Objective: Dysphagia is a common clinical condition characterized by difficulty in swallowing. It is sub-classified into oropharyngeal dysphagia, which refers to problems in the mouth and pharynx, and esophageal dysphagia, which refers to problems in the esophageal body and esophagogastric junction. Dysphagia can have a significant negative impact one’s physical health and quality of life as its severity increases. Therefore, proper assessment and management of dysphagia are critical for improving swallowing function and preventing complications. Thus a guideline was developed to provide evidence-based recommendations for assessment and management in patients with dysphagia. Methods: Nineteen key questions on dysphagia were developed. These questions dealt with various aspects of problems related to dysphagia, including assessment, management, and complications. A literature search for relevant articles was conducted using Pubmed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and one domestic database of KoreaMed, until April 2021. The level of evidence and recommendation grade were established according to the Grading of Recommendation Assessment, Development and Evaluation methodology. Results: Early screening and assessment of videofluoroscopic swallowing were recommended for assessing the presence of dysphagia. Therapeutic methods, such as tongue and pharyngeal muscle strengthening exercises and neuromuscular electrical stimulation with swallowing therapy, were effective in improving swallowing function and quality of life in patients with dysphagia. Nutritional intervention and an oral care program were also recommended. Conclusion This guideline presents recommendations for the assessment and management of patients with oropharyngeal dysphagia, including rehabilitative strategies.

Cannulation of the portal vein is a rare complication of ERCP. This paper reports a case of portal vein catheterization during ERCP in a patient with choledocholithiasis. A 62-year-old man was admitted to the Presbyterian Medical Center with right upper quadrant pain and jaundice. ERCP was performed under the suspicion of obstructive jaundice caused by a radiolucent stone. Bile duct cannulation using a pull-type papillotome was attempted, but it failed. After needle-knife fistulotomy, wire-guided cannulation was performed successfully, and 10 mL contrast was injected. On the other hand, the fluoroscopy image showed that the contrast medium disappeared very quickly. Pure blood was collected when the catheter was aspirated to identify the bile reflux, indicating possible cannulation of the portal vein. The procedure was terminated immediately and abdominal computed tomography showed air in the portal vein. One day after, a follow-up CT scan showed no air in the portal vein. The patient underwent repeated ERCP, and the common bile duct was cannulated. In most cases, isolated portal vein cannulation does not result in severe morbidity. However, it is important to aware of this rare complication so that no further invasive procedure is performed on the patient.

Cannulation of the portal vein is a rare complication of ERCP. This paper reports a case of portal vein catheterization during ERCP in a patient with choledocholithiasis. A 62-year-old man was admitted to the Presbyterian Medical Center with right upper quadrant pain and jaundice. ERCP was performed under the suspicion of obstructive jaundice caused by a radiolucent stone. Bile duct cannulation using a pull-type papillotome was attempted, but it failed. After needle-knife fistulotomy, wire-guided cannulation was performed successfully, and 10 mL contrast was injected. On the other hand, the fluoroscopy image showed that the contrast medium disappeared very quickly. Pure blood was collected when the catheter was aspirated to identify the bile reflux, indicating possible cannulation of the portal vein. The procedure was terminated immediately and abdominal computed tomography showed air in the portal vein. One day after, a follow-up CT scan showed no air in the portal vein. The patient underwent repeated ERCP, and the common bile duct was cannulated. In most cases, isolated portal vein cannulation does not result in severe morbidity. However, it is important to aware of this rare complication so that no further invasive procedure is performed on the patient.

Purpose: Small bowel obstruction (SBO) is a common disease that requires hospitalization. The most common cause of SBO is postoperative adhesion. Delayed timing of operations in patients who need surgical intervention results in mortality or morbidity. A number of studies on SBO have established criteria for emergency surgery. However, few objective clinical parameters are available for screening patients who need a delayed operation. Therefore, we analyzed factors that affect the clinical course of SBO to select appropriate therapeutic plans for reducing the risk of complications in these patients. Methods: We investigated the clinical characteristics of patients admitted to the surgery department of our hospital between January 1, 2015, and December 31, 2016, who were diagnosed with SBO. Patients were divided into an operative treatment group (n = 12) and a conservative treatment group (n = 96). We compared clinical characteristics between the 2 groups. Results: The operative treatment group underwent more operations before SBO than the conservative treatment group (P = 0.007). Initial leukocyte counts (P = 0.004) and C-reactive protein (CRP) levels (P = 0.028) were elevated in the operative group. Body mass index (BMI) was lower in the operative group (P = 0.013). Conclusion The number of operations before SBO, leukocyte counts, CRP levels, and BMI were useful parameters for selecting patients who needed an urgent operation for SBO.

The area of endoscopic application has been continuously expanded since its introduction in the last century and the frequency of its use also increased stiffly in the last decades. Because gastrointestinal endoscopy is naturally exposed to diseased internal organs and contact with pathogenic materials, endoscopy mediated infection or disease transmission becomes a major concern in this field. Gastrointestinal endoscopy is not for single use and the proper reprocessing process is a critical factor for safe and reliable endoscopy procedures. What needed in these circumstances is a practical guideline for reprocessing the endoscope and its accessories which is feasible in the real clinical field to guarantee acceptable prevention of pathogen transmission. This guideline contains principles and instructions of the reprocessing procedure according to the step by step. And it newly includes general information and updated knowledge about endoscopy-mediated infection and disinfection. Multiple societies and working groups participated to revise; Korean Association for the Study of the Liver, the Korean Society of Infectious Diseases, Korean College of Helicobacter and Upper Gastrointestinal Research, the Korean Society of Gastroenterology, Korean Society of Gastrointestinal Cancer, Korean Association for the Study of Intestinal Diseases, Korean Pancreatobiliary Association, the Korean Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Nurses and Associates and Korean Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Through this cooperation, we enhanced communication and established a better concordance. We still need more researches in this field and fill up the unproven area. And our guidelines will be renewed accordingly.

Purpose: Appendectomy, which comprises most benign intra-abdominal surgeries, is currently assisted by laparoscopy in most cases. However, many patients complain of postoperative shoulder or subcostal pain after laparoscopic surgery. In some cases, the pain lasts even several weeks after surgery. This study aimed to analyze unmodifiable clinicopathological factors of patients who underwent laparoscopic appendectomy and to minimize preoperative and postoperative discomfort. Methods: Patients admitted for laparoscopic appendectomy for acute appendicitis with an American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) grades I and II, and ages 12~70 years were enrolled in the study. Postoperative shoulder or subcostal pain was assessed using the visual analogue scale (VAS) for pain and analyzed with the clinicopathological factors of the patients, including age, sex, weight, height, body mass index (BMI), and abdominal circumference (AC) difference. Results: Of the 124 patients, 40 complained of postoperative shoulder or subcostal pain with a VAS score of ≥4. The risk of the postoperative shoulder or subcostal pain increased in women (p=0.001). From a univariate analysis, the risk of postoperative shoulder or subcostal pain increased with lower height, weight and BMI (p=0.002, p=0.001, p=0.012) and with greater AC difference (p=0.012). However, a multivariate analysis showed that lower weight was the only risk factor of postoperative pain (p=0.005). Conclusion The risk of postoperative shoulder or subcostal pain after laparoscopic appendectomy was significantly increased with lower weight.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study is to determine the predictable factors that affect the clinical course, especially the hospital stay, the operation performed, and to determine factors that will be helpful in deciding whether in-hospital or outpatient treatment is appropriate. METHODS: We retrospectively collected medical data for patients who had been diagnosed with acute diverticulitis at Inje University Sanggye Paik Hospital between January and December 2016. In total, 117 patients were enrolled in this study. We examined clinical factors, including age, sex, body mass index, pain, body temperature, white blood cell count, C-reactive protein, nil per os (NPO) time, hospital duration, computed tomography (CT) findings, location of diverticulitis, operation performed, and presence of comorbidity (e.g., hypertension and diabetes mellitus). RESULTS: In the multivariate analysis, the statistically significant factor related with hospital duration was the presence of perforation on the CT scan (P < 0.001). Longer NPO time was related with pain score (>7) (P = 0.011). Operations were mainly performed in patients with left-sided colonic diverticulitis (P = 0.012). CONCLUSION: We suggest a perforation finding on the CT scan, a severe pain score at least above 7 on a numeric rating pain scale, and a left-sided lesion are absolute indications for in-hospital management.
Body Mass Index ; Body Temperature ; C-Reactive Protein ; Comorbidity ; Diverticulitis ; Diverticulitis, Colonic ; Humans ; Hypertension ; Length of Stay ; Leukocyte Count ; Multivariate Analysis ; Outpatients ; Retrospective Studies ; Tomography, X-Ray Computed

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to evaluate whether the perioperative carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) ratio could be used as a determinant for adjuvant therapy after curative surgery in stage II colorectal cancer. METHODS: Data for 119 patients with stage II colorectal cancer who underwent radical surgery between 2010 and 2013 were collected. The perioperative CEA ratio was defined as the postoperative/preoperative serum CEA level, and the patients were grouped according to their perioperative CEA ratios: high ratio (≥0.5) and low ratio ( < 0.5). Overall survival rates were calculated, and their prognostic significances were analyzed. RESULTS: The overall survival rates of the high and the low perioperative CEA groups were 68.2% and 86.8%, respectively (P = 0.033). In patients with normal preoperative CEA levels ( < 5 ng/mL), the high perioperative CEA ratio group showed a worse survival rate than the low perioperative CEA ratio group (71.7% vs. 100.0%, P = 0.007). In patients with high preoperative CEA levels (≥5 ng/mL), the high perioperative CEA ratio group showed a worse survival rate than the low perioperative CEA ratio group (33.3% vs. 75.0%, P = 0.036). In the multivariate analysis, perioperative CEA ratio (P = 0.046), age (P = 0.034), and venous invasion (P = 0.015) were independent prognostic factors for survival. CONCLUSION: The perioperative CEA ratio is a prognostic indicator for stage II colorectal cancer. Patients with normal preoperative serum CEA levels might also be considered for adjuvant therapy if their perioperative CEA ratios are higher than 0.5.
Carcinoembryonic Antigen ; Chemotherapy, Adjuvant ; Colorectal Neoplasms ; Humans ; Multivariate Analysis ; Neoplasm Staging ; Prognosis ; Survival Rate