Long coronavirus disease (COVID) is a condition in which coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) symptoms persist for over 3 months, and currently poses a global public health challenge. Due to varying manifestations and lack of standardized definitions, diagnostic methods, and treatments, comprehensive clinical guidelines are required. This review article, summarizing research and expert consensus up to June 2023, provides recommendations for diagnosis and long-term management of long COVID symptoms. It emphasizes thorough patient evaluation, including medical history, physical examinations, and tests, and advocates vaccination and antiviral treatments to reduce risk. Guidelines for long COVID will be updated as new knowledge emerges.

Objective: To prospectively evaluate the effect of accelerated deep learning-based reconstruction (Accel-DL) on improving brain magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) quality and reducing scan time compared to that in conventional MRI. Materials and Methods: This study included 150 participants (51 male; mean age 57.3 ± 16.2 years). Each group of 50 participants was scanned using one of three 3T scanners from three different vendors. Conventional and Accel-DL MRI images were obtained from each participant and compared using 2D T1- and T2-weighted and 3D gradient-echo sequences. Accel-DL acquisition was achieved using optimized scan parameters to reduce the scan time, with the acquired images reconstructed using U-Net-based software to transform low-quality, undersampled k-space data into high-quality images. The scan times of Accel-DL and conventional MRI methods were compared. Four neuroradiologists assessed the overall image quality, structural delineation, and artifacts using Likert scale (5- and 3-point scales). Inter-reader agreement was assessed using Fleiss’ kappa coefficient. Signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) were calculated, and volumetric quantification of regional structures and white matter hyperintensities (WMHs) was performed. Results: Accel-DL showed a mean scan time reduction of 39.4% (range, 24.2%–51.3%). Accel-DL improved overall image quality (3.78 ± 0.71 vs. 3.36 ± 0.61, P < 0.001), structure delineation (2.47 ± 0.61 vs. 2.35 ± 0.62, P < 0.001), and artifacts (3.73 ± 0.72 vs. 3.71 ± 0.69, P = 0.016). Inter-reader agreement was fair to substantial (κ = 0.34–0.50). SNR and CNR increased in Accel-DL (82.0 ± 23.1 vs. 31.4 ± 10.8, P = 0.02; 12.4 ± 4.1 vs. 4.4 ± 11.2, P = 0.02). Bland-Altman plots revealed no significant differences in the volumetric measurements of 98.2% of the relevant regions, except in the deep gray matter, including the thalamus. Five of the six lesion categories showed no significant differences in WMH segmentation, except for leukocortical lesions (r = 0.64 ± 0.29). Conclusion Accel-DL substantially reduced the scan time and improved the quality of brain MRI in both spin-echo and gradientecho sequences without compromising volumetry, including lesion quantification.

Objective: To prospectively evaluate the effect of accelerated deep learning-based reconstruction (Accel-DL) on improving brain magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) quality and reducing scan time compared to that in conventional MRI. Materials and Methods: This study included 150 participants (51 male; mean age 57.3 ± 16.2 years). Each group of 50 participants was scanned using one of three 3T scanners from three different vendors. Conventional and Accel-DL MRI images were obtained from each participant and compared using 2D T1- and T2-weighted and 3D gradient-echo sequences. Accel-DL acquisition was achieved using optimized scan parameters to reduce the scan time, with the acquired images reconstructed using U-Net-based software to transform low-quality, undersampled k-space data into high-quality images. The scan times of Accel-DL and conventional MRI methods were compared. Four neuroradiologists assessed the overall image quality, structural delineation, and artifacts using Likert scale (5- and 3-point scales). Inter-reader agreement was assessed using Fleiss’ kappa coefficient. Signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) were calculated, and volumetric quantification of regional structures and white matter hyperintensities (WMHs) was performed. Results: Accel-DL showed a mean scan time reduction of 39.4% (range, 24.2%–51.3%). Accel-DL improved overall image quality (3.78 ± 0.71 vs. 3.36 ± 0.61, P < 0.001), structure delineation (2.47 ± 0.61 vs. 2.35 ± 0.62, P < 0.001), and artifacts (3.73 ± 0.72 vs. 3.71 ± 0.69, P = 0.016). Inter-reader agreement was fair to substantial (κ = 0.34–0.50). SNR and CNR increased in Accel-DL (82.0 ± 23.1 vs. 31.4 ± 10.8, P = 0.02; 12.4 ± 4.1 vs. 4.4 ± 11.2, P = 0.02). Bland-Altman plots revealed no significant differences in the volumetric measurements of 98.2% of the relevant regions, except in the deep gray matter, including the thalamus. Five of the six lesion categories showed no significant differences in WMH segmentation, except for leukocortical lesions (r = 0.64 ± 0.29). Conclusion Accel-DL substantially reduced the scan time and improved the quality of brain MRI in both spin-echo and gradientecho sequences without compromising volumetry, including lesion quantification.

Objective: To prospectively evaluate the effect of accelerated deep learning-based reconstruction (Accel-DL) on improving brain magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) quality and reducing scan time compared to that in conventional MRI. Materials and Methods: This study included 150 participants (51 male; mean age 57.3 ± 16.2 years). Each group of 50 participants was scanned using one of three 3T scanners from three different vendors. Conventional and Accel-DL MRI images were obtained from each participant and compared using 2D T1- and T2-weighted and 3D gradient-echo sequences. Accel-DL acquisition was achieved using optimized scan parameters to reduce the scan time, with the acquired images reconstructed using U-Net-based software to transform low-quality, undersampled k-space data into high-quality images. The scan times of Accel-DL and conventional MRI methods were compared. Four neuroradiologists assessed the overall image quality, structural delineation, and artifacts using Likert scale (5- and 3-point scales). Inter-reader agreement was assessed using Fleiss’ kappa coefficient. Signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) were calculated, and volumetric quantification of regional structures and white matter hyperintensities (WMHs) was performed. Results: Accel-DL showed a mean scan time reduction of 39.4% (range, 24.2%–51.3%). Accel-DL improved overall image quality (3.78 ± 0.71 vs. 3.36 ± 0.61, P < 0.001), structure delineation (2.47 ± 0.61 vs. 2.35 ± 0.62, P < 0.001), and artifacts (3.73 ± 0.72 vs. 3.71 ± 0.69, P = 0.016). Inter-reader agreement was fair to substantial (κ = 0.34–0.50). SNR and CNR increased in Accel-DL (82.0 ± 23.1 vs. 31.4 ± 10.8, P = 0.02; 12.4 ± 4.1 vs. 4.4 ± 11.2, P = 0.02). Bland-Altman plots revealed no significant differences in the volumetric measurements of 98.2% of the relevant regions, except in the deep gray matter, including the thalamus. Five of the six lesion categories showed no significant differences in WMH segmentation, except for leukocortical lesions (r = 0.64 ± 0.29). Conclusion Accel-DL substantially reduced the scan time and improved the quality of brain MRI in both spin-echo and gradientecho sequences without compromising volumetry, including lesion quantification.

Long coronavirus disease (COVID) is a condition in which coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) symptoms persist for over 3 months, and currently poses a global public health challenge. Due to varying manifestations and lack of standardized definitions, diagnostic methods, and treatments, comprehensive clinical guidelines are required. This review article, summarizing research and expert consensus up to June 2023, provides recommendations for diagnosis and long-term management of long COVID symptoms. It emphasizes thorough patient evaluation, including medical history, physical examinations, and tests, and advocates vaccination and antiviral treatments to reduce risk. Guidelines for long COVID will be updated as new knowledge emerges.

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.

Long coronavirus disease (COVID) is a condition in which coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) symptoms persist for over 3 months, and currently poses a global public health challenge. Due to varying manifestations and lack of standardized definitions, diagnostic methods, and treatments, comprehensive clinical guidelines are required. This review article, summarizing research and expert consensus up to June 2023, provides recommendations for diagnosis and long-term management of long COVID symptoms. It emphasizes thorough patient evaluation, including medical history, physical examinations, and tests, and advocates vaccination and antiviral treatments to reduce risk. Guidelines for long COVID will be updated as new knowledge emerges.