Many countries have published clinical practice guidelines for appropriate clinical decisions, optimal treatment, and improved clinical outcomes in patients with acute coronary syndrome. Developing guidelines that are specifically tailored to the Korean environment is crucial, considering the treatment system, available medications and medical devices, racial differences, and level of language communication. In 2017, the Korean Society of Myocardial Infarction established a guideline development committee. However, at that time, it was not feasible to develop guidelines, owing to the lack of knowledge and experience in guideline development and the absence of methodology experts. In 2022, the National EvidenceBased Healthcare Collaborating Agency collaborated with a relevant academic association to develop internationally reliable guidelines, with strict adherence to the methodology for evidence-based guideline development. The first Korean acute coronary syndrome guideline starts from the 9 key questions for pharmacotherapy.

Many countries have published clinical practice guidelines for appropriate clinical decisions, optimal treatment, and improved clinical outcomes in patients with acute coronary syndrome. Developing guidelines that are specifically tailored to the Korean environment is crucial, considering the treatment system, available medications and medical devices, racial differences, and level of language communication. In 2017, the Korean Society of Myocardial Infarction established a guideline development committee. However, at that time, it was not feasible to develop guidelines, owing to the lack of knowledge and experience in guideline development and the absence of methodology experts. In 2022, the National EvidenceBased Healthcare Collaborating Agency collaborated with a relevant academic association to develop internationally reliable guidelines, with strict adherence to the methodology for evidence-based guideline development. The first Korean acute coronary syndrome guideline starts from the 9 key questions for pharmacotherapy.

Many countries have published clinical practice guidelines for appropriate clinical decisions, optimal treatment, and improved clinical outcomes in patients with acute coronary syndrome. Developing guidelines that are specifically tailored to the Korean environment is crucial, considering the treatment system, available medications and medical devices, racial differences, and level of language communication. In 2017, the Korean Society of Myocardial Infarction established a guideline development committee. However, at that time, it was not feasible to develop guidelines, owing to the lack of knowledge and experience in guideline development and the absence of methodology experts. In 2022, the National EvidenceBased Healthcare Collaborating Agency collaborated with a relevant academic association to develop internationally reliable guidelines, with strict adherence to the methodology for evidence-based guideline development. The first Korean acute coronary syndrome guideline starts from the 9 key questions for pharmacotherapy.

Many countries have published clinical practice guidelines for appropriate clinical decisions, optimal treatment, and improved clinical outcomes in patients with acute coronary syndrome. Developing guidelines that are specifically tailored to the Korean environment is crucial, considering the treatment system, available medications and medical devices, racial differences, and level of language communication. In 2017, the Korean Society of Myocardial Infarction established a guideline development committee. However, at that time, it was not feasible to develop guidelines, owing to the lack of knowledge and experience in guideline development and the absence of methodology experts. In 2022, the National EvidenceBased Healthcare Collaborating Agency collaborated with a relevant academic association to develop internationally reliable guidelines, with strict adherence to the methodology for evidence-based guideline development. The first Korean acute coronary syndrome guideline starts from the 9 key questions for pharmacotherapy.

Purpose: The benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy following curative-intent surgery in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) patients who had received neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX is unclear. This study aimed to assess the survival benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy in this patient population. Materials and Methods: This retrospective study included 218 patients with localized non-metastatic PDAC who received neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX and underwent curative-intent surgery (R0 or R1) between January 2017 and December 2020. The association of adjuvant chemotherapy with disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) was evaluated in overall patients and in the propensity score matched (PSM) cohort. Subgroup analysis was conducted according to the pathology-proven lymph node status. Results: Adjuvant chemotherapy was administered to 149 patients (68.3%). In the overall cohort, the adjuvant chemotherapy group had significantly improved DFS and OS compared to the observation group (DFS: median, 13.8 months [95% confidence interval (CI), 11.0 to 19.1] vs. 8.2 months [95% CI, 6.5 to 12.0]; p < 0.001; and OS: median, 38.0 months [95% CI, 32.2 to not assessable] vs. 25.7 months [95% CI, 18.3 to not assessable]; p=0.005). In the PSM cohort of 57 matched pairs of patients, DFS and OS were better in the adjuvant chemotherapy group than in the observation group (p < 0.001 and p=0.038, respectively). In the multivariate analysis, adjuvant chemotherapy was a significant favorable prognostic factor (vs. observation; DFS: hazard ratio [HR], 0.51 [95% CI, 0.36 to 0.71; p < 0.001]; OS: HR, 0.45 [95% CI, 0.29 to 0.71; p < 0.001]). Conclusion Among PDAC patients who underwent surgery following neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX, adjuvant chemotherapy may be associated with improved survival. Randomized studies should be conducted to validate this finding.

Purpose: There are no reliable biomarkers to guide treatment for patients with borderline resectable pancreatic cancer (BRPC) in the neoadjuvant setting. We used plasma circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) sequencing to search biomarkers for patients with BRPC receiving neoadjuvant mFOLFIRINOX in our phase 2 clinical trial (NCT02749136). Materials and Methods: Among the 44 patients enrolled in the trial, patients with plasma ctDNA sequencing at baseline or post-operation were included in this analysis. Plasma cell-free DNA isolation and sequencing were performed using the Guardant 360 assay. Detection of genomic alterations, including DNA damage repair (DDR) genes, were examined for correlations with survival. Results: Among the 44 patients, 28 patients had ctDNA sequencing data qualified for the analysis and were included in this study. Among the 25 patients with baseline plasma ctDNA data, 10 patients (40%) had alterations of DDR genes detected at baseline, inclu-ding ATM, BRCA1, BRCA2 and MLH1, and showed significantly better progression-free survival than those without such DDR gene alterations detected (median, 26.6 vs. 13.5 months; log-rank p=0.004). Patients with somatic KRAS mutations detected at baseline (n=6) had significantly worse overall survival (median, 8.5 months vs. not applicable; log-rank p=0.003) than those without. Among 13 patients with post-operative plasma ctDNA data, eight patients (61.5%) had detectable somatic alterations. Conclusion Detection of DDR gene mutations from plasma ctDNA at baseline was associated with better survival outcomes of pati-ents with borderline resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma treated with neoadjuvant mFOLFIRINOX and may be a prognostic biomarker.

While the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic is ongoing, monkeypox has been rapidly spreading in non-endemic countries since May 2022. Accurate and rapid laboratory tests are essential for identifying and controlling monkeypox. Korean Society for Laboratory Medicine and the Korea Disease Prevention and Control Agency have proposed guidelines for diagnosing monkeypox in clinical laboratories in Korea. These guidelines cover the type of tests, selection of specimens, collection of specimens, diagnostic methods, interpretation of test results, and biosafety. Molecular tests are recommended as confirmatory tests. Skin lesion specimens are recommended for testing in the symptomatic stage, and the collection of both blood and oropharyngeal swabs is recommended in the presymptomatic or prodromal stage.

Objective: A regional pandemic may result in a crisis in providing emergency care to the community and disrupt emergency medical services. This study examined how the recent coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic impacted emergency department (ED) preparedness nationwide by describing the current ED operations. Methods: A cross-sectional survey was developed and distributed nationwide to emergency physicians. All 57 severe emergency care centers and 35 selected local emergency medical institutions nationwide were invited to participate. The survey consisted of basic ED information, infection guidelines, and operations for ED, preemptive pretriage area details, ED quarantine area details, cohort isolation and preemptive quarantine area, and difficulties or problems in treating infectious patients. Results: Forty-nine severe emergency care centers (86%) and 24 (68.6%) local emergency medical institutions answered the survey. Most EDs (95.9% and 91.7% of severe emergency care centers and local emergency medical institutions, respectively) operated under infection guidelines. In addition, 51% and 72.3% of preemptive pretriage areas in severe emergency care centers and local emergency medical institutions, respectively, placed doctors. Both negative and normal pressurized ED quarantine areas were more placed in severe emergency care centers (3 and 3 vs. 0.5 and 1 of severe emergency care centers and local emergency medical institutions, respectively). In severe emergency care centers, the preemptive quarantine areas were operated more than the cohort isolation areas (63.3% vs. 40.8%). Common difficulties expressed by EDs were delayed polymerase chain reaction test results (4.5 and 4.1 of severe emergency care centers and local emergency medical institutions, respectively) and a fear of infection with ED shutdown (4.4 and 4.1 of severe emergency care centers and local emergency medical institutions, respectively). Conclusion This study surveyed how ED care was changed by the pandemic and how current resources are redeployed nationwide. These results may be used as a basis for future ED pandemic preparedness.

Background: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has caused health problems and distress among healthcare workers (HCWs), so supportive measures to promote their health and relieve distress are needed. Materials and Methods: We conducted two rounds of Delphi surveys with 20 COVID-19-related frontline healthcare professionals and public officials. The surveys evaluated means of supporting HCWs’ health by improving health care systems and working environments in terms of effectiveness and urgency. The validity of the measures was assessed by calculating the content validity ratio. Results: The top-priority measures to support HCWs were “secure isolation units capable of treating severe cases” in the facility infrastructure category, “secure nursing staff dedicated for patients in the intensive care units” in the personnel infrastructure category, “improve communication between central office and frontline field” in the cooperation system category, “support personal protective equipment and infection control supplies” in the aid supplies category, and “realization of hazard pay” in the physical/mental health and compensation category. Conclusion There was consensus among the experts on the validity and priorities of policies in the facility, personnel, cooperation, supplies, and compensation categories regarding measures to promote COVID-19 related HCWs’ health.

Background: The interest in Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI) has increased, and the choice of assays became wider since the first national survey in Korea on CDI diagnosis in 2015. We conducted a survey of the domestic CDI assays with more varied questions to understand the current situation in Korea. Methods: In April 2018, about 50 questions on the current status of CDI assays and details on implementation and perceptions were written, and a survey questionnaire was administered to laboratory medicine specialists in 200 institutions. Results: One-hundred and fifty institutions responded to the questionnaire, of which 90 (60.0%) including one commercial laboratory, performed CDI assays. The toxin AB enzyme immunoassay (toxin AB EIA), nucleic acid amplification test (NAAT), and C. difficile culture, glutamate dehydrogenase assay, alone or in combination with other assays, were used in 75 (84.3%), 52 (58.4%), 35 (36.0%), and 23 (25.8%), respectively, and 65 (73.0%) institutions performed a combination of two or more assays. The sensitivity of toxin AB EIA was more negatively perceived, and that on specificity was more positively perceived. The perception of sensitivity and specificity of NAAT was mostly positive. Perception on the algorithm test projected it as useful but in need of countermeasures. Sixty-three (73.3%) institutions responded that they performed surveillance on CDI. Conclusion This study provides useful evidence on the current status of CDI laboratory diagnosis in Korea as well as on items that require improvement and is thought to aid in standardizing and improving the CDI laboratory diagnosis in Korea.