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.

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.

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.

Purpose: To evaluate whether the added value of contrast leakage information from dynamic susceptibility contrast magnetic resonance imaging (DSC MRI) is a better prognostic imaging biomarker than the cerebral blood volume (CBV) value in distinguishing true progression from pseudoprogression in glioblastoma patients. Materials and Methods: Forty-nine glioblastoma patients who had undergone MRI after concurrent chemoradiotherapy with temozolomide were enrolled in this retrospective study. Twenty features were extracted from the normalized relative CBV (nCBV) and extraction fraction (EF) map of the contrast-enhancing region in each patient. After univariable analysis, we used multivariable stepwise logistic regression analysis to identify significant predictors for differentiating between pseudoprogression and true progression. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis was employed to determine the best cutoff values for the nCBV and EF features. Finally, leave-one-out cross-validation was used to validate the best predictor in differentiating between true progression and pseudoprogression. Results: Multivariable stepwise logistic regression analysis showed that MGMT (O 6 -methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase) and EF max were independent differentiating variables (P = 0.004 and P = 0.02, respectively). ROC analysis yielded the best cutoff value of 95.75 for the EF max value for differentiating the two groups (sensitivity, 61%; specificity, 84.6%; AUC, 0.681 ± 0.08; 95% CI, 0.524-0.837; P = 0.03). In the leave-one-out cross-validation of the EF max value, the cross-validated values for predicting true progression and pseudoprogression accuracies were 69.4% and 71.4%,respectively. Conclusion We demonstrated that contrast leakage information parameter from DSC MRI showed significance in differentiating true progression from pseudoprogression in glioblastoma patients.

Background: Humidifier disinfectant-related lung injury (HDLI) is a severe form of toxic inhalational pulmonary parenchymal damage found in residents of South Korea previously exposed to specific guanidine-based compounds present in humidifier disinfectants (HD). HD-associated asthma (HDA), which is similar to irritant-induced asthma, has been recognized in victims with asthma-like symptoms and is probably caused by airway injury. In this study, diffusing capacity of the lung for carbon monoxide (DL CO ) in individuals with HDA was compared to that in individuals with pre-existing asthma without HD exposure. Methods: We retrospectively compared data, including DLCO values, of 70 patients with HDA with that of 79 patients having pre-existing asthma without any known exposure to HD (controls). Multiple linear regression analysis and logistic regression analysis were performed to confirm the association between HD exposure and DL CO after controlling for confounding factors. The correlation between DLCO and several indicators related to HD exposure was evaluated in patients with HDA.Result: The mean DLCO was significantly lower in the HDA group than in the control group (81.9% vs. 88.6%; P = 0.021). The mean DLCO of asthma patients with definite HD exposure was significantly lower than that of asthma patients with lesser exposure (P for trend = 0.002). In multivariable regression models, DLCO in the HDA group decreased by 5.8%, and patients with HDA were 2.1-fold more likely to have a lower DLCO than the controls. Pathway analysis showed that exposure to HD directly affected DLCO values and indirectly affected its measurement through a decrease in the forced vital capacity (FVC). Correlation analysis indicated a significant inverse correlation between DLCO % and cumulative HD exposure time. Conclusion DLCO was lower in patients with HDA than in asthma patients without HD exposure, and decreased FVC partially mediated this effect. Therefore, monitoring the DL CO may be useful for early diagnosis of HDA in patients with asthma symptoms and history of HD exposure.

Objective: To develop a radiomics risk score based on dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) MRI for prognosis prediction in patients with glioblastoma. Materials and Methods: One hundred and fifty patients (92 male [61.3%]; mean age ± standard deviation, 60.5 ± 13.5 years) with glioblastoma who underwent preoperative MRI were enrolled in the study. Six hundred and forty-two radiomic features were extracted from volume transfer constant (Ktrans), fractional volume of vascular plasma space (Vp), and fractional volume of extravascular extracellular space (Ve) maps of DCE MRI, wherein the regions of interest were based on both T1-weighted contrast-enhancing areas and non-enhancing T2 hyperintense areas. Using feature selection algorithms, salient radiomic features were selected from the 642 features. Next, a radiomics risk score was developed using a weighted combination of the selected features in the discovery set (n = 105); the risk score was validated in the validation set (n = 45) by investigating the difference in prognosis between the “radiomics risk score” groups. Finally, multivariable Cox regression analysis for progression-free survival was performed using the radiomics risk score and clinical variables as covariates. Results: 16 radiomic features obtained from non-enhancing T2 hyperintense areas were selected among the 642 features identified. The radiomics risk score was used to stratify high- and low-risk groups in both the discovery and validation sets (both p < 0.001 by the log-rank test). The radiomics risk score and presence of isocitrate dehydrogenase (IDH) mutation showed independent associations with progression-free survival in opposite directions (hazard ratio, 3.56; p = 0.004 and hazard ratio, 0.34; p = 0.022, respectively). Conclusion We developed and validated the “radiomics risk score” from the features of DCE MRI based on non-enhancing T2 hyperintense areas for risk stratification of patients with glioblastoma. It was associated with progression-free survival independently of IDH mutation status.

Objective: To develop a radiomics risk score based on dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) MRI for prognosis prediction in patients with glioblastoma. Materials and Methods: One hundred and fifty patients (92 male [61.3%]; mean age ± standard deviation, 60.5 ± 13.5 years) with glioblastoma who underwent preoperative MRI were enrolled in the study. Six hundred and forty-two radiomic features were extracted from volume transfer constant (Ktrans), fractional volume of vascular plasma space (Vp), and fractional volume of extravascular extracellular space (Ve) maps of DCE MRI, wherein the regions of interest were based on both T1-weighted contrast-enhancing areas and non-enhancing T2 hyperintense areas. Using feature selection algorithms, salient radiomic features were selected from the 642 features. Next, a radiomics risk score was developed using a weighted combination of the selected features in the discovery set (n = 105); the risk score was validated in the validation set (n = 45) by investigating the difference in prognosis between the “radiomics risk score” groups. Finally, multivariable Cox regression analysis for progression-free survival was performed using the radiomics risk score and clinical variables as covariates. Results: 16 radiomic features obtained from non-enhancing T2 hyperintense areas were selected among the 642 features identified. The radiomics risk score was used to stratify high- and low-risk groups in both the discovery and validation sets (both p < 0.001 by the log-rank test). The radiomics risk score and presence of isocitrate dehydrogenase (IDH) mutation showed independent associations with progression-free survival in opposite directions (hazard ratio, 3.56; p = 0.004 and hazard ratio, 0.34; p = 0.022, respectively). Conclusion We developed and validated the “radiomics risk score” from the features of DCE MRI based on non-enhancing T2 hyperintense areas for risk stratification of patients with glioblastoma. It was associated with progression-free survival independently of IDH mutation status.

BACKGROUND: Vitamin K antagonist (VKA) to prevent thromboembolism in non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) patients has limitations such as drug interaction. This study investigated the clinical characteristics of Korean patients treated with VKA for stroke prevention and assessed quality of VKA therapy and treatment satisfaction. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter, prospective, non-interventional study. Patients with CHADS2 ≥ 1 and treated with VKA (started within the last 3 months) were enrolled from April 2013 to March 2014. Demographic and clinical features including risk factors of stroke and VKA treatment information was collected at baseline. Treatment patterns and international normalized ratio (INR) level were evaluated during follow-up. Time in therapeutic range (TTR) > 60% indicated well-controlled INR. Treatment satisfaction on the VKA use was measured by Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication (TSQM) after 3 months of follow-up. RESULTS: A total of 877 patients (age, 67; male, 60%) were enrolled and followed up for one year. More than half of patients (56%) had CHADS2 ≥ 2 and 83.6% had CHA2DS2-VASc ≥ 2. A total of 852 patients had one or more INR measurement during their follow-up period. Among those patients, 25.5% discontinued VKA treatment during follow-up. Of all patients, 626 patients (73%) had poor-controlled INR (TTR < 60%) measure. Patients' treatment satisfaction measured with TSQM was 55.6 in global satisfaction domain. CONCLUSION: INR was poorly controlled in Korean NVAF patients treated with VKA. VKA users also showed low treatment satisfaction.
Atrial Fibrillation* ; Drug Interactions ; Follow-Up Studies ; Humans ; International Normalized Ratio ; Male ; Prospective Studies ; Risk Factors ; Stroke ; Thromboembolism ; Vitamin K* ; Vitamins*

PURPOSE: In the present study, the clinical characteristics and outcomes of neuroretinitis in Korea were investigated. METHODS: Seven consecutive patients with neuroretinitis from 2012 to 2015 were retrospectively reviewed. RESULTS: The present study included 9 eyes of 7 patients. The subjects consisted of 5 males and 2 females and the mean age was 45.1 ± 13.2 years. Two patients had Influenza-like symptoms and the others had no specific general symptoms. The mean best corrected visual acuity was logMAR 0.48 ± 0.55 (0-1.6) on the initial visit. Four patients 40 years of age or under had no abnormal findings in laboratory work-up. Conversely, 3 patients over 40 years of age were positive for Toxocara based on enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). Two of 3 patients positive for Toxocara were treated with albendazole and 1was not. Eight eyes had good visual recovery over 20/30 except for 1 patient who did not take the albendazole despite being positive for Toxocara detected using ELISA. CONCLUSIONS: Three of 7 patients with neuroretinitis in Korea showed positive results for Toxocara based on ELISA. In cases with seropositive Toxocara ELISA results, albendazole treatment should be considered.
Albendazole ; Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay ; Female ; Humans ; Korea* ; Male ; Optic Neuritis ; Retinitis* ; Retrospective Studies ; Toxocara ; Toxocariasis ; Visual Acuity

This study intended to review the precedents on plastic surgery medical malpractice lawsuits in lower-court trials, classify the reasons of 'limitation of liability' by type, and suggest a standard in the acknowledgement of limitation of liability ratio. The 30 lower-court's rulings on the cases bearing the medical negligence of the defendants acknowledged the liability ratio of the defendants between 30% and 100%. Ten cases ruled that the defendants were wholly responsible for the negligence or malpractice, while 20 cases acknowledged the limitation of liability principle. In the determination of damage compensation amount, the court considered the cause of the victim side, which contributed in the occurrence of the damage. The court also believed that it is against the idea of fairness to have the assailant pay the whole compensation, even there is no victim-side cause such as previous illness or physical constitution of the patient, and applies the legal doctrine on limitation of liability, which is an independent damage compensation adjustment system. Most of the rulings also limited the ratio of responsibility to certain extent. When considering that the legal doctrine on limitation of liability which supports concrete validity for the fair sharing of damage, the tangible classification of causes of limitation of liability suggested in this study would be a useful tool in forecasting the ruling of a plastic surgery medical malpractice lawsuit.
Humans ; *Liability, Legal ; Malpractice/*legislation & jurisprudence ; Reconstructive Surgical Procedures/adverse effects/legislation & jurisprudence ; Republic of Korea ; Surgery, Plastic/*adverse effects/*legislation & jurisprudence