1.Primary tumor resection vs. self-expandable metallic stent in unresectable obstructive stage IV colorectal cancer: a comparative outcome study
Chang Hyun KIM ; Jae Kyun JU ; Jaram LEE ; Hyeung-min PARK ; Soo Young LEE ; Hyeong Rok KIM ; Young Eun JOO ; Sung Bum CHO
Annals of Surgical Treatment and Research 2025;109(2):89-97
Purpose:
The selection of primary tumor resection (PTR) vs. self-expanding metallic stents (SEMS) in obstructive unresectable stage IV colorectal cancer (CRC) is critical, profoundly impacting patient outcome. This study evaluates the influence of PTR and SEMS on overall survival (OS) in conjunction with chemotherapy.
Methods:
The analysis included 137 patients with obstructive, unresectable stage IV CRC who underwent PTR or attempted SEMS placement. The primary objective was to assess the OS of patients, specifically examining how PTR and SEMS interventions influence these survival outcomes.
Results:
In a cohort of 137 patients with obstructive, unresectable stage IV CRC, 30 initially opted for PTR, while stent placement was attempted in 107 cases. Following 14 stent failures, which resulted in 8 diversions and 6 additional PTR interventions, exclusions due to elective surgeries led to a final analysis of 36 PTR and 72 SEMS cases. Cox regression analysis identified no significant survival advantage between PTR and SEMS interventions (hazard ratio [HR], 0.848; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.555–1.298; P = 0.449). Critical findings highlighted that the absence of chemotherapy markedly reduced survival prospects (HR, 1.963; 95% CI, 1.200–3.211; P = 0.007). These insights were substantiated through propensity score matching.
Conclusions
The comparative analysis reveals that neither PTR nor SEMS offers a definitive survival advantage in managing obstructive, unresectable stage IV CRC. However, the necessity for subsequent invasive interventions is notably lower in the PTR group.
2.Korean Practice Guidelines for Gastric Cancer 2024: An Evidence-based, Multidisciplinary Approach (Update of 2022 Guideline)
In-Ho KIM ; Seung Joo KANG ; Wonyoung CHOI ; An Na SEO ; Bang Wool EOM ; Beodeul KANG ; Bum Jun KIM ; Byung-Hoon MIN ; Chung Hyun TAE ; Chang In CHOI ; Choong-kun LEE ; Ho Jung AN ; Hwa Kyung BYUN ; Hyeon-Su IM ; Hyung-Don KIM ; Jang Ho CHO ; Kyoungjune PAK ; Jae-Joon KIM ; Jae Seok BAE ; Jeong Il YU ; Jeong Won LEE ; Jungyoon CHOI ; Jwa Hoon KIM ; Miyoung CHOI ; Mi Ran JUNG ; Nieun SEO ; Sang Soo EOM ; Soomin AHN ; Soo Jin KIM ; Sung Hak LEE ; Sung Hee LIM ; Tae-Han KIM ; Hye Sook HAN ; On behalf of The Development Working Group for the Korean Practice Guideline for Gastric Cancer 2024
Journal of Gastric Cancer 2025;25(1):5-114
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.
3.Korean Practice Guidelines for Gastric Cancer 2024: An Evidence-based, Multidisciplinary Approach (Update of 2022 Guideline)
In-Ho KIM ; Seung Joo KANG ; Wonyoung CHOI ; An Na SEO ; Bang Wool EOM ; Beodeul KANG ; Bum Jun KIM ; Byung-Hoon MIN ; Chung Hyun TAE ; Chang In CHOI ; Choong-kun LEE ; Ho Jung AN ; Hwa Kyung BYUN ; Hyeon-Su IM ; Hyung-Don KIM ; Jang Ho CHO ; Kyoungjune PAK ; Jae-Joon KIM ; Jae Seok BAE ; Jeong Il YU ; Jeong Won LEE ; Jungyoon CHOI ; Jwa Hoon KIM ; Miyoung CHOI ; Mi Ran JUNG ; Nieun SEO ; Sang Soo EOM ; Soomin AHN ; Soo Jin KIM ; Sung Hak LEE ; Sung Hee LIM ; Tae-Han KIM ; Hye Sook HAN ; On behalf of The Development Working Group for the Korean Practice Guideline for Gastric Cancer 2024
Journal of Gastric Cancer 2025;25(1):5-114
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.
4.Korean Practice Guidelines for Gastric Cancer 2024: An Evidence-based, Multidisciplinary Approach (Update of 2022 Guideline)
In-Ho KIM ; Seung Joo KANG ; Wonyoung CHOI ; An Na SEO ; Bang Wool EOM ; Beodeul KANG ; Bum Jun KIM ; Byung-Hoon MIN ; Chung Hyun TAE ; Chang In CHOI ; Choong-kun LEE ; Ho Jung AN ; Hwa Kyung BYUN ; Hyeon-Su IM ; Hyung-Don KIM ; Jang Ho CHO ; Kyoungjune PAK ; Jae-Joon KIM ; Jae Seok BAE ; Jeong Il YU ; Jeong Won LEE ; Jungyoon CHOI ; Jwa Hoon KIM ; Miyoung CHOI ; Mi Ran JUNG ; Nieun SEO ; Sang Soo EOM ; Soomin AHN ; Soo Jin KIM ; Sung Hak LEE ; Sung Hee LIM ; Tae-Han KIM ; Hye Sook HAN ; On behalf of The Development Working Group for the Korean Practice Guideline for Gastric Cancer 2024
Journal of Gastric Cancer 2025;25(1):5-114
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.
5.Endoscopic Diagnosis and Clinical Course of Isolated Upper Gastrointestinal Amyloidosis: A Retrospective Observational Study
Je Seong KIM ; Young Eun SEO ; Chae June LIM ; Chan Muk IM ; Hyung Hoon OH ; Ki Hyun KIM ; Sung Bum CHO ; Joo Yeon KOO ; Young Eun JOO ; Wan Sik LEE
The Korean Journal of Helicobacter and Upper Gastrointestinal Research 2025;25(4):363-370
Objectives:
Early diagnosis of upper gastrointestinal (UGI) amyloidosis and the establishment of appropriate treatment and follow-up strategies remains challenging. This study aimed to elucidate the endoscopic characteristics and clinical courses of patients with isolated UGI amyloidosis.
Methods:
We retrospectively reviewed 11 patients diagnosed with isolated UGI amyloidosis at Chonnam National University Hospital and Chonnam National University Hwasun Hospital. None of the patients exhibited systemic involvement or multiple myeloma. Clinical data, including endoscopic features, presenting symptoms, and outcomes such as disease progression and mortality, were analyzed.
Results:
The cohort included seven males (63.6%) and four females (36.4%), with a median age of 72 (37–82) years. Isolated gastric amyloidosis was identified in four patients, and five patients had disease confined to the duodenum. Two patients (18.2%) presented with gastric or duodenal involvement. Endoscopic findings were heterogeneous, with diffuse yellowish linear lesions being the most frequently observed in four patients (36.4%). Histopathological analysis revealed AA amyloidosis in three patients, whereas five patients exhibited only amorphous deposits without amyloid A, amyloid P, or light chains. Six patients (54.5%) were asymptomatic at diagnosis, whereas gastrointestinal bleeding was observed in two patients (18.2%). Only one patient (9.1%) experienced disease progression that necessitated systemic chemotherapy. The mean follow-up duration was 20 months, and the 3-year mortality rate was 9.1%.
Conclusions
Isolated UGI amyloidosis is a heterogeneous condition that can be easily misdiagnosed. Familiarity with the characteristic endoscopic features and natural disease course is essential for appropriate management.
6.Facial Dermatoses Associated With Mask-Wearing in the COVID-19 Era:A Nationwide, Cross-Sectional, Multicenter, Questionnaire-based Study
Myoung Eun CHOI ; Woo Jin LEE ; Joo Yeon KO ; Kwang Joong KIM ; Jung Eun KIM ; Hei Sung KIM ; Kui Young PARK ; Mi Youn PARK ; Dae Hun SUH ; Kihyuk SHIN ; Min Kyung SHIN ; Hyo Hyun AHN ; Weon Ju LEE ; Jee Bum LEE ; Hee Jung LEE ; Min Soo JANG ; Seung Hyun CHEONG ; Soyun CHO ; Yu Sung CHOI ; You Won CHOI ; Hoon CHOI ; Mi Woo LEE
Annals of Dermatology 2024;36(2):81-90
Background:
Daily usage of facial masks during coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic influenced on facial dermatoses.
Objective:
This study investigated the impact of mask-wearing habits on facial dermatoses.
Methods:
A nationwide, observational, questionnaire-based survey was conducted from July through August 2021, involving 20 hospitals in Korea.
Results:
Among 1,958 facial dermatoses, 75.9% of patients experienced aggravation or development of new-onset facial dermatoses after wearing masks. In aggravated or newly developed acne patients (543 out of 743), associated factors were healthcare provider, female gender, and a long duration of mask-wearing. Irritating symptoms, xerosis, and hyperpigmentation were more frequently observed in this group. Aggravated or newly developed rosacea patients (515 out of 660) were likely to be female, young, and have a long duration of mask-wearing per day. Seborrheic dermatitis patients who experienced aggravation or de novo development (132 out of 184) were younger, and they more frequently involved the chin and jaw in addition to the nasolabial folds and both cheeks. Contact dermatitis patients (132 out of 147) with aggravation or de novo development tended to be female, involve both cheeks, and complain of pruritus. Aggravated or newly developed atopic dermatitis patients (165 out of 224) were more likely to be female, and had a higher baseline investigator global assessment score before mask-wearing.
Conclusion
Clinical features and factors related to aggravation were different according to the types of facial dermatoses.
7.Consensus Report on Truncal Acne: The Korean Acne and Rosacea Society Experts Panel
Joo Yeon KO ; Chang Hwa SONG ; Kwang Joong KIM ; Nack In KIM ; Jung Eun KIM ; Hei Sung KIM ; Young Suck RO ; Kui Young PARK ; Mi-Youn PARK ; Dae Hun SUH ; Kihyuck SHIN ; Min Kyung SHIN ; Hyo Hyun AHN ; Woo Jin LEE ; Weon Ju LEE ; Ju Hee LEE ; Jee Bum LEE ; Hae Woong LEE ; Hee Jung LEE ; Min Soo JANG ; Seung Hyun CHEONG ; Soyun CHO ; Yu Sung CHOI ; You Won CHOI ; Hoon CHOI ; Mi Woo LEE
Annals of Dermatology 2024;36(1):35-43
Background:
More than half of acne patients have truncal acne on their chest, back, and shoulders. However, since most studies on acne have focused on the face, data on clinical characteristics and proper management for truncal acne are insufficient.
Objective:
To establish a Korean Acne Rosacea Society (KARS) consensus for experts’ perception and treatment patterns of truncal acne.
Methods:
We conducted two rounds of the Dephi technique to gather expert opinion and reach a consensus on truncal acne. The first round comprised 48 questionnaires focusing on various aspects such as epidemiology, clinical features, diagnosis, treatment, prognosis and more, while second rounds consisted of 26 questionnaires.
Results:
A total of 36 dermatologists (36/38 KARS members, 94.7%) completed this survey. In the first-round survey, consensus was reached on 20 out of the 48 questions (41.7%). In the secondround questionnaire, consensus was achieved on 9 of the 26 questions (34.6%). The most unresponsive lesion to truncal acne treatment was scars (atrophic/hypertrophic). The most commonly used treatments for each non-inflammatory and inflammatory truncal acne lesions were selected to use topical retinoids (78.1% of the responders) and oral antibiotics (93.8% of the responders).
Conclusion
Our study has yielded valuable insights into the epidemiology, clinical manifestations, diagnosis, treatment, and quality of life of patients with truncal acne. We anticipate that this study will inspire further comprehensive research for individuals with truncal acne.
8.Quality Indicators of Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography in Korea
Ki-Hyun KIM ; Hyung Ku CHON ; Tae Jun SONG ; Dong Won AHN ; Eaum Seok LEE ; Yun Nah LEE ; Yoon Suk LEE ; Tae Joo JEON ; Chang Hwan PARK ; Kwang Bum CHO ; Dong Wook LEE ; Jin-Seok PARK ; Seung Bae YOON ; Kwang Hyung CHUNG ; Jin LEE ; Miyoung CHOI
The Korean Journal of Gastroenterology 2024;84(3):111-122
Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is a procedure that requires abundant clinical experience and endoscopic skills, and can lead to various complications, some of which may progress to life-threatening conditions. With expanding indications and technological advancements, ERCP is widely utilized, enhancing procedural accessibility. However, without proper quality management, the procedure can pose significant risks. Quality management in ERCP is essential to ensure safe and successful procedures and meet societal demands for improved healthcare competitiveness. To address these concerns, the Korean Society of Pancreatobiliary Endoscopy has developed a Korean-specific ERCP quality indicator reflecting domestic medical environments and realities. Initially, based on a review of foreign ERCP quality indicators and related literatures, key questions were formulated for five pre-procedural items, three intra-procedural items, and four post-procedural items. Descriptions and recommendations for each item were selected through peer evaluation. The developed Korean-specific ERCP quality indicator was reviewed by external experts based on the latest evidence and consensus in this fields. This Korean-specific indicator is expected to significantly contribute to improving ERCP quality in Korea, as it is tailored to local needs.
9.Performance reporting design in artificial intelligence studies using image-based TNM staging and prognostic parameters in rectal cancer: a systematic review
Minsung KIM ; Taeyong PARK ; Bo Young OH ; Min Jeong KIM ; Bum-Joo CHO ; Il Tae SON
Annals of Coloproctology 2024;40(1):13-26
Purpose:
The integration of artificial intelligence (AI) and magnetic resonance imaging in rectal cancer has the potential to enhance diagnostic accuracy by identifying subtle patterns and aiding tumor delineation and lymph node assessment. According to our systematic review focusing on convolutional neural networks, AI-driven tumor staging and the prediction of treatment response facilitate tailored treatment strategies for patients with rectal cancer.
Methods:
This paper summarizes the current landscape of AI in the imaging field of rectal cancer, emphasizing the performance reporting design based on the quality of the dataset, model performance, and external validation.
Results:
AI-driven tumor segmentation has demonstrated promising results using various convolutional neural network models. AI-based predictions of staging and treatment response have exhibited potential as auxiliary tools for personalized treatment strategies. Some studies have indicated superior performance than conventional models in predicting microsatellite instability and KRAS status, offering noninvasive and cost-effective alternatives for identifying genetic mutations.
Conclusion
Image-based AI studies for rectal cancer have shown acceptable diagnostic performance but face several challenges, including limited dataset sizes with standardized data, the need for multicenter studies, and the absence of oncologic relevance and external validation for clinical implantation. Overcoming these pitfalls and hurdles is essential for the feasible integration of AI models in clinical settings for rectal cancer, warranting further research.
10.Influence of Sleep Stage on the Determination of Positional Dependency in Patients With Obstructive Sleep Apnea
Somi RYU ; Seung Chan KIM ; Rock Bum KIM ; Byeong Min LEE ; Sang-Wook PARK ; Yung-Jin JEON ; Yeon-Hee JOO ; Hyun-Jin CHO ; Sang-Wook KIM
Clinical and Experimental Otorhinolaryngology 2024;17(3):226-233
Objectives:
. The supine sleep position and the rapid eye movement (REM) stage are widely recognized to exacerbate the severity of obstructive sleep apnea (OSA). Position-dependent OSA is generally characterized by an apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) that is at least twice as high in the supine position compared to other sleep positions. However, this condition can be misdiagnosed if a particular sleep stage—REM or non-REM (NREM)—predominates in a specific position. We explored the impact of the sleep stage on positional dependency in OSA.
Methods:
. Polysomnographic data were retrospectively analyzed from 111 patients with OSA aged 18 years or older, all of whom had an AHI exceeding five events per hour and slept in both supine and non-supine positions for at least 5% of the total sleep time. The overall ratio of non-supine AHI to supine AHI (NS/S-AHI ratio) was compared between total, REM, and NREM sleep. Additionally, a weighted NS/S-AHI ratio, reflecting the proportion of time spent in each sleep stage, was calculated and compared to the original ratio.
Results:
. The mean NS/S-AHI ratio was consistent between the entire sleep period and the specific sleep stages. However, the NS/S-AHI ratios for individual patients displayed poor agreement between total sleep and the specific stages. Additionally, the weighted NS/S-AHI ratio displayed poor agreement with the original NS/S-AHI ratio, primarily due to discrepancies in patients with mild to moderate OSA.
Conclusion
. The weighted NS/S-AHI ratio may help precisely assess positional dependency.

Result Analysis
Print
Save
E-mail