Purpose: This study evaluated the postoperative quality of life (QoL) after various types of gastrectomy for gastric cancer. Materials and Methods: A multicenter prospective observational study was conducted in Korea using the Korean Quality of Life in Stomach Cancer Patients Study (KOQUSS)-40, a new QoL assessment tool focusing on postgastrectomy syndrome. Overall, 496 patients with gastric cancer were enrolled, and QoL was assessed at 5 time points: preoperatively and at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery. Results: Distal gastrectomy (DG) and pylorus-preserving gastrectomy (PPG) showed significantly better outcomes than total gastrectomy (TG) and proximal gastrectomy (PG) with regard to total score, indigestion, and dysphagia. DG, PPG, and TG also showed significantly better outcomes than PG in terms of dumping syndrome and worry about cancer. Postoperative QoL did not differ significantly according to anastomosis type in DG, except for Billroth I anastomosis, which achieved better bowel habit change scores than the others. No domains differed significantly when comparing double tract reconstruction and esophagogastrostomy after PG. The total QoL score correlated significantly with postoperative body weight loss (more than 10%) and extent of resection (P<0.05 for both).Reflux as assessed by KOQUSS-40 did not correlate significantly with reflux observed on gastroscopy 1 year postoperatively (P=0.064). Conclusions Our prospective observation using KOQUSS-40 revealed that DG and PPG lead to better QoL than TG and PG. Further study is needed to compare postoperative QoL according to anastomosis type in DG and PG.

Purpose: This study evaluated the postoperative quality of life (QoL) after various types of gastrectomy for gastric cancer. Materials and Methods: A multicenter prospective observational study was conducted in Korea using the Korean Quality of Life in Stomach Cancer Patients Study (KOQUSS)-40, a new QoL assessment tool focusing on postgastrectomy syndrome. Overall, 496 patients with gastric cancer were enrolled, and QoL was assessed at 5 time points: preoperatively and at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery. Results: Distal gastrectomy (DG) and pylorus-preserving gastrectomy (PPG) showed significantly better outcomes than total gastrectomy (TG) and proximal gastrectomy (PG) with regard to total score, indigestion, and dysphagia. DG, PPG, and TG also showed significantly better outcomes than PG in terms of dumping syndrome and worry about cancer. Postoperative QoL did not differ significantly according to anastomosis type in DG, except for Billroth I anastomosis, which achieved better bowel habit change scores than the others. No domains differed significantly when comparing double tract reconstruction and esophagogastrostomy after PG. The total QoL score correlated significantly with postoperative body weight loss (more than 10%) and extent of resection (P<0.05 for both).Reflux as assessed by KOQUSS-40 did not correlate significantly with reflux observed on gastroscopy 1 year postoperatively (P=0.064). Conclusions Our prospective observation using KOQUSS-40 revealed that DG and PPG lead to better QoL than TG and PG. Further study is needed to compare postoperative QoL according to anastomosis type in DG and PG.

Purpose: This study evaluated the postoperative quality of life (QoL) after various types of gastrectomy for gastric cancer. Materials and Methods: A multicenter prospective observational study was conducted in Korea using the Korean Quality of Life in Stomach Cancer Patients Study (KOQUSS)-40, a new QoL assessment tool focusing on postgastrectomy syndrome. Overall, 496 patients with gastric cancer were enrolled, and QoL was assessed at 5 time points: preoperatively and at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery. Results: Distal gastrectomy (DG) and pylorus-preserving gastrectomy (PPG) showed significantly better outcomes than total gastrectomy (TG) and proximal gastrectomy (PG) with regard to total score, indigestion, and dysphagia. DG, PPG, and TG also showed significantly better outcomes than PG in terms of dumping syndrome and worry about cancer. Postoperative QoL did not differ significantly according to anastomosis type in DG, except for Billroth I anastomosis, which achieved better bowel habit change scores than the others. No domains differed significantly when comparing double tract reconstruction and esophagogastrostomy after PG. The total QoL score correlated significantly with postoperative body weight loss (more than 10%) and extent of resection (P<0.05 for both).Reflux as assessed by KOQUSS-40 did not correlate significantly with reflux observed on gastroscopy 1 year postoperatively (P=0.064). Conclusions Our prospective observation using KOQUSS-40 revealed that DG and PPG lead to better QoL than TG and PG. Further study is needed to compare postoperative QoL according to anastomosis type in DG and PG.

Background/Aims: Little is known about the practical clinical application of neuromodulators and psychiatric treatments in patients with functional gastrointestinal disorders (FGIDs). We investigate the knowledge, attitudes, and practices of Korean clinicians regarding the use of neuromodulators and psychiatric treatments for FGIDs. Methods: This prospective, online, cross-sectional study was conducted between May and August 2022. A questionnaire regarding the knowledge, attitude, and practice of neuromodulators and psychiatric treatments for FGIDs was developed and administered to primary care clinicians and gastroenterologists in university hospitals in Korea. Results: Overall, 451 clinicians from primary (n = 179, 39.7%), secondary (n = 113, 25.1%), and tertiary (n = 159, 35.3%) hospitals participated in the survey. Most of them considered that neuromodulators (98.7%) and psychiatric treatment (86.5%) were required for patients with FGIDs. However, approximately one-third of them did not prescribe neuromodulators, mainly due to unfamiliarity with the drugs, and only one-quarter considered psychiatric referral. Compared to gastroenterologists at university hospitals, primary care clinicians’ prescriptions had a lower rate (87.2% vs 64.2%, P < 0.001) and shorter duration of neuromodulator. The psychiatric referral rate was lower for primary care clinicians than for gastroenterologists at university hospitals (19.0% vs 34.2%, P < 0.001). Conclusions Knowledge, attitude, and practice levels regarding neuromodulators and psychiatric treatment among clinicians are inhomogeneous, and a knowledge gap exists between primary care clinicians and gastroenterologists at university hospitals. Encouraging ongoing education for Korean clinicians regarding the appropriate use of neuromodulators and psychiatric treatments in patients with FGIDs is suggested.

Objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of aripiprazole long-acting injection in patients with schizophrenia undergoing antipsychotics combination therapy. Methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis using electronic medical records of patients with schizophrenia who initiated aripiprazole long-acting injectable and were treated with antipsychotics combination therapy. These patients were either admitted to a psychiatric hospital or treated as outpatients between June, 2019 and December, 2019. Results: Seventeen patients met the inclusion criteria. The mean number of antipsychotics significantly decreased from 2.53 use to 1.81 at month 12 (p=0.018). Total antipsychotics olanzapine equivalent dose significantly decreased from 46.96 to 27.54 at month 12 (p=0.005). The number of combined medications including antidepressants, mood stabilizers, anxiolytics, and anticholinergics did not significantly change. Both the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) score and The Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF) score significantly improved until month 24 (p=0.004, 0.038; respectively). Conclusions This observational study confirmed that aripiprazole long-acting injection is an effective treatment option for patients with schizophrenia undergoing antipsychotic combination therapy. Well-controlled clinical trials are necessary in the near future.

Background: Oral sulfate tablets (OSTs) are bowel preparation agents that combine oral sulfate solution and simethicone. This study compared the efficacy, tolerability, and safety of OST compared to 2 L-polyethylene glycol plus ascorbic acid (2 L-PEG/ASC). Methods: This prospective, randomized, controlled, single-blinded, multicenter, noninferiority trial enrolled 211 healthy adults who underwent colonoscopy between May 2020 and September 2022 at 13 university hospitals. The bowel cleansing rate was assessed using the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS) and Harefield Cleansing Scale (HCS), and the preparation agents were administered in split regimens. Results: The total BBPS score (8.2 ± 1.5 vs. 7.8 ± 1.4, p = 0.040) and the high-quality bowel cleansing rates in the right colon (73.2% vs. 50.5), transverse colon (80.6% vs. 68.0%), and left colon (81.5% vs. 67.0%) on the BBPS were significantly higher in the OST group than in the 2 L-PEG/ASC group. However, the rates of successful cleansing according to BBPS (90.7% vs. 91.2%) and HCS (96.3% vs. 94.2%) did not significantly differ between the two groups.The taste, ease, and amount of consumption of the preparation agent; and willingness to repeat colonoscopy with the same agent (89.8% vs. 78.6%, P = 0.026) were significantly better in the OST group compared to the 2 L-PEG/ASC group. Adverse events and clinically significant laboratory changes were not significantly different between the two groups. Conclusion The OST was not inferior to 2 L-PEG/ASC in terms of bowel cleansing efficacy and showed better tolerability when used for bowel preparation for colonoscopy.

Background: Oral sulfate tablets (OSTs) are bowel preparation agents that combine oral sulfate solution and simethicone. This study compared the efficacy, tolerability, and safety of OST compared to 2 L-polyethylene glycol plus ascorbic acid (2 L-PEG/ASC). Methods: This prospective, randomized, controlled, single-blinded, multicenter, noninferiority trial enrolled 211 healthy adults who underwent colonoscopy between May 2020 and September 2022 at 13 university hospitals. The bowel cleansing rate was assessed using the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS) and Harefield Cleansing Scale (HCS), and the preparation agents were administered in split regimens. Results: The total BBPS score (8.2 ± 1.5 vs. 7.8 ± 1.4, p = 0.040) and the high-quality bowel cleansing rates in the right colon (73.2% vs. 50.5), transverse colon (80.6% vs. 68.0%), and left colon (81.5% vs. 67.0%) on the BBPS were significantly higher in the OST group than in the 2 L-PEG/ASC group. However, the rates of successful cleansing according to BBPS (90.7% vs. 91.2%) and HCS (96.3% vs. 94.2%) did not significantly differ between the two groups.The taste, ease, and amount of consumption of the preparation agent; and willingness to repeat colonoscopy with the same agent (89.8% vs. 78.6%, P = 0.026) were significantly better in the OST group compared to the 2 L-PEG/ASC group. Adverse events and clinically significant laboratory changes were not significantly different between the two groups. Conclusion The OST was not inferior to 2 L-PEG/ASC in terms of bowel cleansing efficacy and showed better tolerability when used for bowel preparation for colonoscopy.

Background: Oral sulfate tablets (OSTs) are bowel preparation agents that combine oral sulfate solution and simethicone. This study compared the efficacy, tolerability, and safety of OST compared to 2 L-polyethylene glycol plus ascorbic acid (2 L-PEG/ASC). Methods: This prospective, randomized, controlled, single-blinded, multicenter, noninferiority trial enrolled 211 healthy adults who underwent colonoscopy between May 2020 and September 2022 at 13 university hospitals. The bowel cleansing rate was assessed using the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS) and Harefield Cleansing Scale (HCS), and the preparation agents were administered in split regimens. Results: The total BBPS score (8.2 ± 1.5 vs. 7.8 ± 1.4, p = 0.040) and the high-quality bowel cleansing rates in the right colon (73.2% vs. 50.5), transverse colon (80.6% vs. 68.0%), and left colon (81.5% vs. 67.0%) on the BBPS were significantly higher in the OST group than in the 2 L-PEG/ASC group. However, the rates of successful cleansing according to BBPS (90.7% vs. 91.2%) and HCS (96.3% vs. 94.2%) did not significantly differ between the two groups.The taste, ease, and amount of consumption of the preparation agent; and willingness to repeat colonoscopy with the same agent (89.8% vs. 78.6%, P = 0.026) were significantly better in the OST group compared to the 2 L-PEG/ASC group. Adverse events and clinically significant laboratory changes were not significantly different between the two groups. Conclusion The OST was not inferior to 2 L-PEG/ASC in terms of bowel cleansing efficacy and showed better tolerability when used for bowel preparation for colonoscopy.

Background/Aims: Little is known about the practical clinical application of neuromodulators and psychiatric treatments in patients with functional gastrointestinal disorders (FGIDs). We investigate the knowledge, attitudes, and practices of Korean clinicians regarding the use of neuromodulators and psychiatric treatments for FGIDs. Methods: This prospective, online, cross-sectional study was conducted between May and August 2022. A questionnaire regarding the knowledge, attitude, and practice of neuromodulators and psychiatric treatments for FGIDs was developed and administered to primary care clinicians and gastroenterologists in university hospitals in Korea. Results: Overall, 451 clinicians from primary (n = 179, 39.7%), secondary (n = 113, 25.1%), and tertiary (n = 159, 35.3%) hospitals participated in the survey. Most of them considered that neuromodulators (98.7%) and psychiatric treatment (86.5%) were required for patients with FGIDs. However, approximately one-third of them did not prescribe neuromodulators, mainly due to unfamiliarity with the drugs, and only one-quarter considered psychiatric referral. Compared to gastroenterologists at university hospitals, primary care clinicians’ prescriptions had a lower rate (87.2% vs 64.2%, P < 0.001) and shorter duration of neuromodulator. The psychiatric referral rate was lower for primary care clinicians than for gastroenterologists at university hospitals (19.0% vs 34.2%, P < 0.001). Conclusions Knowledge, attitude, and practice levels regarding neuromodulators and psychiatric treatment among clinicians are inhomogeneous, and a knowledge gap exists between primary care clinicians and gastroenterologists at university hospitals. Encouraging ongoing education for Korean clinicians regarding the appropriate use of neuromodulators and psychiatric treatments in patients with FGIDs is suggested.

Objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of aripiprazole long-acting injection in patients with schizophrenia undergoing antipsychotics combination therapy. Methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis using electronic medical records of patients with schizophrenia who initiated aripiprazole long-acting injectable and were treated with antipsychotics combination therapy. These patients were either admitted to a psychiatric hospital or treated as outpatients between June, 2019 and December, 2019. Results: Seventeen patients met the inclusion criteria. The mean number of antipsychotics significantly decreased from 2.53 use to 1.81 at month 12 (p=0.018). Total antipsychotics olanzapine equivalent dose significantly decreased from 46.96 to 27.54 at month 12 (p=0.005). The number of combined medications including antidepressants, mood stabilizers, anxiolytics, and anticholinergics did not significantly change. Both the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) score and The Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF) score significantly improved until month 24 (p=0.004, 0.038; respectively). Conclusions This observational study confirmed that aripiprazole long-acting injection is an effective treatment option for patients with schizophrenia undergoing antipsychotic combination therapy. Well-controlled clinical trials are necessary in the near future.