Background: Non-thermal atmospheric pressure plasma (NTAP) generates reactive oxygen species, reactive nitrogen species, and ultraviolet radiation, which can inactivate microorganisms.Onychomycosis treatment is challenging, and its prognosis is poor owing to mixed infections and dermatophytosis. Although NTAP has shown in vitro antifungal effects against dermatophytes and yeast, its efficacy against non-dermatophyte molds (NDMs) and in clinical or nail model studies remains poorly understood. Objective: We evaluated the effects of NTAP on fungi, including NDMs, and infected nail plates. Methods: For the in vitro experiments, Trichophyton rubrum, Candida albicans, Aspergillus fumigatus, and Fusarium oxysporum strains were exposed to NTAP. After NTAP exposure (2,4 and 6 minutes), growth curve, cell viability, and biofilm biomass were assessed by absorbance wavelength of 600 nm, XTT assay, and crystal violet staining, respectively. For the ex vivo experiments, infected nail plates were analyzed using a scanning electron microscope. Results: T. rubrum and C. albicans showed greater growth inhibition with increasing NTAP exposure time, whereas A. fumigatus showed enhanced growth after 6 minutes exposure. Many fungal elements within the subungual hyperkeratosis of the ex vivo specimen were all damaged following NTAP exposure. Conclusion NTAP has antifungal effects on dermatophytes, yeast, and NDMs. We suggest that the intensity and time of NTAP application should be adjusted according to each strain and can be more effective when NTAP directly reaches the hyphae on the nail bed or subungual hyperkeratosis.

Background and Objectives: Clinical characteristics and outcomes in acute heart failure (AHF) vary by phenotype. We assessed phenotype-specific features, treatment patterns, and outcomes in a nationwide Korean cohort. Methods: The Korean Heart Failure III registry prospectively enrolled 7,351 AHF admissions at 47 hospitals. Among 6,777 patients with available left ventricular ejection fraction (EF), phenotypes were defined as heart failure with reduced EF (HFrEF, ≤40%), mildly reduced EF (HFmrEF,41–49%), or preserved EF (HFpEF, ≥50%). The primary endpoint was a 12-month composite of all-cause death or heart transplantation, evaluated from index admission and, among hospital survivors, from discharge. We used inverse probability weighting (multinomial generalized boosted models with stabilized, trimmed weights) and weighted Cox proportional-hazards models to estimate hazard ratios (HRs). Results: Phenotype distribution was 58.9% HFrEF, 13.6% HFmrEF, and 27.5% HFpEF. Crude 12-month composite rates from index admission were 13.4% (HFrEF), 12.7% (HFmrEF), and 16.8% (HFpEF). After weighting, from index admission, HFmrEF (HR, 0.892; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.731–1.088) and HFpEF (HR, 1.101; 95% CI, 0.939–1.291) did not differ from HFrEF; from discharge, HFpEF had modestly higher risk (HR, 1.207; 95% CI, 1.008–1.445) whereas HFmrEF did not (HR, 1.039; 95% CI, 0.844–1.279). Hyponatremia and chronic kidney disease were consistent adverse markers, while angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/ angiotensin II receptor blocker use at discharge was protective. Conclusions Across the EF spectrum, phenotypes showed distinct profiles and risk. Postdischarge risk was modestly higher in HFpEF, supporting phenotype-tailored care and systematic discharge optimization in Korean patients with AHF.

Background and Objectives: We evaluated 20-year trends in heart failure (HF) epidemiology in Korea to quantify changes in its burden from 2002 to 2023. Methods: A nationwide analysis was conducted using a random 50% sample from the Korean National Health Information Database linked to mortality records (2002–2023). HF was defined using diagnostic codes recorded as a primary or secondary condition. We calculated crude and age-standardized rates of prevalence, incidence, hospitalization, and mortality. Survival was assessed using the Kaplan–Meier method, stratified by inpatient versus outpatient diagnosis.Trends in heart transplantation and left ventricular assist device implantations were also examined. Results: By 2023, approximately 1,750,228 individuals had HF (3.41% prevalence). The age-standardized prevalence has more than doubled from 2002 to 2023. The crude incidence increased over time; the age-standardized incidence remained stable in men and declined in women.Hospitalization rates for any cause or secondary HF diagnoses have increased substantially, whereas primary HF hospitalization rates have remained relatively stable. The annual mortality rate in patients with HF was approximately 6.0% in 2023, being markedly higher in older adults.Although short-term survival has improved, particularly in hospitalized patients, long-term survival remains limited. Use of advanced therapies significantly increased. Conclusions The burden of HF in Korea has increased substantially over the past two decades, driven primarily by population aging and improved survival rather than increasing age-adjusted incidence. Despite therapeutic advances, hospitalization and long-term mortality rates remain high, highlighting the need for comprehensive HF strategies in aging societies.

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.

With advancements in both pharmacologic and non-pharmacologic treatments, significant changes have occurred in heart failure (HF) management. The previous Korean HF registries, namely the Korea Heart Failure Registry (KorHF-registry) and Korean Acute Heart Failure Registry (KorAHF-registry), no longer accurately reflect contemporary acute heart failure (AHF) patients. Our objective is to assess contemporary AHF patients through a nationwide registry encompassing various aspects, such as clinical characteristics, management approaches, hospital course, and long-term outcomes of individuals hospitalized for AHF in Korea. This prospective observational multicenter cohort study (KorHF III) is organized by the Korean Society of Heart Failure. We aim to prospectively enroll 7,000 or more patients hospitalized for AHF at 47 tertiary hospitals in Korea starting from March 2018. Eligible patients exhibit signs and symptoms of HF and demonstrate either lung congestion or objective evidence of structural or functional cardiac abnormalities in echocardiography, or isolated right-sided HF. Patients will be followed up for up to 5 years after enrollment in the registry to evaluate long-term clinical outcomes. KorHF III represents the nationwide AHF registry that will elucidate the clinical characteristics, management strategies, and outcomes of contemporary AHF patients in Korea.

Background and Objectives: Beta-blockers (BBs) improve prognosis in heart failure (HF), which is mediated by lowering heart rate (HR). However, HR has no prognostic implication in atrial fibrillation (AF) and also BBs have not been shown to improve prognosis in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) with AF. This study assessed the prognostic implication of BB in HFpEF with AF according to discharge HR. Methods: From the Korean Acute Heart Failure Registry, 687 patients with HFpEF and AF were selected. Study subjects were divided into 4 groups based on 75 beats per minute (bpm) of HR at discharge and whether or not they were treated with BB at discharge. Results: Of the 687 patients with HFpEF and AF, 128 (36.1%) were in low HR group and 121 (36.4%) were in high HR group among those treated with BB at discharge. In high HR group, HR at discharge was significantly faster in BB non-users (85.5±9.1 bpm vs. 89.2±12.5 bpm, p=0.005). In the Cox model, BB did not improve 60-day rehospitalization (hazard ratio, 0.93;95% confidence interval [95% CI], 0.35–2.47) or mortality (hazard ratio, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.22– 2.74) in low HR group. However, in high HR group, BB treatment at discharge was associated with 82% reduced 60-day HF rehospitalization (hazard ratio, 0.18; 95% CI, 0.04–0.81), but not with mortality (hazard ratio, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.20–2.98). Conclusions In HFpEF with AF, in patients with HR over 75 bpm at discharge, BB treatment at discharge was associated with a reduced 60-day rehospitalization rate.

Background: and Purpose Patients with cluster headache (CH) exhibit impaired health-related quality of life (HRQoL). However, there have been few studies related to the HRQoL of patients with CH from Asian backgrounds. This study aimed to determine the impact of CH on HRQoL and to identify the factors affecting HRQoL in patients with CH during cluster periods. Methods: This prospective study enrolled patients with CH from 17 headache clinics in South Korea between September 2016 and February 2021. The study aimed to determine HRQoL in patients with CH using the EuroQol 5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) index and the time trade-off (TTO) method. Age- and sex-matched headache-free participants were recruited as a control group. Results: The study included 423 patients with CH who experienced a cluster period at the time. EQ-5D scores were lower in patients with CH (0.88±0.43, mean±standard deviation) than in the controls (0.99±0.33, p<0.001). The TTO method indicated that 58 (13.6%) patients with CH exhibited moderate-to-severe HRQoL deterioration. The HRQoL states in patients with CH were associated with current smoking patterns, headache severity, frequency, and duration, and scores on the Generalized Anxiety Disorder 7-item scale (GAD-7), Patient Health Questionnaire 9-item scale (PHQ-9), 6-item Headache Impact Test, and 12-item Allodynia Symptom Checklist. Multivariable logistic regression analyses demonstrated that the HRQoL states in patients with CH were negatively correlated with the daily frequency of headaches, cluster period duration, and GAD-7 and PHQ-9 scores. Conclusions Patients with CH experienced a worse quality of life during cluster periods compared with the headache-free controls, but the degree of HRQoL deterioration varied among them. The daily frequency of headaches, cluster period duration, anxiety, and depression were factors associated with HRQoL deterioration severity in patients with CH.

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.