Purpose: The long-term outcomes and efficacy of partial stapled hemorrhoidopexy (PSH) compared with those of conventional hemorrhoidectomy (CH) are not fully understood. This study aimed to introduce a modified PSH (mPSH) and compare its clinical efficacy and safety with those of CH. Methods: A prospective randomized controlled trial was conducted. This study was performed at a single hospital and involved 6 colorectal surgeons. In total, 110 patients were enrolled between July 2019 and September 2020. Patients were randomly assigned to undergo either mPSH group (n=55) or CH group (n=55). The primary outcome was to compare postoperative average pain and postoperative peak pain using visual analog scale score between the 2 groups. Results: The required duration of analgesia was shorter in the mPSH group than in the CH group, although the difference was not statistically significant (P=0.096). However, the laxative requirement duration (P<0.010), return to work (P<0.010), satisfaction score (P<0.010), and Vaizey score (P=0.014) were significantly better in the mPSH group. The average and peak postoperative pain scores were significantly lower in the mPSH group during the 15 days after surgery (P<0.001). The overall complication rate in both groups was 9.1%, with no significant difference between the groups (P=0.867). Conclusion The mPSH group demonstrated better improvement in symptoms, lower pain scores, and greater patient early satisfaction after surgery than the CH group. Therefore, this surgical technique appears to be a safe and effective alternative for CH.

Purpose: The long-term outcomes and efficacy of partial stapled hemorrhoidopexy (PSH) compared with those of conventional hemorrhoidectomy (CH) are not fully understood. This study aimed to introduce a modified PSH (mPSH) and compare its clinical efficacy and safety with those of CH. Methods: A prospective randomized controlled trial was conducted. This study was performed at a single hospital and involved 6 colorectal surgeons. In total, 110 patients were enrolled between July 2019 and September 2020. Patients were randomly assigned to undergo either mPSH group (n=55) or CH group (n=55). The primary outcome was to compare postoperative average pain and postoperative peak pain using visual analog scale score between the 2 groups. Results: The required duration of analgesia was shorter in the mPSH group than in the CH group, although the difference was not statistically significant (P=0.096). However, the laxative requirement duration (P<0.010), return to work (P<0.010), satisfaction score (P<0.010), and Vaizey score (P=0.014) were significantly better in the mPSH group. The average and peak postoperative pain scores were significantly lower in the mPSH group during the 15 days after surgery (P<0.001). The overall complication rate in both groups was 9.1%, with no significant difference between the groups (P=0.867). Conclusion The mPSH group demonstrated better improvement in symptoms, lower pain scores, and greater patient early satisfaction after surgery than the CH group. Therefore, this surgical technique appears to be a safe and effective alternative for CH.

Purpose: The long-term outcomes and efficacy of partial stapled hemorrhoidopexy (PSH) compared with those of conventional hemorrhoidectomy (CH) are not fully understood. This study aimed to introduce a modified PSH (mPSH) and compare its clinical efficacy and safety with those of CH. Methods: A prospective randomized controlled trial was conducted. This study was performed at a single hospital and involved 6 colorectal surgeons. In total, 110 patients were enrolled between July 2019 and September 2020. Patients were randomly assigned to undergo either mPSH group (n=55) or CH group (n=55). The primary outcome was to compare postoperative average pain and postoperative peak pain using visual analog scale score between the 2 groups. Results: The required duration of analgesia was shorter in the mPSH group than in the CH group, although the difference was not statistically significant (P=0.096). However, the laxative requirement duration (P<0.010), return to work (P<0.010), satisfaction score (P<0.010), and Vaizey score (P=0.014) were significantly better in the mPSH group. The average and peak postoperative pain scores were significantly lower in the mPSH group during the 15 days after surgery (P<0.001). The overall complication rate in both groups was 9.1%, with no significant difference between the groups (P=0.867). Conclusion The mPSH group demonstrated better improvement in symptoms, lower pain scores, and greater patient early satisfaction after surgery than the CH group. Therefore, this surgical technique appears to be a safe and effective alternative for CH.

Purpose: The long-term outcomes and efficacy of partial stapled hemorrhoidopexy (PSH) compared with those of conventional hemorrhoidectomy (CH) are not fully understood. This study aimed to introduce a modified PSH (mPSH) and compare its clinical efficacy and safety with those of CH. Methods: A prospective randomized controlled trial was conducted. This study was performed at a single hospital and involved 6 colorectal surgeons. In total, 110 patients were enrolled between July 2019 and September 2020. Patients were randomly assigned to undergo either mPSH group (n=55) or CH group (n=55). The primary outcome was to compare postoperative average pain and postoperative peak pain using visual analog scale score between the 2 groups. Results: The required duration of analgesia was shorter in the mPSH group than in the CH group, although the difference was not statistically significant (P=0.096). However, the laxative requirement duration (P<0.010), return to work (P<0.010), satisfaction score (P<0.010), and Vaizey score (P=0.014) were significantly better in the mPSH group. The average and peak postoperative pain scores were significantly lower in the mPSH group during the 15 days after surgery (P<0.001). The overall complication rate in both groups was 9.1%, with no significant difference between the groups (P=0.867). Conclusion The mPSH group demonstrated better improvement in symptoms, lower pain scores, and greater patient early satisfaction after surgery than the CH group. Therefore, this surgical technique appears to be a safe and effective alternative for CH.

Purpose: The long-term outcomes and efficacy of partial stapled hemorrhoidopexy (PSH) compared with those of conventional hemorrhoidectomy (CH) are not fully understood. This study aimed to introduce a modified PSH (mPSH) and compare its clinical efficacy and safety with those of CH. Methods: A prospective randomized controlled trial was conducted. This study was performed at a single hospital and involved 6 colorectal surgeons. In total, 110 patients were enrolled between July 2019 and September 2020. Patients were randomly assigned to undergo either mPSH group (n=55) or CH group (n=55). The primary outcome was to compare postoperative average pain and postoperative peak pain using visual analog scale score between the 2 groups. Results: The required duration of analgesia was shorter in the mPSH group than in the CH group, although the difference was not statistically significant (P=0.096). However, the laxative requirement duration (P<0.010), return to work (P<0.010), satisfaction score (P<0.010), and Vaizey score (P=0.014) were significantly better in the mPSH group. The average and peak postoperative pain scores were significantly lower in the mPSH group during the 15 days after surgery (P<0.001). The overall complication rate in both groups was 9.1%, with no significant difference between the groups (P=0.867). Conclusion The mPSH group demonstrated better improvement in symptoms, lower pain scores, and greater patient early satisfaction after surgery than the CH group. Therefore, this surgical technique appears to be a safe and effective alternative for CH.

Gastric cancer is one of the most common cancers in Korea and the world. Since 2004, this is the 4th gastric cancer guideline published in Korea which is the revised version of previous evidence-based approach in 2018. Current guideline is a collaborative work of the interdisciplinary working group including experts in the field of gastric surgery, gastroenterology, endoscopy, medical oncology, abdominal radiology, pathology, nuclear medicine, radiation oncology and guideline development methodology. Total of 33 key questions were updated or proposed after a collaborative review by the working group and 40 statements were developed according to the systematic review using the MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library and KoreaMed database. The level of evidence and the grading of recommendations were categorized according to the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation proposition. Evidence level, benefit, harm, and clinical applicability was considered as the significant factors for recommendation. The working group reviewed recommendations and discussed for consensus. In the earlier part, general consideration discusses screening, diagnosis and staging of endoscopy, pathology, radiology, and nuclear medicine. Flowchart is depicted with statements which is supported by meta-analysis and references. Since clinical trial and systematic review was not suitable for postoperative oncologic and nutritional follow-up, working group agreed to conduct a nationwide survey investigating the clinical practice of all tertiary or general hospitals in Korea. The purpose of this survey was to provide baseline information on follow up. Herein we present a multidisciplinary-evidence based gastric cancer guideline.

Extranodal natural killer (NK)/T-cell lymphoma, nasal type (ENKTCL-NT) is the most common subtype of Epstein-Barr virus-associated NK/T-cell lymphomas. ENKTCL-NT occurs infrequently in the gastrointestinal tract. In particular, reports of ENKTCL-on NT arising from the stomach are extremely rare. Several clusters of differentiation (CDs) have been useful in recognizing NK-cells, T-cells, and tumor cells of NK/T-cell lymphomas. Among them, the CD56 antigen is considered the most sensitive marker for ENKTCL-NT and is expressed in almost all cases of ENKTCL-NT. Thus, the development of CD56-negative ENKTCL-NT is highly atypical. This paper reports a case of a young Asian female who presented with gastric ulcer bleeding. The patient was histologically diagnosed with ENKTCL-NT. No tumor cells for CD56 were observed, whereas no monoclonality of the T-cell receptor gamma gene rearrangement was detected in the tumor cells. The patient was scheduled for systemic chemotherapy six times and achieved complete remission. Peripheral blood-hematopoietic stem cell transplantation was performed later.

Purpose: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic disrupted the emergency medical care system worldwide. We analyzed the changes in the management of intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) and compared the pre-COVID-19 and COVID-19 eras. Materials and Methods: From March to October of the COVID-19 era (2020), 83 consecutive patients with ICH were admitted to four comprehensive stroke centers. We retrospectively reviewed the data of patients and compared the treatment workflow metrics, treatment modalities, and clinical outcomes with the patients admitted during the same period of pre-COVID-19 era (2017–2019). Results: Three hundred thirty-eight patients (83 in COVID-19 era and 255 in pre-COVID-19 era) were included in this study. Symptom onset/detection-to-door time [COVID-19; 56.0 min (34.0–106.0), pre-COVID-19; 40.0 min (27.0–98.0), p=0.016] and median door to-intensive treatment time differed between the two groups [COVID-19; 349.0 min (177.0–560.0), pre-COVID-19; 184.0 min (134.0–271.0), p<0.001]. Hematoma expansion was detected more significantly in the COVID-19 era (39.8% vs. 22.1%, p=0.002). At 3-month follow-up, clinical outcomes of patients were worse in the COVID-19 era (Good modified Rankin Scale; 33.7% in COVID-19, 46.7% in pre-COVID-19, p=0.039). Conclusion During the COVID-19 era, delays in management of ICH was associated with hematoma expansion and worse outcomes.

Purpose: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic disrupted the emergency medical care system worldwide. We analyzed the changes in the management of intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) and compared the pre-COVID-19 and COVID-19 eras. Materials and Methods: From March to October of the COVID-19 era (2020), 83 consecutive patients with ICH were admitted to four comprehensive stroke centers. We retrospectively reviewed the data of patients and compared the treatment workflow metrics, treatment modalities, and clinical outcomes with the patients admitted during the same period of pre-COVID-19 era (2017–2019). Results: Three hundred thirty-eight patients (83 in COVID-19 era and 255 in pre-COVID-19 era) were included in this study. Symptom onset/detection-to-door time [COVID-19; 56.0 min (34.0–106.0), pre-COVID-19; 40.0 min (27.0–98.0), p=0.016] and median door to-intensive treatment time differed between the two groups [COVID-19; 349.0 min (177.0–560.0), pre-COVID-19; 184.0 min (134.0–271.0), p<0.001]. Hematoma expansion was detected more significantly in the COVID-19 era (39.8% vs. 22.1%, p=0.002). At 3-month follow-up, clinical outcomes of patients were worse in the COVID-19 era (Good modified Rankin Scale; 33.7% in COVID-19, 46.7% in pre-COVID-19, p=0.039). Conclusion During the COVID-19 era, delays in management of ICH was associated with hematoma expansion and worse outcomes.