Purpose: Due to its rarity, treatment guidelines for appendiceal cancer have traditionally followed those established for colorectal cancer, despite showing distinct histologic and clinical features. This study aimed to compare the clinicopathologic characteristics and long-term oncologic outcomes of appendiceal cancer with those of right-sided colon cancers. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the records of patients with stage I–III appendiceal, cecal, or ascending colon cancer who underwent curative resection between 2010 and 2020 at our center. A 1:3:3 exact matching for age, sex, TNM stage, and adjuvant chemotherapy was performed. Survival outcomes were analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression methods. Results: Overall, 245 patients with appendiceal cancer (n = 35), ascending colon cancer (n = 105), and cecal cancer (n = 105) were analyzed. Appendiceal cancer exhibited a higher proportion of T4 tumors and fewer harvested lymph nodes compared with ascending or cecal cancers. The mean follow-up duration was 9.5 years. The 5- and 10-year overall survival rates were lower in appendiceal cancer (66.2% and 52.9%) than in ascending (91.2% and 78.4%) or cecal cancer (88.5% and 78.3%). Similarly, the 10-year disease-free survival rate was lower in appendiceal cancer (59.2%) compared with ascending (83.1%) and cecal cancers (78.4%). Cox regression analysis identified age (≥65 years), perforation, nodal metastasis, and lymphovascular invasion as independent predictors of poor prognosis. Conclusion Appendiceal cancer exhibited significantly worse long-term survival compared to cecal or ascending colon cancer. Tumor perforation, nodal metastasis, and lymphovascular invasion were adverse prognostic factors for overall and disease-free survival.

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.

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.

Purpose: Various materials and techniques have been explored to prevent anastomotic leakage (AL). Polyglycolic acid (PGA) sheets and cyanoacrylate (CA) glue have been investigated for their potential in wound healing and fistula closure. This study aims to assess the feasibility of PGA-CA complex (PCC) to prevent AL by developing a major leakage model in rats. Methods: After the creation of the major leakage model in the jejunum of rat, the leakage site was treated with each material individually and in combination. Rats were categorized into the control, CA, PGA, and PCC groups. Results: A total of 40 rats were included, with one animal from the CA and PGA groups having expired. Gross intraabdominal conditions showed no significant difference between the groups. Median intraluminal bursting pressure was 120.0 (range, 102.5–138.0) in the CA group and 138.0 (range, 127.0–147.0) in the PCC group (P = 0.286). Pathologic evaluation revealed fibroblast activation was significantly different in the PCC group (P = 0.025). Conclusion No significant differences were observed in the macroscopic intra-abdominal findings or intraluminal bursting pressure between the groups. The only difference in PCC group was enhanced fibroblast activation at moderate levels compare to the control group. Further research is warranted to optimize material combinations and validate efficacy in larger preclinical and clinical settings.

Sarcopenia upon admission to the intensive care unit (ICU) consistently correlates with adverse outcomes, including heightened mortality, in critically ill patients. This study aims to investigate the independent association of sarcopenia with both mortality and recovery from dialysis in critically ill patients with sepsis-induced acute kidney injury (SIAKI) undergoing continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT). Methods: This retrospective study included 618 patients with SIAKI who underwent CRRT in our ICU. All patients had abdominal computed tomography (CT) scans within 3 days preceding ICU admission. The cross-sectional area of skeletal muscles at the third lumbar vertebra was quantified, and the skeletal muscle index (SMI), a normalized measure of skeletal muscle mass, was computed. Using Korean-specific SMI cutoffs, patients were categorized into sarcopenic and non-sarcopenic groups. Results: Among the 618 patients, 301 expired within 28 days of ICU admission. Multivariable Cox regression analysis revealed that sarcopenia independently predicted 28-day mortality. Among survivors, sarcopenia was independently associated with recovery from dialysis within 28 days after ICU admission. Kaplan-Meier analysis illustrated that sarcopenic patients had a higher mortality rate and a lower rate of recovery from dialysis within 28 days after ICU admission compared to non-sarcopenic patients. Conclusion: This study underscores the independent association of sarcopenia, assessed via CT-derived SMI, with both mortality and recovery from dialysis in critically ill patients with SIAKI undergoing CRRT. The inclusion of sarcopenia assessment could serve as a valuable tool for physicians in effectively stratifying the risk of adverse outcomes in these patients.

Background: Obesity is a major worldwide health problem and can be related to cellular senescence. Along with the rise in obesity, the comorbidity of renal ischemia-reperfusion (IR) injury is increasing. Whether obesity accelerates the severity of IR injury and whether senescence contributes to these conditions remain unclear. We studied the degree of injury and cellular senescence in the IR kidneys and perirenal adipose tissues of high-fat-diet–induced obese mice. Methods: C57BL/6 mice fed standard chow or a high-fat diet for 16 weeks were randomized to renal IR or sham group (n = 6–10 each). Renal IR was performed by unilateral clamping of the right renal pedicle for 30 minutes. Six weeks after surgery, renal function, perirenal fat/renal senescence, and histology were evaluated ex vivo. Results: Obese mice showed more renal tubular damage and fibrosis in IR injury than control mice, even though the degree of ischemic insult was comparable. Renal expression of senescence and its secretory phenotype was upregulated in either IR injury or with a high-fat diet and was further increased in the IR kidneys of obese mice. Fat senescence and the expression of tumor necrosis factor alpha were also increased, especially in the perirenal depot of the IR kidneys, with a high-fat diet. Conclusion A high-fat diet aggravates IR injury in murine kidneys, which is associated, at least in part, with perirenal fat senescence and inflammation. These observations support the exploration of therapeutic targets of the adipo-renal axis in injured obese kidneys.

Objective: Primary frozen shoulder causes significant pain and progressively restricts shoulder movements. Diagnosis is made clinically based on patient history and physical examination. Management is mainly non-invasive owing to its self-limiting clinical course. However, clinical practice guidelines for frozen shoulder have not yet been developed in Korea. The developed guidelines aim to provide evidence-based recommendations for the diagnosis and treatment of frozen shoulder. Methods: A guideline development committee reviewed the literature from four databases (PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and KMbase). Using the Population, Intervention, Comparator, and Outcome (PICO) framework, the committee formulated two backgrounds and 16 key questions to address common clinical concerns. Recommendations were made using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation framework. Results: Diabetes, thyroid disease, and dyslipidemia significantly increase the risk of developing a frozen shoulder. Although frozen shoulder is often self-limiting, some patients may experience long-term functional disabilities. Ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging should be used as adjunctive tools alongside clinical diagnosis, and rather than as independent diagnostic methods. Noninvasive approaches, such as medications, physical modalities, exercises, electrical stimulation, and manual therapy, may reduce pain and improve shoulder function. Other noninvasive interventions have limited evidence, and their application should be based on clinical judgment. Intra-articular steroid injections are recommended for treatment, and physiotherapy or hydrodilation with steroid injections can also be beneficial. Conclusion These guidelines provide evidence-based recommendations for diagnosing and treating primary frozen shoulder.

Colorectal cancer is the third most common cancer in Korea and the third leading cause of death from cancer. Treatment outcomes for colon cancer are steadily improving due to national health screening programs with advances in diagnostic methods, surgical techniques, and therapeutic agents.. The Korea Colon Cancer Multidisciplinary (KCCM) Committee intends to provide professionals who treat colon cancer with the most up-to-date, evidence-based practice guidelines to improve outcomes and help them make decisions that reflect their patients’ values and preferences. These guidelines have been established by consensus reached by the KCCM Guideline Committee based on a systematic literature review and evidence synthesis and by considering the national health insurance system in real clinical practice settings. Each recommendation is presented with a recommendation strength and level of evidence based on the consensus of the committee.