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.

Nephrogenic diabetes insipidus (NDI) is characterized by polyuria and polydipsia, high serum osmolality, and low urine osmolality because of resistance to antidiuretic hormone. Lithium is commonly used to treat psychiatric disorders, and NDI is one of the common renal side effects of lithium therapy. On the other hand, NDI induced by lithium medication in a patient after a coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) infection has not been reported. This paper presents a patient who developed new-onset NDI secondary to a COVID-19 infection despite being on a stable lithium dose for several years. This case highlights the importance of considering a COVID-19 infection as a possible cause of NDI in patients taking lithium medication.

Nephrogenic diabetes insipidus (NDI) is characterized by polyuria and polydipsia, high serum osmolality, and low urine osmolality because of resistance to antidiuretic hormone. Lithium is commonly used to treat psychiatric disorders, and NDI is one of the common renal side effects of lithium therapy. On the other hand, NDI induced by lithium medication in a patient after a coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) infection has not been reported. This paper presents a patient who developed new-onset NDI secondary to a COVID-19 infection despite being on a stable lithium dose for several years. This case highlights the importance of considering a COVID-19 infection as a possible cause of NDI in patients taking lithium medication.

Nephrogenic diabetes insipidus (NDI) is characterized by polyuria and polydipsia, high serum osmolality, and low urine osmolality because of resistance to antidiuretic hormone. Lithium is commonly used to treat psychiatric disorders, and NDI is one of the common renal side effects of lithium therapy. On the other hand, NDI induced by lithium medication in a patient after a coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) infection has not been reported. This paper presents a patient who developed new-onset NDI secondary to a COVID-19 infection despite being on a stable lithium dose for several years. This case highlights the importance of considering a COVID-19 infection as a possible cause of NDI in patients taking lithium medication.

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.

Heart failure (HF) is a major cause of mortality and morbidity in South Korea, imposing substantial physical, emotional, and financial burdens on patients and society. Despite the high burden of symptom and complex care needs of HF patients, palliative care and hospice services remain underutilized in South Korea due to cultural, institutional, and knowledge-related barriers. This position statement from the Korean Society of Heart Failure emphasizes the need for integrating palliative and hospice care into HF management to improve quality of life and support holistic care for patients and their families. By clarifying the role of palliative care in HF and proposing practical referral criteria, this position statement aims to bridge the gap between HF and palliative care services in South Korea, ultimately improving patient-centered outcomes and aligning treatment with the goals and values of HF 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.

Background: Islet transplantation holds promise for treating selected type 1 diabetes mellitus patients, yet the scarcity of human donor organs impedes widespread adoption. Porcine islets, deemed a viable alternative, recently demonstrated successful longterm survival without zoonotic risks in a clinically relevant pig-to-non-human primate islet transplantation model. This success prompted the development of a clinical trial protocol for porcine islet xenotransplantation in humans. Methods: A single-center, open-label clinical trial initiated by the sponsor will assess the safety and efficacy of porcine islet transplantation for diabetes patients at Gachon Hospital. The protocol received approval from the Gachon Hospital Institutional Review Board (IRB) and the Korean Ministry of Food and Drug Safety (MFDS) under the Investigational New Drug (IND) process. Two diabetic patients, experiencing inadequate glycemic control despite intensive insulin treatment and frequent hypoglycemic unawareness, will be enrolled. Participants and their family members will engage in deliberation before xenotransplantation during the screening period. Each patient will receive islets isolated from designated pathogen-free pigs. Immunosuppressants and systemic infection prophylaxis will follow the program schedule. The primary endpoint is to confirm the safety of porcine islets in patients, and the secondary endpoint is to assess whether porcine islets can reduce insulin dose and the frequency of hypoglycemic unawareness. Conclusion A clinical trial protocol adhering to global consensus guidelines for porcine islet xenotransplantation is presented, facilitating streamlined implementation of comparable human trials worldwide.

Background: We aimed to evaluate long-term outcomes of gamma knife radiosurgery (GKS) for cerebral cavernous malformations (CCMs). Methods: Among the 233 CCM patients who underwent GKS, 79 adult patients (96 lesions) followed for over 10 years were included and analyzed retrospectively. Annual hemorrhage rate (AHR) was analyzed the entire cohort of 233 patients and the subset of 79 enrolled patients by dividing lesions into overall CCM lesions and brainstem lesions. AHR, neurologic outcome, adverse radiation effect (ARE), and changes of lesions in magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) were compared before and after GKS. Cox-regression analysis was performed to identify risk factors for hemorrhage following GKS. Results: Mean follow-up duration of 79 enrolled patients was 14 years (range, 10–23 years).The AHR of all CCMs for entire cohort at each time point was 17.8% (pre-GKS), 5.9% (≤ 2 years post-GKS), 1.8% (≤ 10 years post-GKS). The AHR of all CCM for 79 enrolled patients was 21.4% (pre-GKS), 3.8% (2 years post-GKS), 1.4% (10 years post-GKS), and 2.3% (> 10 years post-GKS). The AHR of brainstem cavernous malformation (CM) for entire cohort at each time point was 22.4% (pre-GKS), 10.1% (≤ 2 years post-GKS), 3.2% (≤ 10 years post-GKS). The AHR of brainstem CM for 79 enrolled patients was 27.2% (pre-GKS), 5.8% (2 years post-GKS), 3.4% (10 years post-GKS), and 3.5% (> 10 years post-GKS). Out of the 79 enrolled patients, 35 presented with focal neurologic deficits at the initial clinical visit. Among these patients, 74.3% showed recovery at the last follow-up. Symptomatic ARE occurred in five (6.4%) patients. No mortality occurred. Most lesions were decreased in size at the last follow-up MRI. Previous hemorrhage history (hazard ratio [HR], 8.38; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.07–65.88; P = 0.043), and brainstem location (HR, 3.10; 95% CI, 1.26–7.64; P = 0.014) were significant risk factors for hemorrhage event. Conclusion GKS for CCM showed favorable long-term outcomes. GKS should be considered for CCM, especially when it has a previous hemorrhage history and brainstem location.

Background: This study assessed the comparative effectiveness of sextant and extended 12-core systematic biopsy within combined biopsy for the detection of prostate cancer. Methods: Patients who underwent combined biopsy targeting lesions with a Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) score of 3–5 were assessed. Two specialists performed all combined cognitive biopsies. Both specialists performed target biopsies with five or more cores. One performed sextant systematic biopsies, and the other performed extended 12-core systematic biopsies. A total of 550 patients were analyzed. Results: Cases requiring systematic biopsy in combined biopsy exhibited a significant association with age ≥ 65 years (odds ratio [OR], 2.32; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.25– 4.32; P = 0.008), PI-RADS score (OR, 2.32; 95% CI, 1.25–4.32; P = 0.008), and the number of systematic biopsy cores (OR, 3.69; 95% CI, 2.11–6.44; P < 0.001). In patients with an index lesion of PI-RADS 4, an extended 12-core systematic biopsy was required (target-negative/ systematic-positive or a greater Gleason score in the systematic biopsy than in the targeted biopsy) (P < 0.001). Conclusion During combined biopsy for prostate cancer in patients with PI-RADS 3 or 5, sextant systematic biopsy should be recommended over extended 12-core systematic biopsy when an effective targeted biopsy is performed.