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/Aims: We previously reported that patients with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis (UC) often experience common mental disorders (CMDs) such as anxiety and depression, necessitating immediate psychological interventions within the first 4 weeks of diagnosis. In this 3-year follow-up study of the MOSAIK cohort in Korea, we examined the effects of CMDs at initial diagnosis on clinical outcomes and health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Methods: We examined differences in clinical outcomes (evaluated based on clinical response, relapse, hospitalization, and medication use) and HRQoL (assessed using the Inflammatory Bowel Disease Questionnaire [IBDQ] and Short Form 12 [SF-12]) according to Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) scores at diagnosis. Results: In a study involving 199 UC patients, 47.7% exhibited significant psychological distress (anxiety and/or depression) at diagnosis. Clinical follow-up showed no major differences in outcomes, including remission rates, response rates, or hospitalization rates, between patients with anxiety or depression at diagnosis and patients without anxiety or depression at diagnosis. The HRQoL at the end of follow-up was notably lower in those with baseline CMDs, particularly anxiety, across all domains of the IBDQ and SF-12. Linear mixed-effect models revealed that higher HADS scores, as well as higher Mayo scores, were independently associated with lower IBDQ scores and both summary domains of the SF-12. Additionally, regular attendance at follow-up visits during the study period was also related to improvements in HRQoL (all p<0.05). Conclusions While CMDs present at the time of UC diagnosis did not influence long-term clinical outcomes, they persistently impaired HRQoL. Our findings support the routine incorporation of psychological interventions into the long-term management of moderate-to-severe UC.

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/Aims: We previously reported that patients with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis (UC) often experience common mental disorders (CMDs) such as anxiety and depression, necessitating immediate psychological interventions within the first 4 weeks of diagnosis. In this 3-year follow-up study of the MOSAIK cohort in Korea, we examined the effects of CMDs at initial diagnosis on clinical outcomes and health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Methods: We examined differences in clinical outcomes (evaluated based on clinical response, relapse, hospitalization, and medication use) and HRQoL (assessed using the Inflammatory Bowel Disease Questionnaire [IBDQ] and Short Form 12 [SF-12]) according to Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) scores at diagnosis. Results: In a study involving 199 UC patients, 47.7% exhibited significant psychological distress (anxiety and/or depression) at diagnosis. Clinical follow-up showed no major differences in outcomes, including remission rates, response rates, or hospitalization rates, between patients with anxiety or depression at diagnosis and patients without anxiety or depression at diagnosis. The HRQoL at the end of follow-up was notably lower in those with baseline CMDs, particularly anxiety, across all domains of the IBDQ and SF-12. Linear mixed-effect models revealed that higher HADS scores, as well as higher Mayo scores, were independently associated with lower IBDQ scores and both summary domains of the SF-12. Additionally, regular attendance at follow-up visits during the study period was also related to improvements in HRQoL (all p<0.05). Conclusions While CMDs present at the time of UC diagnosis did not influence long-term clinical outcomes, they persistently impaired HRQoL. Our findings support the routine incorporation of psychological interventions into the long-term management of moderate-to-severe UC.

Background/Aims: We previously reported that patients with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis (UC) often experience common mental disorders (CMDs) such as anxiety and depression, necessitating immediate psychological interventions within the first 4 weeks of diagnosis. In this 3-year follow-up study of the MOSAIK cohort in Korea, we examined the effects of CMDs at initial diagnosis on clinical outcomes and health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Methods: We examined differences in clinical outcomes (evaluated based on clinical response, relapse, hospitalization, and medication use) and HRQoL (assessed using the Inflammatory Bowel Disease Questionnaire [IBDQ] and Short Form 12 [SF-12]) according to Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) scores at diagnosis. Results: In a study involving 199 UC patients, 47.7% exhibited significant psychological distress (anxiety and/or depression) at diagnosis. Clinical follow-up showed no major differences in outcomes, including remission rates, response rates, or hospitalization rates, between patients with anxiety or depression at diagnosis and patients without anxiety or depression at diagnosis. The HRQoL at the end of follow-up was notably lower in those with baseline CMDs, particularly anxiety, across all domains of the IBDQ and SF-12. Linear mixed-effect models revealed that higher HADS scores, as well as higher Mayo scores, were independently associated with lower IBDQ scores and both summary domains of the SF-12. Additionally, regular attendance at follow-up visits during the study period was also related to improvements in HRQoL (all p<0.05). Conclusions While CMDs present at the time of UC diagnosis did not influence long-term clinical outcomes, they persistently impaired HRQoL. Our findings support the routine incorporation of psychological interventions into the long-term management of moderate-to-severe UC.

Background/Aims: We previously reported that patients with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis (UC) often experience common mental disorders (CMDs) such as anxiety and depression, necessitating immediate psychological interventions within the first 4 weeks of diagnosis. In this 3-year follow-up study of the MOSAIK cohort in Korea, we examined the effects of CMDs at initial diagnosis on clinical outcomes and health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Methods: We examined differences in clinical outcomes (evaluated based on clinical response, relapse, hospitalization, and medication use) and HRQoL (assessed using the Inflammatory Bowel Disease Questionnaire [IBDQ] and Short Form 12 [SF-12]) according to Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) scores at diagnosis. Results: In a study involving 199 UC patients, 47.7% exhibited significant psychological distress (anxiety and/or depression) at diagnosis. Clinical follow-up showed no major differences in outcomes, including remission rates, response rates, or hospitalization rates, between patients with anxiety or depression at diagnosis and patients without anxiety or depression at diagnosis. The HRQoL at the end of follow-up was notably lower in those with baseline CMDs, particularly anxiety, across all domains of the IBDQ and SF-12. Linear mixed-effect models revealed that higher HADS scores, as well as higher Mayo scores, were independently associated with lower IBDQ scores and both summary domains of the SF-12. Additionally, regular attendance at follow-up visits during the study period was also related to improvements in HRQoL (all p<0.05). Conclusions While CMDs present at the time of UC diagnosis did not influence long-term clinical outcomes, they persistently impaired HRQoL. Our findings support the routine incorporation of psychological interventions into the long-term management of moderate-to-severe UC.

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: This study was designed to determine the current status of diagnosis and treatment of valvular heart disease (VHD) in Korea. Methods: A nationwide registry study was conducted in 45 hospitals in Korea involving adult patients with at least moderate VHD as determined by echocardiography carried out between September and October of 2019. Of a total of 4,094 patients with at least moderate VHD, 1,482 had severe VHD (age, 71.3 ± 13.5 years; 49.1% male). Echocar‑ diographic data used for the diagnosis of each case of VHD were analyzed. Experts from each center determined the diagnosis and treatment strategy for VHD based on current guidelines and institutional policy. The clinical out‑ come was in-hospital mortality. Results: Each valve underwent surgical or transcatheter intervention in 19.3% cases of severe mitral stenosis, 31.4% cases of severe primary mitral regurgitation (MR), 7.5% cases of severe secondary MR, 43.7% cases of severe aortic stenosis, 27.5% cases of severe aortic regurgitation, and 7.2% cases of severe tricuspid regurgitation. The overall inhospital mortality rate for patients with severe VHD was 5.4%, and for secondary severe MR and severe tricuspid regur‑ gitation, the rates were 9.0% and 7.5%, respectively, indicating a poor prognosis. In-hospital mortality occurred in 73 of the 1,244 patients (5.9%) who received conservative treatment and in 18 of the 455 patients (4.0%) who received a surgical or transcatheter intervention, which was significantly lower in the intervention group (P = 0.037). Conclusions This study provides important information about the current status of VHD diagnosis and treatment through a nationwide registry in Korea and helps to define future changes.

Since the role of the liver in metabolic dysfunction, including type 2 diabetes mellitus, was demonstrated, studies on non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) and metabolic dysfunction-associated fatty liver disease (MAFLD) have shown associations between fatty liver disease and other metabolic diseases. Unlike the exclusionary diagnostic criteria of NAFLD, MAFLD diagnosis is based on the presence of metabolic dysregulation in fatty liver disease. Renaming NAFLD as MAFLD also introduced simpler diagnostic criteria. In 2023, a new nomenclature, steatotic liver disease (SLD), was proposed. Similar to MAFLD, SLD diagnosis is based on the presence of hepatic steatosis with at least one cardiometabolic dysfunction. SLD is categorized into metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD), metabolic dysfunction and alcohol-related/-associated liver disease, alcoholrelated liver disease, specific etiology SLD, and cryptogenic SLD. The term MASLD has been adopted by a number of leading national and international societies due to its concise diagnostic criteria, exclusion of other concomitant liver diseases, and lack of stigmatizing terms. This article reviews the diagnostic criteria, clinical relevance, and differences among NAFLD, MAFLD, and MASLD from a diabetologist’s perspective and provides a rationale for adopting SLD/MASLD in the Fatty Liver Research Group of the Korean Diabetes Association.