Background and Objectives: Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) has been associated with an increased risk of cancer in various organs. OSA is also linked to chronic inflammation in the biliary tract and pancreas, a well-established risk factor for carcinogenesis in these organs. However, its relationship with biliary tract and pancreatic cancers remains unclear and has been rarely investigated. Therefore, we aimed to evaluate whether OSA serves as an independent risk factor for these malignancies by analyzing a nationwide healthcare claims database in South Korea. Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted using the Korean National Health Insurance Service (KNHIS) database. Adults aged ≥20 years who were newly diagnosed with OSA (ICD-10: G47.30) between 2007 and 2014 were identified and propensity score-matched (1:5) with controls based on age, sex, and comorbidities. Individuals with pre-existing cancer diagnoses were excluded. The primary endpoints were the incidence of overall cancer, biliary tract cancer (C23–C24), and pancreatic cancer (C25). Cox proportional hazards regression models were used to calculate hazard ratios (HRs), adjusting for demographic and clinical factors. Results: A total of 1,191,444 individuals were included, comprising 198,574 patients diagnosed with OSA and 992,870 matched controls. OSA was associated with an increased overall cancer incidence (HR, 1.132; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.097–1.169); however, it was not significantly associated with pancreatic cancer (HR, 0.941; 95% CI, 0.823–1.072) or biliary tract cancer (HR, 0.931; 95% CI, 0.751–1.142). Subgroup analyses stratified by sex and age revealed no statistically significant associations across these groups. Conclusion Our findings do not support OSA as an independent risk factor for biliary tract or pancreatic cancers.

Background: Complete revascularization has demonstrated better outcomes in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) and multivessel disease. However, in the case of left main (LM) culprit lesion AMI with multivessel disease, there is limited evidence to suggest that complete revascularization is better. Methods: We reviewed 16,831 patients in the Korea Acute Myocardial Infarction Registry who were treated from July 2016 to June 2020, and 399 patients were enrolled with LM culprit lesion AMI treated with percutaneous coronary intervention. We categorized the patients as those treated with complete revascularization (n=295) or incomplete revascularization (n=104). The study endpoint was major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE), a composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, ischemia-driven revascularization, stent thrombosis, and stroke. We performed propensity score matching (PSM) and analyzed the incidence of MACCE at 1 year. Results: After PSM, the two groups were well balanced. There was no significant difference between the two groups in MACCE at 1 year (12.1% vs. 15.2%; hazard ratio, 1.28; 95% confidence interval, 0.60–2.74; p=0.524) after PSM. The components of MACCE and major bleeding were also not significantly different. Conclusion There was no significant difference in clinical outcomes between the groups treated with complete or incomplete revascularization for LM culprit lesion AMI with multivessel disease.

Background: Maintenance of stable blood pressure (BP) during cerebrovascular bypass surgery is crucial to prevent cerebral ischemia. We compared the effect of remimazolam anesthesia with that of propofol-induced and desflurane-maintained anesthesia on intraoperative hemodynamic stability and the need for vasoactive agents in patients undergoing cerebrovascular bypass surgery. Methods: Sixty-five patients were randomized into remimazolam (n = 31, remimazolam-based intravenous anesthesia) and control groups (n = 34, propofol-induced and desflurane-maintained anesthesia). The primary outcome was the occurrence of intraoperative hypotension. The secondary outcomes included hypotension duration, lowest mean BP (MBP), generalized average real variability (ARV) of MBP, and consumption of phenylephrine, norepinephrine, or remifentanil. Results: Occurrence rate and duration of hypotension were significantly lower in the remimazolam group (38.7% vs. 73.5%, P = 0.005; 0 [0, 10] vs. 7.5 [1.25, 25] min, P = 0.008). Remimazolam also showed better outcomes for lowest MBP (78 [73, 84] vs. 69.5 [66.25, 75.8] mmHg, P < 0.001) and generalized ARV of MBP (1.42 ± 0.49 vs. 1.66 ± 0.52 mmHg/min, P = 0.036). The remimazolam group required less phenylephrine (20 [0, 65] vs. 100 [60, 130] μg, P < 0.001), less norepinephrine (162 [0, 365.5] vs. 1335 [998.5, 1637.5] μg, P < 0.001), and more remifentanil (1750 [1454.5, 2184.5] vs. 531 [431, 746.5] μg, P < 0.001) than the control group. Conclusions Remimazolam anesthesia may provide better hemodynamic stability during cerebrovascular bypass surgery than propofol-induced and desflurane-maintained anesthesia.

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.

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.

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: Pulmonary tumor thrombotic microangiopathy (PTTM) is a fatal complication of gastric cancer (GC). This study aimed to evaluate the clinical characteristics, outcomes, and immunohistochemical profiles of patients with GC-induced PTTM. Materials and Methods: From 2011 to 2023, 8 patients were clinically diagnosed with PTTM associated with GC antemortem. Clinical features and outcomes were reviewed, and immunohistochemical staining for c-erbB-2, MutL protein homolog 1, and programmed cell death ligand-1 was performed. Results: The median patient age was 56 years (range, 34–66 years). In all the patients, the tumors exhibited either ulceroinfiltrative or diffusely infiltrative gross morphology.The median tumor size was 5.8 cm (range, 2.0 cm–15.0 cm). Poorly differentiated adenocarcinoma was the most common histological type (6/8, 75%), followed by signet ring cell carcinoma (1/8, 12.5%) and moderately differentiated adenocarcinoma (1/8, 12.5%).Chest computed tomography revealed ground-glass opacities (7/8, 87.5%) or tree-in-bud signs (2/8, 25.0%) without definite evidence of pulmonary thromboembolism. Disseminated intravascular coagulation was present in 62.5% (5/8) of the patients diagnosed with PTTM.C-erbB-2 was positive in one patient (1/8, 12.5%). One patient who received palliative chemotherapy after developing PTTM survived for 35 days, whereas the other 7 patients who did not receive chemotherapy after developing PTTM survived for 7 days or less after PTTM diagnosis. Conclusions Most patients with GC-induced PTTM had an undifferentiated-type histology, infiltrative morphology, and extremely poor survival. Palliative chemotherapy may benefit patients with GC-induced PTTM; however, further studies are needed to explore the potential of targeted therapy in these 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.