Background/Aims: Early colorectal cancer (ECC) is commonly resected endoscopically. Perforation is a devastating complication of endoscopic resection. We aimed to identify the characteristics and predictive risk factors for perforation related to endoscopic resection of ECC. Methods: This nationwide retrospective multicenter study included patients with ECC who underwent endoscopic resection. We investigated the demographics, endoscopic findings at the time of treatment, and histopathological characteristics of the resected specimens. Logistic regression analysis was used to investigate the clinical factors associated with procedure-related perforations. Survival analysis was conducted to assess the impact of perforation on the overall survival of patients with ECC. Results: This study included 965 participants with a mean age of 63.4 years. The most common endoscopic treatment was conventional endoscopic mucosal resection (n=573, 59.4%), followed by conventional endoscopic submucosal dissection (n=259, 26.8%). Thirty-three patients (3.4%) experienced perforations, most of which were managed endoscopically (n=23/33, 69.7%). Patients who undergo endoscopic submucosal dissection-hybrid and precut endoscopic mucosal resection have a higher risk of perforation than those who undergo conventional endoscopic mucosal resection (odds ratio, 78.65 and 39.72, p<0.05). Procedure-related perforations were not associated with patient survival. Conclusions Perforation after endoscopic resection had no significant impact on the prognosis of ECC. The type of endoscopic resection was a crucial predictor of perforation. Large-scale prospective studies are needed to further investigate endoscopic resection of ECC.

Heart failure (HF) is a major cause of mortality and morbidity in South Korea, imposing substantial physical, emotional, and financial burdens on patients and society. Despite the high burden of symptom and complex care needs of HF patients, palliative care and hospice services remain underutilized in South Korea due to cultural, institutional, and knowledge-related barriers. This position statement from the Korean Society of Heart Failure emphasizes the need for integrating palliative and hospice care into HF management to improve quality of life and support holistic care for patients and their families. By clarifying the role of palliative care in HF and proposing practical referral criteria, this position statement aims to bridge the gap between HF and palliative care services in South Korea, ultimately improving patient-centered outcomes and aligning treatment with the goals and values of HF patients.

Background/Aims: Early colorectal cancer (ECC) is commonly resected endoscopically. Perforation is a devastating complication of endoscopic resection. We aimed to identify the characteristics and predictive risk factors for perforation related to endoscopic resection of ECC. Methods: This nationwide retrospective multicenter study included patients with ECC who underwent endoscopic resection. We investigated the demographics, endoscopic findings at the time of treatment, and histopathological characteristics of the resected specimens. Logistic regression analysis was used to investigate the clinical factors associated with procedure-related perforations. Survival analysis was conducted to assess the impact of perforation on the overall survival of patients with ECC. Results: This study included 965 participants with a mean age of 63.4 years. The most common endoscopic treatment was conventional endoscopic mucosal resection (n=573, 59.4%), followed by conventional endoscopic submucosal dissection (n=259, 26.8%). Thirty-three patients (3.4%) experienced perforations, most of which were managed endoscopically (n=23/33, 69.7%). Patients who undergo endoscopic submucosal dissection-hybrid and precut endoscopic mucosal resection have a higher risk of perforation than those who undergo conventional endoscopic mucosal resection (odds ratio, 78.65 and 39.72, p<0.05). Procedure-related perforations were not associated with patient survival. Conclusions Perforation after endoscopic resection had no significant impact on the prognosis of ECC. The type of endoscopic resection was a crucial predictor of perforation. Large-scale prospective studies are needed to further investigate endoscopic resection of ECC.

Background/Aims: Early colorectal cancer (ECC) is commonly resected endoscopically. Perforation is a devastating complication of endoscopic resection. We aimed to identify the characteristics and predictive risk factors for perforation related to endoscopic resection of ECC. Methods: This nationwide retrospective multicenter study included patients with ECC who underwent endoscopic resection. We investigated the demographics, endoscopic findings at the time of treatment, and histopathological characteristics of the resected specimens. Logistic regression analysis was used to investigate the clinical factors associated with procedure-related perforations. Survival analysis was conducted to assess the impact of perforation on the overall survival of patients with ECC. Results: This study included 965 participants with a mean age of 63.4 years. The most common endoscopic treatment was conventional endoscopic mucosal resection (n=573, 59.4%), followed by conventional endoscopic submucosal dissection (n=259, 26.8%). Thirty-three patients (3.4%) experienced perforations, most of which were managed endoscopically (n=23/33, 69.7%). Patients who undergo endoscopic submucosal dissection-hybrid and precut endoscopic mucosal resection have a higher risk of perforation than those who undergo conventional endoscopic mucosal resection (odds ratio, 78.65 and 39.72, p<0.05). Procedure-related perforations were not associated with patient survival. Conclusions Perforation after endoscopic resection had no significant impact on the prognosis of ECC. The type of endoscopic resection was a crucial predictor of perforation. Large-scale prospective studies are needed to further investigate endoscopic resection of ECC.

Background/Aims: Early colorectal cancer (ECC) is commonly resected endoscopically. Perforation is a devastating complication of endoscopic resection. We aimed to identify the characteristics and predictive risk factors for perforation related to endoscopic resection of ECC. Methods: This nationwide retrospective multicenter study included patients with ECC who underwent endoscopic resection. We investigated the demographics, endoscopic findings at the time of treatment, and histopathological characteristics of the resected specimens. Logistic regression analysis was used to investigate the clinical factors associated with procedure-related perforations. Survival analysis was conducted to assess the impact of perforation on the overall survival of patients with ECC. Results: This study included 965 participants with a mean age of 63.4 years. The most common endoscopic treatment was conventional endoscopic mucosal resection (n=573, 59.4%), followed by conventional endoscopic submucosal dissection (n=259, 26.8%). Thirty-three patients (3.4%) experienced perforations, most of which were managed endoscopically (n=23/33, 69.7%). Patients who undergo endoscopic submucosal dissection-hybrid and precut endoscopic mucosal resection have a higher risk of perforation than those who undergo conventional endoscopic mucosal resection (odds ratio, 78.65 and 39.72, p<0.05). Procedure-related perforations were not associated with patient survival. Conclusions Perforation after endoscopic resection had no significant impact on the prognosis of ECC. The type of endoscopic resection was a crucial predictor of perforation. Large-scale prospective studies are needed to further investigate endoscopic resection of ECC.

Background: The benefits of transradial access (TRA) over transfemoral access (TFA) for bifurcation percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) are uncertain because of the limited availability of device selection. This study aimed to compare the procedural differences and the in-hospital and long-term outcomes of TRA and TFA for bifurcation PCI using secondgeneration drug-eluting stents (DESs). Methods: Based on data from the Coronary Bifurcation Stenting Registry III, a retrospective registry of 2,648 patients undergoing bifurcation PCI with second-generation DES from 21 centers in South Korea, patients were categorized into the TRA group (n = 1,507) or the TFA group (n = 1,141). After propensity score matching (PSM), procedural differences, in-hospital outcomes, and device-oriented composite outcomes (DOCOs; a composite of cardiac death, target vessel-related myocardial infarction, and target lesion revascularization) were compared between the two groups (772 matched patients each group). Results: Despite well-balanced baseline clinical and lesion characteristics after PSM, the use of the two-stent strategy (14.2% vs. 23.7%, P = 0.001) and the incidence of in-hospital adverse outcomes, primarily driven by access site complications (2.2% vs. 4.4%, P = 0.015), were significantly lower in the TRA group than in the TFA group. At the 5-year follow-up, the incidence of DOCOs was similar between the groups (6.3% vs. 7.1%, P = 0.639). Conclusion The findings suggested that TRA may be safer than TFA for bifurcation PCI using second-generation DESs. Despite differences in treatment strategy, TRA was associated with similar long-term clinical outcomes as those of TFA. Therefore, TRA might be the preferred access for bifurcation PCI using second-generation DES.

Purpose: This study was conducted to update the previous evidence-based nursing clinical practice guidelines for pressure injury. Methods: The guideline was revised in 22 steps based on the international standards. Results: The updated nursing practice guideline for pressure injury consisted of four domains and 494 recommendations. The numbers of recommendations in each domain was: 31 hospital policy, 64 assessment, 386 prevention and management, and 13 education. The recommended grade was 10.3% for A, 13.8% for B, and 75.9% for C. Of these, the major revision was done in 40 recommendations (8.1%). A total of 55 recommendations (11.0%) were newly added. 25 recommendations had minor revisions such as changes or additions for some words, and only one recommendation was deleted. Conclusion The revised nursing practice guidelines for pressure injury are expected to serve as an evidence-based practice guideline for pressure injury in Korea. This guideline will provide healthcare providers, patients, and caregivers with information to help prevent and manage pressure injuries, leading to improving patient outcomes.

Purpose: This study investigated the incidence and risk factors of cataract in people with diabetes mellitus (DM) using data from Ansan cohort of the Korean Genome and Epidemiology Study (KoGES). Methods: Data from a total of 329 patients with type 2 DM without cataract who participated in Ansan cohort of the KoGES from baseline survey (2001–2002) to fifth follow-up visit (2011–2012) were examined.The characteristics of the subjects were analyzed with frequency and percentage, and mean and standard deviation. Cataract incidence was measured as incidence proportion (%). For risk factors of cataract, hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were obtained using the Cox proportional hazard model. Results: The cataract incidence over a 10-year follow-up period was 19.1% (15.1 in males and 25.8 in females), and mean age at the incidence of cataract was 63.48 years (61.58 years in males and 65.31 years in females). Age (HR=1.09, 95% CI=1.05–1.13) and HbA1c (HR=1.21, 95% CI=1.07–1.37) or the duration of DM (HR=1.05, 95% CI=1.00–1.09) were found to be independently associated with cataract development. Conclusion Cataract development in people with DM is common, and its likelihood increases with age, HbA1c, and the duration of DM. Considering negative effect of cataract on their quality of life and economic burden, nurses should identify people with DM at a higher risk of cataract development, and plan individual eye examination programs to detect cataract development as early as possible.

Background: Patient-centered management is becoming increasingly important in gout, but there are limited studies exploring patients' perspectives and preferences. We aimed to investigate patients' perspectives and preferences regarding gout and gout management, and their impacts on adherence to urate lowering therapy (ULT). Methods: A paper-based survey was performed in patients with gout seen at the rheumatology outpatient clinics of 16 tertiary hospitals. The survey included questions regarding demographics, comorbidities, gout attacks, current treatment and adherence, and patients' perspectives and preferences regarding gout and gout management. Multivariate regression analysis was performed to determine the factors associated with ULT adherence. Results: Of 809 surveyed patients with gout, 755 (94.5%) were using ULT. Among those using ULT, 89.1% had ≥ 80% adherence to ULT. Majority of the patients knew management strategies to some extent (94.8%), perceived gout as a life-long disease (91.2%), and were making efforts toward practicing at least one lifestyle modification (89.2%). Most patients (71.9%) obtained information about gout management during their clinic visits.Approximately half of the patients (53.6%) preferred managing their disease with both ULT and lifestyle modification, 28.4% preferred ULT only, and 17.4% preferred lifestyle modification only. Adherence was better in patients with older age (odds ratio [OR], 1.03), those with better knowledge of gout management strategies (OR, 3.56), and those who had preference for ULT (OR, 2.07). Conclusion Patients' perspectives and management preferences had high impacts on adherence to ULT in gout. Consideration of patients' perspectives and preferences is important for achieving the desired clinical outcome in gout.

Background: Patient-centered management is becoming increasingly important in gout, but there are limited studies exploring patients' perspectives and preferences. We aimed to investigate patients' perspectives and preferences regarding gout and gout management, and their impacts on adherence to urate lowering therapy (ULT). Methods: A paper-based survey was performed in patients with gout seen at the rheumatology outpatient clinics of 16 tertiary hospitals. The survey included questions regarding demographics, comorbidities, gout attacks, current treatment and adherence, and patients' perspectives and preferences regarding gout and gout management. Multivariate regression analysis was performed to determine the factors associated with ULT adherence. Results: Of 809 surveyed patients with gout, 755 (94.5%) were using ULT. Among those using ULT, 89.1% had ≥ 80% adherence to ULT. Majority of the patients knew management strategies to some extent (94.8%), perceived gout as a life-long disease (91.2%), and were making efforts toward practicing at least one lifestyle modification (89.2%). Most patients (71.9%) obtained information about gout management during their clinic visits.Approximately half of the patients (53.6%) preferred managing their disease with both ULT and lifestyle modification, 28.4% preferred ULT only, and 17.4% preferred lifestyle modification only. Adherence was better in patients with older age (odds ratio [OR], 1.03), those with better knowledge of gout management strategies (OR, 3.56), and those who had preference for ULT (OR, 2.07). Conclusion Patients' perspectives and management preferences had high impacts on adherence to ULT in gout. Consideration of patients' perspectives and preferences is important for achieving the desired clinical outcome in gout.