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 and Objectives: In chronic heart failure (HF), natriuretic peptide (NP) levels are higher in atrial fibrillation (AF) compared to sinus rhythm (SR). However, due to the loss of atrial contraction, AF patients are prone to hemodynamic decompensation at earlier stages.Since NP levels reflect disease severity, acutely decompensated AF patients may exhibit lower NP levels compared to SR patients, who retain greater hemodynamic reserve. Methods: We analyzed 5,048 patients with acute HF from the Korea Acute Heart Failure registry with available NP data. NP levels and echocardiographic parameters were compared between AF and SR patients. The association of NP levels with in-hospital and one-year mortality was also assessed according to cardiac rhythm. Results: Brain natriuretic peptide (BNP) and N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) were measured in 2,027 and 3,021 patients, respectively. NP levels were lower in AF than in SR (median BNP, 740 vs. 1,044 pg/mL; median NT-proBNP, 4,420 vs. 5,198 pg/mL), particularly in HF with reduced or mildly reduced ejection fraction. A similar trend was observed regardless of HF onset or etiology. AF patients had smaller left ventricular (LV) end-diastolic diameter and larger left atrial size compared to SR patients. Higher NP tertiles were associated with increased in-hospital and one-year mortality in both groups. Conclusions In acute HF, NP levels are lower in AF than in SR. AF patients also exhibited smaller LV chamber sizes. Nevertheless, NP levels remain strong predictors of outcomes in both AF and SR 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.

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: To evaluate recurrence patterns of and survival outcomes in glioblastoma treated with intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) versus three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3D-CRT). Materials and Methods: We retrospectively examined 91 patients with glioblastoma treated with either IMRT (n = 60) or 3D-CRT (n = 31) between January 2013 and December 2019. Magnetic resonance imaging showing tumor recurrence and planning computed tomography scans were fused for analyzing recurrence patterns categorized as in-field, marginal, and out-of-field based on their relation to the initial radiation field. Results: The median overall survival (OS) was 18.9 months, with no significant difference between the groups. The median progression-free survival (PFS) was 9.4 months, with no significant difference between the groups. Patients who underwent gross total resection (GTR) had higher OS and PFS than those who underwent less extensive surgery. Among 78 relapse cases, 67 were of in-field; 5, marginal; and 19, out-of-field recurrence. Among 3D-CRT-treated cases, 24 were of in-field; 1, marginal; and 9, out-of-field recurrence. Among IMRT-treated cases, 43 were of in-field; 4, marginal; and 10, out-of-field recurrence. In partial tumor removal or biopsy cases, out-of-field recurrence was less frequent in the IMRT (16.2%) than in the 3D-CRT (36.3%) group, with marginal significance (p = 0.079). Conclusion IMRT and 3D-CRT effectively managed glioblastoma with no significant differences in OS and PFS. The survival benefit with GTR underscored the importance of maximal surgical resection. The reduced rate of out-of-field recurrence in IMRT-treated patients with partial resection highlights its potential utility in cases with unfeasible complete tumor removal.

Systemic inflammatory response (SIR) is a crucial determinant of disease progression and survival in patients with colorectal cancer. This study investigated the prognostic relevance of changes in the platelet count on survival and the predictive value of changes in the platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR) and neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) on the pathological tumor response to preoperative chemoradiotherapy (CRT) in patients with microsatellite instability-high (MSI-H) rectal cancer. From 2011 to 2022, data of 46 consecutive patients with MSI-H rectal cancer who were treated with preoperative CRT followed by curative surgery at Kyungpook National University Chilgok Hospital (Daegu, South Korea) were retrospectively analyzed. A 235 cut-off value was used to define whether PLR was high or low. Any change in the PLR or NLR was calculated on the basis of subtracting the pre-CRT PLR or NLR from the post-CRT values. Both pre-CRT and post-CRT values of the NLR and PLR were not significantly associated with clinical outcomes. Simple logistic regression analysis showed that a change in the PLR following CRT was not significantly associated with survival outcomes; however, patients who maintained a high change in the PLR following CRT showed significantly better pathologic T-stage. No statistically significant association was noted between changes in the platelet count and clinical outcomes of patients. The results suggested that changes in the PLR following CRT are associated with pathologic T-stage of the group. However, the SIR markers showed no prognostic values on the survival outcomes of the patients with MSI-H/mismatch repair-deficient (dMMR) locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC).

Background/Aims: Tegoprazan is a novel potassium-competitive acid blocker that has beneficial effects on acid-related disorders such as gastroesophageal reflux and peptic ulcer diseases.This study aimed to validate the effect of tegoprazan on endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD)-induced artificial ulcers. Methods: Patients from 16 centers in Korea who underwent ESD for gastric neoplasia were enrolled. After ESD, pantoprazole was administered intravenously for 48 hours. The patients were randomly allocated to either the tegoprazan or esomeprazole group. Tegoprazan 50 mg or esomeprazole 40 mg were administered for 4 weeks, after which gastroscopic evaluation was performed. If the artificial ulcer had not healed, the same dose of tegoprazan or esomeprazole was administered for an additional 4 weeks, and a gastroscopic evaluation was performed. Results: One hundred sixty patients were enrolled in this study. The healing rates of artificial ulcers at 4 weeks were 30.3% (23/76) and 22.1% (15/68) in the tegoprazan and esomeprazole groups, respectively (p=0.006). At 8 weeks after ESD, the cumulative ulcer healing rates were 73.7% (56/76) and 77.9% (53/68) in the tegoprazan and esomeprazole groups, respectively (p=0.210). Delayed bleeding occurred in two patients in the tegoprazan group (2.6%) and in one patient in the esomeprazole group (1.5%). Other adverse events were negligible in both groups. Conclusions Tegoprazan showed similar effects on post-ESD artificial ulcer healing in comparison with esomeprazole.

With the increasing use of primary hip arthroplasty for management of intertrochanteric fractures, firm fixation and union of the greater trochanteric (GT) fragment are required during hip arthroplasty for management of intertrochanteric fractures. Various methods have been suggested to address this issue. However, displacement of the GT is a frequent occurrence. We have introduced a cement-filling technique for performance of hip arthroplasty of the proximal femur for achievement of immediate firm fixation of the GT. Cement filling during performance of hip arthroplasty for management of femoral intertrochanteric fractures is a valuable technique for preventing displacement of the GT and to encourage early mobilization.

Purpose: Despite the increasing use of immediate breast reconstruction (IBR), its oncologic safety in the setting of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) needs to be comprehensively clarified in breast cancer management. The objective of the present study was to analyze the oncologic safety of IBR following NACT. Methods: In total, 587 patients with breast cancer who underwent a total mastectomy (TM) with IBR after NACT between 2008 and 2017 at a single institution were retrospectively reviewed. The reviewed patients with IBR following skin-sparing mastectomy (SSM) or nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) were matched 1:3 to patients who underwent TM alone after NACT. Matching variables included age, clinical T and N stages before NACT, response to NACT, pathologic T and N stages, and molecular subtypes. Results: After propensity score matching, 95 patients who underwent IBR following SSM/ NSM after NACT (IBR group) and 228 patients who underwent TM alone after NACT (TM group) were selected. The median follow-up period was 73 (range, 5–181) months after matching. After matching, there were no significant differences between the two groups in 5-year locoregional recurrence-free survival (88.8% vs. 91.2%, p = 0.516), disease-free survival (67.3% vs. 76.6%, p = 0.099), distant metastasis-free survival (71.9% vs. 81.9%, p = 0.057), or overall survival (84.1% vs. 91.5, p = 0.061) rates. In multivariate analyses, conducting IBR was not associated with increased risks for locoregional recurrence, any recurrence, distant metastasis, or overall death. Conclusion Our findings suggest that IBR following SSM/NSM elicits comparable long-term oncologic outcomes to those of TM alone in the setting of NACT.