posttraumatic stress, anger, and suicidal ideation. Participants with a history of medical/psychiatric illnesses reported more symptoms of depression, anxiety, post-traumatic stress, anger, and suicidal ideation. Having inadequate basic supplies during quarantine was associated with negative mental health outcomes. Conclusions ：Quarantine had a negative psychological impact on all five mental health factors. The risk of depression, anxiety, post-traumatic stress disorder, anger, and suicidality increased among those who suffered from financial losses due to COVID-19. The associated risk factors will help identify populations at risk for mental health problems and implement mental health intervention policies.

Objective: Pre-treatment anxiety (PA) before chemotherapy increases complaints of chemotherapy-related symptoms (CRS). The results on the association have been inconsistent, and the effect of temperament remains unclear. We aimed to determine whether PA is a risk factor for CRS and the effect of differing temperaments on CRS. Methods: This prospective study comprised 176 breast cancer patients awaiting adjuvant chemotherapy post-surgery. We assessed CRS, PA, and temperament using the MD Anderson Symptom Inventory (MDASI), the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, and the short form of the Temperament and Character Inventory-Revised, respectively. The MDASI was re-administered three weeks after the first chemo-cycle. Results: PA showed weak positive correlation with several CRS after the first cycle; no CRS was significantly associated with PA when pre-treatment depressive symptoms and baseline CRS were adjusted in multiple regression analysis. Moderation model analysis indicated that the PA effect on several CRS, including pain, insomnia, anorexia, dry mouth, and vomiting, was moderated by harm avoidance (HA) but not by other temperament dimensions. In particular, PA was positively associated with CRS in patients with low HA. Conclusion The results in patients with low HA indicate that more attention to PA in patients with confident and optimistic temperaments is necessary.

Background/Aims: We evaluated the feasibility and long-term efficacy of the combination of cytarabine, idarubicin, and all-trans retinoic acid (ATRA) for treating patients with newly diagnosed acute promyelocytic leukemia (APL). Methods: We included 87 patients with newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia and a t(15;17) or promyelocytic leukemia/retinoic acid receptor alpha (PML-RARα) mutation. Patients received 12 mg/m2/day idarubicin intravenously for 3 days and 100 mg/m2/day cytarabine for 7 days, plus 45 mg/m2/day ATRA. Clinical outcomes included complete remission (CR), relapse-free survival (RFS), overall survival (OS), and the secondary malignancy incidence during a 20-year follow-up. Results: The CR, 10-year RFS, and 10-year OS rates were 89.7%, 94.1%, and 73.8%, respectively, for all patients. The 10-year OS rate was 100% for patients that achieved CR. Subjects were classified according to the white blood cell (WBC) count in peripheral blood at diagnosis (low-risk, WBC < 10,000/mm3; high-risk, WBC ≥ 10,000/mm3). The low-risk group had significantly higher RFS and OS rates than the high-risk group, but the outcomes were not superior to the current standard treatment (arsenic trioxide plus ATRA). Toxicities were similar to those observed with anthracycline plus ATRA, and higher than those observed with arsenic trioxide plus ATRA. The secondary malignancy incidence after APL treatment was 2.7%, among the 75 patients that achieved CR, and 5.0% among the 40 patients that survived more than 5 years after the APL diagnosis. Conclusions Adding cytarabine to anthracycline plus ATRA was not inferior to anthracycline plus ATRA alone, but it was not comparable to arsenic trioxide plus ATRA. The probability of secondary malignancy was low.