Gastric polyps are morphological diagnoses that collectively refer to various types of lesions, and are commonly found by accident in gastroscopy. Gastric polyps in the broad sense are commonly referred to as abnormal structures protruding toward the gastric lumen, but are generally used only in lesions of the gastric mucosa. The incidence of gastric polyps ranged from 1 to 30% and varied by reporter, and differs by region. Fundic gland polyps were the most common in the West, while hyperplastic polyps were the most common in Korea. Gastric polyps are usually discovered by accident, but because some kinds of polyps have the potential to transform of malignant tumors, histological diagnosis is essential. There should be adequate treatment and management according to the histological results.

Purpose: Although most colorectal malignancies are adenocarcinomas from mucosa, various types of malignant and benign tumors can develop. Due to extremely low incidence, little research has been conducted. The purpose was to assess incidence and compare it according to demographic factors. Methods: Data from the Korea National Cancer Registry from 2007 to 2016 were used. The crude incidence, age-standard incidence rate (ASR) of colorectal nonadenocarcinomas were calculated. Results: Over 11 years, there were 267,142 patients with colorectal malignancies. The patients of 14,495 (5.43%) were diagnosed with nonadenocarcinoma. The ASR was 2.52 per 100,000 in men and 1.56 in women. Lesions were classified according to histologic categories; neuroendocrine tumor (NET) was the most common malignancy (10,919 [75.33%]). Nonadenocarcinoma was the most common in 40s and 50s (40 to 49 years, 3,530 [24.35%]; 50 to 59 years, 3,991 [27.53%]). Lymphoma was high (54.46%) in patients in teenagers. Proportion of NET decreased with age and that of carcinoma increased with age. Carcinoma, sarcoma, and lymphoma were more common among men and melanoma was more common among women. The most common site was the rectum (11,066 [76.34%]). Lymphoma occurred more frequently in proximal colon. Melanoma, gastrointestinal stromal tumor, and NET occurred mostly in rectum. A total of 10,155 patients (70.06%) were classified as having localized disease. Conclusion This study is meaningful as it is the first study to examine incidence of colorectal nonadenocarcinoma. Differences in incidence of different lesions based on demographic factors were identified. This study will play a role in cancer prevention and diagnosis projects.

Background: This study aimed to estimate the association between mRNA coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine exposure during pregnancy and the risks of preterm birth and congenital malformations leveraging a national population data. Methods: This retrospective cohort study utilized national data from the National Health Insurance System, linking maternal and infant records with COVID-19 vaccination registries.Newborns with congenital malformations were identified using diagnosis codes. The analysis included women aged 20–49 who gave live births between February 2022 and December 2022. Odds ratios (ORs) for preterm birth and any congenital malformation per COVID-19 vaccination during pregnancy compared to 1:4 matched unvaccinated controls, adjusted for maternal age, residential area, employment, income, disability, month of conception, prepregnancy obesity, smoking, and severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection prior to pregnancy, were calculated. We compared the risk of two outcomes between BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273. Results: Among 106,692 women who gave birth during the study period, 8,966 (8.4%) received a COVID-19 vaccination during pregnancy. Of the newborns, 7,039 (6.6%) were preterm births and 7,658 (7.2%) had congenital malformations. COVID-19 vaccination during pregnancy was associated with a comparable risk of preterm birth (OR, 1.03; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.77–1.36) and a similar risk of congenital malformations (0.90; 95% CI, 0.72–1.12) compared to non-vaccinees. The ORs of preterm birth (1.02; 95% CI, 0.77–1.36) and congenital malformation (0.91; 95% CI, 0.73–1.14) for mRNA-1273 were comparable to those for BNT162b2. Conclusion COVID-19 vaccines during pregnancy poses no increased risk of preterm birth and congenital malformations compared to those not exposed to the vaccine, with similar risk levels observed between the two mRNA vaccines. This finding provides additional evidence supporting the safety of COVID-19 vaccines.

Background: This study aimed to estimate the association between mRNA coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine exposure during pregnancy and the risks of preterm birth and congenital malformations leveraging a national population data. Methods: This retrospective cohort study utilized national data from the National Health Insurance System, linking maternal and infant records with COVID-19 vaccination registries.Newborns with congenital malformations were identified using diagnosis codes. The analysis included women aged 20–49 who gave live births between February 2022 and December 2022. Odds ratios (ORs) for preterm birth and any congenital malformation per COVID-19 vaccination during pregnancy compared to 1:4 matched unvaccinated controls, adjusted for maternal age, residential area, employment, income, disability, month of conception, prepregnancy obesity, smoking, and severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection prior to pregnancy, were calculated. We compared the risk of two outcomes between BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273. Results: Among 106,692 women who gave birth during the study period, 8,966 (8.4%) received a COVID-19 vaccination during pregnancy. Of the newborns, 7,039 (6.6%) were preterm births and 7,658 (7.2%) had congenital malformations. COVID-19 vaccination during pregnancy was associated with a comparable risk of preterm birth (OR, 1.03; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.77–1.36) and a similar risk of congenital malformations (0.90; 95% CI, 0.72–1.12) compared to non-vaccinees. The ORs of preterm birth (1.02; 95% CI, 0.77–1.36) and congenital malformation (0.91; 95% CI, 0.73–1.14) for mRNA-1273 were comparable to those for BNT162b2. Conclusion COVID-19 vaccines during pregnancy poses no increased risk of preterm birth and congenital malformations compared to those not exposed to the vaccine, with similar risk levels observed between the two mRNA vaccines. This finding provides additional evidence supporting the safety of COVID-19 vaccines.

Background: This study aimed to estimate the association between mRNA coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine exposure during pregnancy and the risks of preterm birth and congenital malformations leveraging a national population data. Methods: This retrospective cohort study utilized national data from the National Health Insurance System, linking maternal and infant records with COVID-19 vaccination registries.Newborns with congenital malformations were identified using diagnosis codes. The analysis included women aged 20–49 who gave live births between February 2022 and December 2022. Odds ratios (ORs) for preterm birth and any congenital malformation per COVID-19 vaccination during pregnancy compared to 1:4 matched unvaccinated controls, adjusted for maternal age, residential area, employment, income, disability, month of conception, prepregnancy obesity, smoking, and severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection prior to pregnancy, were calculated. We compared the risk of two outcomes between BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273. Results: Among 106,692 women who gave birth during the study period, 8,966 (8.4%) received a COVID-19 vaccination during pregnancy. Of the newborns, 7,039 (6.6%) were preterm births and 7,658 (7.2%) had congenital malformations. COVID-19 vaccination during pregnancy was associated with a comparable risk of preterm birth (OR, 1.03; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.77–1.36) and a similar risk of congenital malformations (0.90; 95% CI, 0.72–1.12) compared to non-vaccinees. The ORs of preterm birth (1.02; 95% CI, 0.77–1.36) and congenital malformation (0.91; 95% CI, 0.73–1.14) for mRNA-1273 were comparable to those for BNT162b2. Conclusion COVID-19 vaccines during pregnancy poses no increased risk of preterm birth and congenital malformations compared to those not exposed to the vaccine, with similar risk levels observed between the two mRNA vaccines. This finding provides additional evidence supporting the safety of COVID-19 vaccines.

Background: This study aimed to estimate the association between mRNA coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine exposure during pregnancy and the risks of preterm birth and congenital malformations leveraging a national population data. Methods: This retrospective cohort study utilized national data from the National Health Insurance System, linking maternal and infant records with COVID-19 vaccination registries.Newborns with congenital malformations were identified using diagnosis codes. The analysis included women aged 20–49 who gave live births between February 2022 and December 2022. Odds ratios (ORs) for preterm birth and any congenital malformation per COVID-19 vaccination during pregnancy compared to 1:4 matched unvaccinated controls, adjusted for maternal age, residential area, employment, income, disability, month of conception, prepregnancy obesity, smoking, and severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection prior to pregnancy, were calculated. We compared the risk of two outcomes between BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273. Results: Among 106,692 women who gave birth during the study period, 8,966 (8.4%) received a COVID-19 vaccination during pregnancy. Of the newborns, 7,039 (6.6%) were preterm births and 7,658 (7.2%) had congenital malformations. COVID-19 vaccination during pregnancy was associated with a comparable risk of preterm birth (OR, 1.03; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.77–1.36) and a similar risk of congenital malformations (0.90; 95% CI, 0.72–1.12) compared to non-vaccinees. The ORs of preterm birth (1.02; 95% CI, 0.77–1.36) and congenital malformation (0.91; 95% CI, 0.73–1.14) for mRNA-1273 were comparable to those for BNT162b2. Conclusion COVID-19 vaccines during pregnancy poses no increased risk of preterm birth and congenital malformations compared to those not exposed to the vaccine, with similar risk levels observed between the two mRNA vaccines. This finding provides additional evidence supporting the safety of COVID-19 vaccines.

Background/Aims: Owing to the low prevalence of small-bowel adenocarcinoma (SBA), data on the impact of Crohn’s disease (CD) on the survival of patients with SBA are lacking. Therefore, we investigated this issue in this study. Methods: In this bicenter cohort study, patients with histologically confirmed SBA were retrospectively enrolled and classified into two groups: sporadic SBA and CD-associated SBA. Patients with duodenal SBA were excluded. Overall survival, disease-free survival, and factors associated with survival were analyzed. Results: Of 128 patients with SBA, 115 had sporadic SBA and 13 had CD-associated SBA. Ileal involvement and poorly differentiated tumors were more common in the CD-associated SBA group than in the sporadic SBA group (ileal involvement, 53.8% vs 22.6%; poor differentiation, 46.2% vs 14.8%; both p<0.05). In survival analysis, overall survival showed no statistical difference between the sporadic SBA and CD-associated SBA groups (p=0.370). However, when stratified by stage, the adjusted overall survival of the CD-associated SBA group was lower in patients with an advanced disease stage (p=0.029). Disease-free survival showed the same tendency, albeit without clinical significance (p=0.097). CD (hazard ratio [HR], 2.308; p=0.047), older age (≥65 yr) at SBA diagnosis (HR, 2.766; p=0.001), and stage III/IV disease (HR, 3.151; p<0.001) were factors associated with mortality. Conclusions The overall survival of patients with CD-associated SBA did not differ from that of patients with sporadic SBA. However, as CD is an independent risk factor for mortality, vigilant surveillance in high-risk patients may be crucial.

Objective: Cine magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has emerged as a noninvasive method to quantitatively assess bowel motility. However, its accuracy in measuring various degrees of small bowel motility has not been extensively evaluated. We aimed to draw a quantitative small bowel motility score from cine MRI and evaluate its performance in a population with varying degrees of small bowel motility. Materials and Methods: A total of 174 participants (28.5 ± 7.6 years; 135 males) underwent a 22-second-long cine MRI sequence (2-dimensional balanced turbo-field echo; 0.5 seconds per image) approximately 5 minutes after being intravenously administered 10 mg of scopolamine-N-butyl bromide to deliberately create diverse degrees of small bowel motility. In a manually segmented area of the small bowel, motility was automatically quantified using a nonrigid registration and calculated as a quantitative motility score. The mean value (MV) of motility grades visually assessed by two radiologists was used as a reference standard. The quantitative motility score’s correlation (Spearman’s ρ) with the reference standard and performance (area under the receiver operating characteristics curve [AUROC], sensitivity, and specificity) for diagnosing adynamic small bowel (MV of 1) were evaluated. Results: For the MV of the quantitative motility scores at grades 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5, and 3, the mean ± standard deviation values were 0.019 ± 0.003, 0.027 ± 0.010, 0.033 ± 0.008, 0.032 ± 0.009, and 0.043 ± 0.013, respectively. There was a significant positive correlation between the quantitative motility score and the MV (ρ = 0.531, P < 0.001). The AUROC value for diagnosing a MV of 1 (i.e., adynamic small bowel) was 0.953 (95% confidence interval, 0.923–0.984). Moreover, the optimal cutoff for the quantitative motility score was 0.024, with a sensitivity of 100% (15/15) and specificity of 89.9% (143/159). Conclusion The quantitative motility score calculated from a cine MRI enables diagnosis of an adynamic small bowel, and potentially discerns various degrees of bowel motility.

OBJECTIVES: We examined the associations of socioeconomic factors, health behaviors, and comorbidities with early-onset lung cancer. METHODS: The study included 6,794,287 individuals aged 20-39 years who participated in a Korean national health check-up program from 2009 to 2012. During the follow-up period, 4,684 participants developed lung cancer. Multivariable Cox regression analysis was used to estimate the independent associations of potential risk factors with incident lung cancer. RESULTS: Older age (multivariable hazard ratio [mHR], 1.13; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.12 to 1.14) and female sex (mHR, 1.62; 95% CI, 1.49 to 1.75) were associated with increased lung cancer risk. Current smoking was also associated with elevated risk (<10 pack-years: mHR, 1.12; 95% CI, 1.01 to 1.24; ≥10 pack-years: mHR, 1.30; 95% CI, 1.18 to 1.45), but past smoking was not. Although mild alcohol consumption (<10 g/day) was associated with lower lung cancer risk (mHR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.86 to 0.99), heavier alcohol consumption (≥10 g/day) was not. Higher income (highest vs. lowest quartile: mHR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.78 to 0.94), physical activity for at least 1,500 metabolic equivalent of task-min/wk (vs. non-exercisers: mHR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.69 to 0.99) and obesity (vs. normal weight: mHR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.83 to 0.96) were associated with lower lung cancer risk, whereas metabolic syndrome was associated with increased risk (mHR, 1.13; 95% CI, 1.03 to 1.24). CONCLUSIONS In young adults, age, female sex, smoking, and metabolic syndrome were risk factors for early-onset lung cancer, while high income, physical activity, and obesity displayed protective effects.

Purpose: This study aimed to evaluate the safety of biologics and small molecules for the treatment of inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD) in patients receiving antirejection therapies after organ transplants. Materials and Methods: We reviewed the medical records of patients with IBD who received organ transplants at the Asan Medical Center between January 1989 and December 2021. We compared the parameters of patients receiving biologics or small molecules to those of patients without those therapies. Results: This study included a total of 53 patients (ulcerative colitis, 41; Crohn’s disease, 6; and gastrointestinal Behçet’s disease, 6). Among them, 15 patients were receiving biologics or small molecules and 38 were not. During a mean follow-up of 119 months, the proportion of patients experiencing severe infections was significantly higher in those treated with biologics or small molecules than in those not treated. However, other safety outcomes (e.g., malignancies, adverse events, including organizing pneumonia or hepatic failure, and death) were not different between the two groups. Kaplan–Meier curve analysis revealed no significant difference in the safety outcome rate related to the use of biologics or small molecules. During follow-up, eight patients underwent bowel resections for IBD. The rate of bowel resection was not different between the two groups. Conclusion The use of biologics or small molecules for patients with IBD who received organ transplants did not show a significant difference in safety outcomes. However, the possibility of severe infections must be considered.