1.Prospective Evaluation of Irreversible Electroporation With Clustered Electrodes as a Novel Palliative Approach for Locally Advanced Pancreatic Cancer
Joon Ho KWON ; Man-Deuk KIM ; Maher Salamah ALANAZI ; Jiwon SUK ; Seung JEONG ; Seungmin BANG ; Moon Jae CHUNG ; Ho Kyoung HWANG ; Seung Soo HONG ; Kichang HAN ; Gyoung Min KIM ; Jong Yun WON ; Juil PARK ; Jaesung CHO ; Seok Min JEONG ; Tae Yang CHOI
Korean Journal of Radiology 2026;27(2):152-160
Objective:
This study aimed to evaluate the feasibility, safety, and oncologic outcomes of irreversible electroporation (IRE) using a clustered electrode in patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC).
Materials and Methods:
In this single-center prospective cohort study, 13 patients with LAPC (median age, 60 years; range, 48–78 years) underwent clustered electrode IRE between September 2022 and September 2024. Patient characteristics, procedural details, and clinical outcomes were recorded. Endpoints included technical success, procedure-related complications, overall survival (OS), and progression-free survival (PFS).
Results:
Tumors were located in the pancreatic head in four patients (30.8%) and in the body/tail in nine (69.2%). The median tumor size was 2.4 cm (1.5–4.0 cm), and vascular invasion was present in all patients. Technical success was achieved in all patients. Intraoperative IRE was performed in 11 (84.6%) patients, and 2 (15.4%) patients underwent percutaneous IRE. Gastrointestinal bleeding events as major complications occurred in two patients (15.4%) and, both were successfully controlled by embolization. No 60-day mortality was observed. At a median follow-up of 24.5 months (range, 9.9–33.4 months) after IRE, median OS and PFS from IRE were 20.1 and 14.5 months, respectively.
Conclusion
IRE using clustered electrodes for LAPC appears to be a feasible therapeutic approach, offering reliable technical success and acceptable safety. Survival outcomes are encouraging; however, larger, controlled studies are required.
2.Healing Through Loss: Exploring Nurses’ Post-Traumatic Growth After Patient Death
YongHan KIM ; Joon-Ho AHN ; Jangho PARK ; Young Rong BANG ; Jin Yong JUN ; Youjin HONG ; Seockhoon CHUNG ; Junseok AHN ; C. Hyung Keun PARK
Psychiatry Investigation 2025;22(1):40-46
Objective:
This study aimed to identify the factors contributing to post-traumatic growth (PTG) among nurses who experienced patient death during the coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and to evaluate the necessity of grief support is required.
Methods:
An online survey was conducted to assess the experiences of nurses at Ulsan University Hospital who lost patients during the past year of the pandemic. In total, 211 nurses were recruited. We obtained information on the participants’ demographic and clinical characteristics. For symptoms rating, we used the following scales: the Post-traumatic Growth Inventory (PTGI), Stress and Anxiety to Viral Epidemic-9 (SAVE-9), Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9), Pandemic Grief Scale (PGS), and Utrecht Grief Rumination Scale (UGRS), and Grief Support in Healthcare Scale (GSHCS). Pearson’s correlation coefficients, linear regression, and mediation analysis were employed.
Results:
PTGI scores were significantly correlated with the SAVE-9 (r=0.31, p<0.01), PHQ-9 (r=0.31, p<0.01), PGS (r=0.28, p<0.01), UGRS (r=0.45, p<0.01), and GSHCS scores (r=0.46, p<0.01). The linear regression analysis revealed the factors significantly associated with PTGI scores: SAVE-9 (β=0.16, p=0.014), UGRS (β=0.29, p<0.001), and GSHCS (β=0.34, p<0.001). The mediation analysis revealed that nurses’ stress and anxiety about COVID-19 and grief rumination had a direct impact on PTG, with grief support serving as a significant mediator.
Conclusion
PTG was promoted by increases in the medical staff’s anxiety and stress related to COVID-19, grief rumination, and grief support. For the medical staff’s experience of bereavement to result in meaningful personal and professional growth, family members, colleagues, and other associates should provide thoughtful support.
3.Korean Practice Guidelines for Gastric Cancer 2024: An Evidence-based, Multidisciplinary Approach (Update of 2022 Guideline)
In-Ho KIM ; Seung Joo KANG ; Wonyoung CHOI ; An Na SEO ; Bang Wool EOM ; Beodeul KANG ; Bum Jun KIM ; Byung-Hoon MIN ; Chung Hyun TAE ; Chang In CHOI ; Choong-kun LEE ; Ho Jung AN ; Hwa Kyung BYUN ; Hyeon-Su IM ; Hyung-Don KIM ; Jang Ho CHO ; Kyoungjune PAK ; Jae-Joon KIM ; Jae Seok BAE ; Jeong Il YU ; Jeong Won LEE ; Jungyoon CHOI ; Jwa Hoon KIM ; Miyoung CHOI ; Mi Ran JUNG ; Nieun SEO ; Sang Soo EOM ; Soomin AHN ; Soo Jin KIM ; Sung Hak LEE ; Sung Hee LIM ; Tae-Han KIM ; Hye Sook HAN ; On behalf of The Development Working Group for the Korean Practice Guideline for Gastric Cancer 2024
Journal of Gastric Cancer 2025;25(1):5-114
Gastric cancer is one of the most common cancers in both Korea and worldwide. Since 2004, the Korean Practice Guidelines for Gastric Cancer have been regularly updated, with the 4th edition published in 2022. The 4th edition was the result of a collaborative work by an interdisciplinary team, including experts in gastric surgery, gastroenterology, endoscopy, medical oncology, abdominal radiology, pathology, nuclear medicine, radiation oncology, and guideline development methodology. The current guideline is the 5th version, an updated version of the 4th edition. In this guideline, 6 key questions (KQs) were updated or proposed after a collaborative review by the working group, and 7 statements were developed, or revised, or discussed based on a systematic review using the MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, and KoreaMed database. Over the past 2 years, there have been significant changes in systemic treatment, leading to major updates and revisions focused on this area.Additionally, minor modifications have been made in other sections, incorporating recent research findings. The level of evidence and grading of recommendations were categorized according to the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation system. Key factors for recommendation included the level of evidence, benefit, harm, and clinical applicability. The working group reviewed and discussed the recommendations to reach a consensus. The structure of this guideline remains similar to the 2022 version.Earlier sections cover general considerations, such as screening, diagnosis, and staging of endoscopy, pathology, radiology, and nuclear medicine. In the latter sections, statements are provided for each KQ based on clinical evidence, with flowcharts supporting these statements through meta-analysis and references. This multidisciplinary, evidence-based gastric cancer guideline aims to support clinicians in providing optimal care for gastric cancer patients.
4.Influence of Adipose-Derived Stem Cell-Enhanced Acellular Dermal Matrix on Capsule Formation in Rat Models
Hyun Su KANG ; Myeong Jae KANG ; Hyun Ki HONG ; Jeong Yeop RYU ; Joon Seok LEE ; Kang Young CHOI ; Ho Yun CHUNG ; Ho Yong PARK ; Jung Dug YANG
Journal of Wound Management and Research 2025;21(1):1-9
Background:
The use of acellular dermal matrix (ADM) in breast reconstruction can inhibit capsular contracture, increasing the success rate of surgery. Adipose-derived stem cells (ADSCs) can effectively suppress foreign body reaction, which is a major cause of capsular contracture. This study aimed to elucidate the synergistic effects of combining ADSCs with ADM on capsule formation, utilizing a rat model.
Methods:
The study utilized 12 rats, equally divided into two experimental groups. Group A received silicone implants covered with ADM, while Group B was implanted with silicone prostheses wrapped in ADM, pre-seeded with ADSCs. Capsule formation was assessed through visual examination, histological analysis, and reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) at 4 and 8 weeks post-implantation.
Results:
At 4 weeks, the mean capsular thickness was 177.16 μm in Group A and 170.76 μm in Group B; at 8 weeks, it was 196.69 μm in Group A and 176.10 μm in Group B. Statistical analysis showed no significant difference in capsule thickness between the groups (P>0.05). Histological findings indicated that Group A had more inflammatory cells and collagen fibers and reduced angiogenesis. RT-PCR showed that angiogenesis-promoting gene expression in Group B was 14% higher at 4 weeks and 156% higher at 8 weeks compared to Group A.
Conclusion
Although no statistically significant reduction in capsule thickness was observed, ADSC-seeded implants showed histological features associated with reduced inflammation and enhanced angiogenesis, suggesting potential benefits in capsule formation management.
5.Healing Through Loss: Exploring Nurses’ Post-Traumatic Growth After Patient Death
YongHan KIM ; Joon-Ho AHN ; Jangho PARK ; Young Rong BANG ; Jin Yong JUN ; Youjin HONG ; Seockhoon CHUNG ; Junseok AHN ; C. Hyung Keun PARK
Psychiatry Investigation 2025;22(1):40-46
Objective:
This study aimed to identify the factors contributing to post-traumatic growth (PTG) among nurses who experienced patient death during the coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and to evaluate the necessity of grief support is required.
Methods:
An online survey was conducted to assess the experiences of nurses at Ulsan University Hospital who lost patients during the past year of the pandemic. In total, 211 nurses were recruited. We obtained information on the participants’ demographic and clinical characteristics. For symptoms rating, we used the following scales: the Post-traumatic Growth Inventory (PTGI), Stress and Anxiety to Viral Epidemic-9 (SAVE-9), Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9), Pandemic Grief Scale (PGS), and Utrecht Grief Rumination Scale (UGRS), and Grief Support in Healthcare Scale (GSHCS). Pearson’s correlation coefficients, linear regression, and mediation analysis were employed.
Results:
PTGI scores were significantly correlated with the SAVE-9 (r=0.31, p<0.01), PHQ-9 (r=0.31, p<0.01), PGS (r=0.28, p<0.01), UGRS (r=0.45, p<0.01), and GSHCS scores (r=0.46, p<0.01). The linear regression analysis revealed the factors significantly associated with PTGI scores: SAVE-9 (β=0.16, p=0.014), UGRS (β=0.29, p<0.001), and GSHCS (β=0.34, p<0.001). The mediation analysis revealed that nurses’ stress and anxiety about COVID-19 and grief rumination had a direct impact on PTG, with grief support serving as a significant mediator.
Conclusion
PTG was promoted by increases in the medical staff’s anxiety and stress related to COVID-19, grief rumination, and grief support. For the medical staff’s experience of bereavement to result in meaningful personal and professional growth, family members, colleagues, and other associates should provide thoughtful support.
6.Korean Practice Guidelines for Gastric Cancer 2024: An Evidence-based, Multidisciplinary Approach (Update of 2022 Guideline)
In-Ho KIM ; Seung Joo KANG ; Wonyoung CHOI ; An Na SEO ; Bang Wool EOM ; Beodeul KANG ; Bum Jun KIM ; Byung-Hoon MIN ; Chung Hyun TAE ; Chang In CHOI ; Choong-kun LEE ; Ho Jung AN ; Hwa Kyung BYUN ; Hyeon-Su IM ; Hyung-Don KIM ; Jang Ho CHO ; Kyoungjune PAK ; Jae-Joon KIM ; Jae Seok BAE ; Jeong Il YU ; Jeong Won LEE ; Jungyoon CHOI ; Jwa Hoon KIM ; Miyoung CHOI ; Mi Ran JUNG ; Nieun SEO ; Sang Soo EOM ; Soomin AHN ; Soo Jin KIM ; Sung Hak LEE ; Sung Hee LIM ; Tae-Han KIM ; Hye Sook HAN ; On behalf of The Development Working Group for the Korean Practice Guideline for Gastric Cancer 2024
Journal of Gastric Cancer 2025;25(1):5-114
Gastric cancer is one of the most common cancers in both Korea and worldwide. Since 2004, the Korean Practice Guidelines for Gastric Cancer have been regularly updated, with the 4th edition published in 2022. The 4th edition was the result of a collaborative work by an interdisciplinary team, including experts in gastric surgery, gastroenterology, endoscopy, medical oncology, abdominal radiology, pathology, nuclear medicine, radiation oncology, and guideline development methodology. The current guideline is the 5th version, an updated version of the 4th edition. In this guideline, 6 key questions (KQs) were updated or proposed after a collaborative review by the working group, and 7 statements were developed, or revised, or discussed based on a systematic review using the MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, and KoreaMed database. Over the past 2 years, there have been significant changes in systemic treatment, leading to major updates and revisions focused on this area.Additionally, minor modifications have been made in other sections, incorporating recent research findings. The level of evidence and grading of recommendations were categorized according to the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation system. Key factors for recommendation included the level of evidence, benefit, harm, and clinical applicability. The working group reviewed and discussed the recommendations to reach a consensus. The structure of this guideline remains similar to the 2022 version.Earlier sections cover general considerations, such as screening, diagnosis, and staging of endoscopy, pathology, radiology, and nuclear medicine. In the latter sections, statements are provided for each KQ based on clinical evidence, with flowcharts supporting these statements through meta-analysis and references. This multidisciplinary, evidence-based gastric cancer guideline aims to support clinicians in providing optimal care for gastric cancer patients.
7.Healing Through Loss: Exploring Nurses’ Post-Traumatic Growth After Patient Death
YongHan KIM ; Joon-Ho AHN ; Jangho PARK ; Young Rong BANG ; Jin Yong JUN ; Youjin HONG ; Seockhoon CHUNG ; Junseok AHN ; C. Hyung Keun PARK
Psychiatry Investigation 2025;22(1):40-46
Objective:
This study aimed to identify the factors contributing to post-traumatic growth (PTG) among nurses who experienced patient death during the coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and to evaluate the necessity of grief support is required.
Methods:
An online survey was conducted to assess the experiences of nurses at Ulsan University Hospital who lost patients during the past year of the pandemic. In total, 211 nurses were recruited. We obtained information on the participants’ demographic and clinical characteristics. For symptoms rating, we used the following scales: the Post-traumatic Growth Inventory (PTGI), Stress and Anxiety to Viral Epidemic-9 (SAVE-9), Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9), Pandemic Grief Scale (PGS), and Utrecht Grief Rumination Scale (UGRS), and Grief Support in Healthcare Scale (GSHCS). Pearson’s correlation coefficients, linear regression, and mediation analysis were employed.
Results:
PTGI scores were significantly correlated with the SAVE-9 (r=0.31, p<0.01), PHQ-9 (r=0.31, p<0.01), PGS (r=0.28, p<0.01), UGRS (r=0.45, p<0.01), and GSHCS scores (r=0.46, p<0.01). The linear regression analysis revealed the factors significantly associated with PTGI scores: SAVE-9 (β=0.16, p=0.014), UGRS (β=0.29, p<0.001), and GSHCS (β=0.34, p<0.001). The mediation analysis revealed that nurses’ stress and anxiety about COVID-19 and grief rumination had a direct impact on PTG, with grief support serving as a significant mediator.
Conclusion
PTG was promoted by increases in the medical staff’s anxiety and stress related to COVID-19, grief rumination, and grief support. For the medical staff’s experience of bereavement to result in meaningful personal and professional growth, family members, colleagues, and other associates should provide thoughtful support.
8.Healing Through Loss: Exploring Nurses’ Post-Traumatic Growth After Patient Death
YongHan KIM ; Joon-Ho AHN ; Jangho PARK ; Young Rong BANG ; Jin Yong JUN ; Youjin HONG ; Seockhoon CHUNG ; Junseok AHN ; C. Hyung Keun PARK
Psychiatry Investigation 2025;22(1):40-46
Objective:
This study aimed to identify the factors contributing to post-traumatic growth (PTG) among nurses who experienced patient death during the coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and to evaluate the necessity of grief support is required.
Methods:
An online survey was conducted to assess the experiences of nurses at Ulsan University Hospital who lost patients during the past year of the pandemic. In total, 211 nurses were recruited. We obtained information on the participants’ demographic and clinical characteristics. For symptoms rating, we used the following scales: the Post-traumatic Growth Inventory (PTGI), Stress and Anxiety to Viral Epidemic-9 (SAVE-9), Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9), Pandemic Grief Scale (PGS), and Utrecht Grief Rumination Scale (UGRS), and Grief Support in Healthcare Scale (GSHCS). Pearson’s correlation coefficients, linear regression, and mediation analysis were employed.
Results:
PTGI scores were significantly correlated with the SAVE-9 (r=0.31, p<0.01), PHQ-9 (r=0.31, p<0.01), PGS (r=0.28, p<0.01), UGRS (r=0.45, p<0.01), and GSHCS scores (r=0.46, p<0.01). The linear regression analysis revealed the factors significantly associated with PTGI scores: SAVE-9 (β=0.16, p=0.014), UGRS (β=0.29, p<0.001), and GSHCS (β=0.34, p<0.001). The mediation analysis revealed that nurses’ stress and anxiety about COVID-19 and grief rumination had a direct impact on PTG, with grief support serving as a significant mediator.
Conclusion
PTG was promoted by increases in the medical staff’s anxiety and stress related to COVID-19, grief rumination, and grief support. For the medical staff’s experience of bereavement to result in meaningful personal and professional growth, family members, colleagues, and other associates should provide thoughtful support.
9.Healing Through Loss: Exploring Nurses’ Post-Traumatic Growth After Patient Death
YongHan KIM ; Joon-Ho AHN ; Jangho PARK ; Young Rong BANG ; Jin Yong JUN ; Youjin HONG ; Seockhoon CHUNG ; Junseok AHN ; C. Hyung Keun PARK
Psychiatry Investigation 2025;22(1):40-46
Objective:
This study aimed to identify the factors contributing to post-traumatic growth (PTG) among nurses who experienced patient death during the coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and to evaluate the necessity of grief support is required.
Methods:
An online survey was conducted to assess the experiences of nurses at Ulsan University Hospital who lost patients during the past year of the pandemic. In total, 211 nurses were recruited. We obtained information on the participants’ demographic and clinical characteristics. For symptoms rating, we used the following scales: the Post-traumatic Growth Inventory (PTGI), Stress and Anxiety to Viral Epidemic-9 (SAVE-9), Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9), Pandemic Grief Scale (PGS), and Utrecht Grief Rumination Scale (UGRS), and Grief Support in Healthcare Scale (GSHCS). Pearson’s correlation coefficients, linear regression, and mediation analysis were employed.
Results:
PTGI scores were significantly correlated with the SAVE-9 (r=0.31, p<0.01), PHQ-9 (r=0.31, p<0.01), PGS (r=0.28, p<0.01), UGRS (r=0.45, p<0.01), and GSHCS scores (r=0.46, p<0.01). The linear regression analysis revealed the factors significantly associated with PTGI scores: SAVE-9 (β=0.16, p=0.014), UGRS (β=0.29, p<0.001), and GSHCS (β=0.34, p<0.001). The mediation analysis revealed that nurses’ stress and anxiety about COVID-19 and grief rumination had a direct impact on PTG, with grief support serving as a significant mediator.
Conclusion
PTG was promoted by increases in the medical staff’s anxiety and stress related to COVID-19, grief rumination, and grief support. For the medical staff’s experience of bereavement to result in meaningful personal and professional growth, family members, colleagues, and other associates should provide thoughtful support.
10.Korean Practice Guidelines for Gastric Cancer 2024: An Evidence-based, Multidisciplinary Approach (Update of 2022 Guideline)
In-Ho KIM ; Seung Joo KANG ; Wonyoung CHOI ; An Na SEO ; Bang Wool EOM ; Beodeul KANG ; Bum Jun KIM ; Byung-Hoon MIN ; Chung Hyun TAE ; Chang In CHOI ; Choong-kun LEE ; Ho Jung AN ; Hwa Kyung BYUN ; Hyeon-Su IM ; Hyung-Don KIM ; Jang Ho CHO ; Kyoungjune PAK ; Jae-Joon KIM ; Jae Seok BAE ; Jeong Il YU ; Jeong Won LEE ; Jungyoon CHOI ; Jwa Hoon KIM ; Miyoung CHOI ; Mi Ran JUNG ; Nieun SEO ; Sang Soo EOM ; Soomin AHN ; Soo Jin KIM ; Sung Hak LEE ; Sung Hee LIM ; Tae-Han KIM ; Hye Sook HAN ; On behalf of The Development Working Group for the Korean Practice Guideline for Gastric Cancer 2024
Journal of Gastric Cancer 2025;25(1):5-114
Gastric cancer is one of the most common cancers in both Korea and worldwide. Since 2004, the Korean Practice Guidelines for Gastric Cancer have been regularly updated, with the 4th edition published in 2022. The 4th edition was the result of a collaborative work by an interdisciplinary team, including experts in gastric surgery, gastroenterology, endoscopy, medical oncology, abdominal radiology, pathology, nuclear medicine, radiation oncology, and guideline development methodology. The current guideline is the 5th version, an updated version of the 4th edition. In this guideline, 6 key questions (KQs) were updated or proposed after a collaborative review by the working group, and 7 statements were developed, or revised, or discussed based on a systematic review using the MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, and KoreaMed database. Over the past 2 years, there have been significant changes in systemic treatment, leading to major updates and revisions focused on this area.Additionally, minor modifications have been made in other sections, incorporating recent research findings. The level of evidence and grading of recommendations were categorized according to the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation system. Key factors for recommendation included the level of evidence, benefit, harm, and clinical applicability. The working group reviewed and discussed the recommendations to reach a consensus. The structure of this guideline remains similar to the 2022 version.Earlier sections cover general considerations, such as screening, diagnosis, and staging of endoscopy, pathology, radiology, and nuclear medicine. In the latter sections, statements are provided for each KQ based on clinical evidence, with flowcharts supporting these statements through meta-analysis and references. This multidisciplinary, evidence-based gastric cancer guideline aims to support clinicians in providing optimal care for gastric cancer patients.

Result Analysis
Print
Save
E-mail