Purpose: Immunochemical fecal occult blood tests (iFOBT) have been utilized as the primary method for colorectal cancer screening within Korea's National Cancer Screening Program. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of the accreditation program for clinical laboratories and external quality assessment (EQA) programs on colorectal cancer screening. Methods: We analyzed the false-positive rates of iFOBT in colorectal cancer screening from 2016 to 2020 according to participation and performance in the Outstanding Laboratory Accreditation Program (OLAP) conducted by the Laboratory Medicine Foundation, and the External Quality Assessment programs run by the Korean Association of External Quality Assessment Service. Results: False-positive rates of iFOBT were lower among institutions accredited by OLAP (2.35%) compared with non-accredited (3.04%) and non-participating institutions (5.60%). Similarly, institutions participating in the EQA program exhibited lower false-positive rates (3.79%) compared to non-participants (7.04%). Within the iFOBT-specific EQA program, institutions that passed demonstrated the lowest false-positive rate (3.37%), while failing institutions showed the highest rate (9.07%), surpassing even non-participating institutions (6.44%). Conclusion Participation in quality management programs such as OLAP and EQA was associated with lower false-positive rates in iFOBT for colorectal cancer screening. These findings suggest that quality management initiatives can increase the accuracy of iFOBT, potentially improving the effectiveness of colorectal cancer screening programs, and reducing unnecessary follow-up procedures and associated healthcare costs.

Purpose: Immunochemical fecal occult blood tests (iFOBT) have been utilized as the primary method for colorectal cancer screening within Korea's National Cancer Screening Program. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of the accreditation program for clinical laboratories and external quality assessment (EQA) programs on colorectal cancer screening. Methods: We analyzed the false-positive rates of iFOBT in colorectal cancer screening from 2016 to 2020 according to participation and performance in the Outstanding Laboratory Accreditation Program (OLAP) conducted by the Laboratory Medicine Foundation, and the External Quality Assessment programs run by the Korean Association of External Quality Assessment Service. Results: False-positive rates of iFOBT were lower among institutions accredited by OLAP (2.35%) compared with non-accredited (3.04%) and non-participating institutions (5.60%). Similarly, institutions participating in the EQA program exhibited lower false-positive rates (3.79%) compared to non-participants (7.04%). Within the iFOBT-specific EQA program, institutions that passed demonstrated the lowest false-positive rate (3.37%), while failing institutions showed the highest rate (9.07%), surpassing even non-participating institutions (6.44%). Conclusion Participation in quality management programs such as OLAP and EQA was associated with lower false-positive rates in iFOBT for colorectal cancer screening. These findings suggest that quality management initiatives can increase the accuracy of iFOBT, potentially improving the effectiveness of colorectal cancer screening programs, and reducing unnecessary follow-up procedures and associated healthcare costs.

Purpose: Immunochemical fecal occult blood tests (iFOBT) have been utilized as the primary method for colorectal cancer screening within Korea's National Cancer Screening Program. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of the accreditation program for clinical laboratories and external quality assessment (EQA) programs on colorectal cancer screening. Methods: We analyzed the false-positive rates of iFOBT in colorectal cancer screening from 2016 to 2020 according to participation and performance in the Outstanding Laboratory Accreditation Program (OLAP) conducted by the Laboratory Medicine Foundation, and the External Quality Assessment programs run by the Korean Association of External Quality Assessment Service. Results: False-positive rates of iFOBT were lower among institutions accredited by OLAP (2.35%) compared with non-accredited (3.04%) and non-participating institutions (5.60%). Similarly, institutions participating in the EQA program exhibited lower false-positive rates (3.79%) compared to non-participants (7.04%). Within the iFOBT-specific EQA program, institutions that passed demonstrated the lowest false-positive rate (3.37%), while failing institutions showed the highest rate (9.07%), surpassing even non-participating institutions (6.44%). Conclusion Participation in quality management programs such as OLAP and EQA was associated with lower false-positive rates in iFOBT for colorectal cancer screening. These findings suggest that quality management initiatives can increase the accuracy of iFOBT, potentially improving the effectiveness of colorectal cancer screening programs, and reducing unnecessary follow-up procedures and associated healthcare costs.

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.

Purpose: This study aimed to evaluate the long-term clinical outcomes based on the ligation level of the inferior mesenteric artery (IMA) in patients with rectal cancer. Methods: This was a retrospective analysis of a prospectively collected database that included all patients who underwent elective low anterior resection for rectal cancer between January 2013 and December 2019. The clinical outcomes included oncological outcomes, postoperative complications, and functional outcomes. The oncological outcomes included overall survival (OS) and relapse-free survival (RFS). The functional outcomes, including defecatory and urogenital functions, were analyzed using the Fecal Incontinence Severity Index, International Prostate Symptom Score, and International Index of Erectile Function questionnaires. Results: In total, 545 patients were included in the analysis. Of these, 244 patients underwent high ligation (HL), whereas 301 underwent low ligation (LL). The tumor size was larger in the HL group than in the LL group. The number of harvested lymph nodes (LNs) was higher in the HL group than in the LL group. There were no significant differences in complication rates and recurrence patterns between the groups. There were no significant differences in 5-year RFS and OS between the groups. Cox regression analysis revealed that the ligation level (HL vs. LL) was not a significant risk factor for oncological outcomes. Regarding functional outcomes, the LL group showed a significant recovery in defecatory function 1 year postoperatively compared with the HL group. Conclusion LL with LNs dissection around the root of the IMA might not affect the oncologic outcomes comparing to HL; however, it has minimal benefit for defecatory function.

Background/Aims: Some management strategies for acute colonic diverticulitis remain controversial in Korean real-world practice because their clinical features differ from those in the West. This study aimed to investigate the opinions of Korean physicians regarding the diagnosis and treatment of acute diverticulitis. Methods: A web-based survey was conducted among gastroenterologists specializing on treating lower gastrointestinal disorders. The questionnaires concerned overall management strategies for colonic diverticulitis, including diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up. Results: In total, 209 gastroenterologists responded to the survey. Less than one-fourth of the respondents (23.6%) answered that left-sided colonic diverticulitis is more likely to be complicated than right-sided colonic diverticulitis. Most respondents agreed that immunocompromised patients with diverticulitis have worse clinical outcomes than immunocompetent patients (71.3%). Computed tomography was the most preferred tool for diagnosing diverticulitis (93.9%). Approximately 89% of the respondents answered that they believed antibiotic treatment is necessary to treat acute uncomplicated diverticulitis. Most respondents (92.6%) agreed that emergency surgery is not required for diverticulitis with an abscess or microperforation without panperitonitis. Further, 94.7% of the respondents agreed that colon cancer screening is necessary in patients aged ≥ 50 years with diverticulitis after they have recovered from acute illness. Many respondents (71.4%) agreed that surgery for recurrent diverticulitis should be individualized. Conclusions Opinions regarding management strategies for colonic diverticulitis among Korean gastroenterologists were well agreed upon in some areas but did not agree well in other areas. Evidence-based guidelines that meet the practical needs of the Korean population should be developed.

Background/Aims: Immunocompromised patients with acute colonic diverticulitis are at high risk for complications and failure of non-surgical treatment. However, evidence on the comparative outcomes of immunocompromised and immunocompetent patients with diverticulitis is lacking. This systematic review and meta-analysis investigated the outcomes of medical treatment in immunocompromised and immunocompetent patients with diverticulitis. Methods: A comprehensive literature search was conducted in PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library. Studies comparing the clinical outcomes of immunocompromised and immunocompetent patients with diverticulitis were included. Results: A total of 10 studies with 1,946,461 subjects were included in the quantitative synthesis. The risk of emergency surgery and postoperative mortality after emergency surgery was significantly higher in immunocompromised patients than in immunocompetent patients with diverticulitis (risk ratio [RR], 1.76; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.31–2.38 and RR, 3.05; 95% CI, 1.70–5.45, respectively). Overall risk of complications associated with diverticulitis was non-significantly higher in immunocompromised than in immunocompetent patients (RR, 1.24; 95% CI, 0.95–1.63). Overall mortality irrespective of surgery was significantly higher in immunocompromised than in immunocompetent patients with diverticulitis (RR, 3.65; 95% CI, 1.73–7.69). By contrast, postoperative mortality after elective surgery was not significantly different between immunocompromised and immunocompetent patients with diverticulitis. In subgroup analysis, the risk of emergency surgery and recurrence was significantly higher in immunocompromised patients with complicated diverticulitis, whereas no significant difference was shown in mild disease. Conclusions Immunocompromised patients with diverticulitis should be given the best medical treatment with multidisciplinary approach because they had increased risks of surgery, postoperative morbidity, and mortality than immunocompetent patients.