Background/Aims: Chronic constipation is prevalent yet under-diagnosed across Asia, compromising quality of life and burdening healthcare systems. Cultural stigma, varied diets, and limited access to standardized diagnostic tools delay timely care. Methods: The Bali Chronic Constipation Roundtable in November 2024, brought together experts from 11 Asian countries. The group reviewed epidemiological data, analyzed multinational questionnaire on clinical practice pattern, and conducted structured discussions to identify key barriers and propose region-specific recommendations. Results: Chronic constipation prevalence varies across Asia, ranging from 1.8% in India to 16.6% in Japan, with women and the elderly disproportionately affected. Under-reporting persists owing to cultural taboos and widespread self treatment with laxatives and traditional medications. Although the Rome IV criteria remains the global standard, they may not fully reflect Asian symptom profiles, and diagnosis is limited by scarce motility laboratories. First line therapies such as dietary-fiber optimization and osmotic laxatives are widely available, but newer pharmacotherapies (prucalopride, linaclotide, lubiprostone, and elobixibat) remain costly and unevenly accessible. Biofeedback for dyssynergic defecation is underutilized due to limited availability. Experts recommend expanded regional research on to refine diagnostic criteria, coupled with enhanced physician education and public awareness. They advocate accessibility to second-line and novel therapies that incorporate culturally attuned regional guidelines, and improved access to gastrointestinal motility testing. Conclusions The Bali Chronic Constipation Roundtable highlighted Asia’s need for region specific diagnostics and management. Addressing diagnostic and treatment gaps will improve outcomes, while ongoing researcher clinician policy collaboration must standardize guidelines, advance research, and ensure equitable care across Asia.

Purpose: Radiotherapy (RT) remains a cornerstone of curative treatment for localized and locally advanced prostate cancer. However, dose escalation to improve tumor control is often constrained by the proximity of the rectum, which increases the risk of gastrointestinal (GI) and genitourinary toxicities. Biodegradable rectal spacers inserted between the prostate and rectum have emerged as an effective approach to reduce rectal radiation exposure. This guideline provides evidence-based recommendations on indications, contraindications, procedural standards, and clinical management for biodegradable rectal spacer insertion during prostate cancer RT. Materials and Methods: This guideline was developed by a multidisciplinary expert panel through a systematic review of the literature, analysis of international guidelines (National Comprehensive Cancer Network, European Association of Urology, American Society for Radiation Oncology), and expert consensus among radiation oncologists, radiologists, and urologists with clinical experience in spacer insertion. The strength of each recommendation and the level of evidence were classified according to the modified GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) system. Results: Spacer insertion is conditionally recommended (Grade C, Level I) for patients receiving definitive external-beam RT without rectal invasion. It reduces the high-dose rectal irradiation volume (V70–75) by >50%, decreases acute GI toxicity, and helps maintain bowel-related quality of life. However, the benefit for late severe toxicity (grade 2 or higher) remains debated in recent meta-analyses. Contraindications include rectal invasion, anatomical inaccessibility, infection, and material hypersensitivity. Procedures should be performed under local anesthesia in a sterile environment by trained physicians. Short-course antibiotics and simulator-based training, including completion of multiple supervised cases, are advised. Conclusion Biodegradable rectal spacer insertion is clinically validated and effective in reducing acute rectal toxicity. Although pivotal trials demonstrated a favorable procedural safety profile, real-world postmarket data include reports of rare but severe procedural complications. This guideline provides standardized recommendations tailored to Korean clinical practice while remaining consistent with international standards, emphasizing the importance of operator training and careful patient selection.

Objective: : To identify sex-specific risk factors for postoperative urinary retention (POUR) in patients undergoing spine surgery with total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) and explore differences between male and female patients. Methods: : A retrospective chart review was conducted on 446 adult patients (268 males, 178 females) who underwent spine surgery with TIVA from January 1, 2019 to December 31, 2023. Propensity score matching was applied to adjust for confounding variables, resulting in 328 matched patients (164 males and 164 females). Multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed to identify independent risk factors for POUR. Residual urine volume ≥300 mL was used to define POUR. Results: : Male patients had a higher incidence of POUR compared to female patients. Significant risk factors for POUR in males included myelopathy (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 5.17; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.11–24.15), benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) (aOR, 2.63; 95% CI, 1.02–6.78), and prolonged anesthesia time ≥240 minutes (aOR, 2.54; 95% CI, 1.13–5.72). No significant risk factors were found in female patients. Myelopathy and prolonged anesthesia were associated with an increased risk of POUR across the overall population. Conclusion : Male sex, myelopathy, BPH, and prolonged anesthesia time are significant risk factors for POUR following spine surgery with TIVA. Given these findings, particular attention should be paid to myelopathy, a history of BPH, and anesthesia time in male patients.

Subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH) is a stroke subtype with high mortality and poor functional outcomes. Prompt occlusion of a ruptured aneurysm at an early stage is crucial to prevent rebleeding, which can result in even higher mortality and more severe disabilities. The most critical initial decision in SAH management is the choice of treatment method with surgical clipping or endovascular coiling. We aimed to develop an evidence-based clinical guideline to select the optimal initial treatment in patients with SAH. We developed this guideline based on evidence from systematic reviews and meta-analyses via a de novo process. A systematic literature review was conducted across four databases (MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane, and KoreaMed) to answer two population, intervention, comparison, outcome questions comparing clipping and coiling. The risk of bias was assessed using ROB 2.0 and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses flow diagrams and meta-analyses were generated for functional outcome and mortality. We included six randomized control trials (RCTs) and 58 observational studies. Meta-analysis of RCTs showed that coiling improved functional outcomes compared to clipping (odds ratio [OR], 0.91; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.86–0.97). No significant mortality difference was observed in RCTs (OR, 1.38; 95% CI, 0.91–2.09), but non-RCTs favored clipping for reduced mortality (OR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.69–0.86). However, it is difficult to generalize these findings to all clinical situations, as patients with SAH have a highly variable clinical course. Final treatment decision should be tailored to the individual patient’s status, including aneurysm location, morphology, and the expertise available at the treatment center. Such decisions are best made by specialists such as a board-certified physician and should be explained to the patient and their caregivers, along with the rationale for selecting the most appropriate treatment at the given hospital. Korea has many certified endovascular neurosurgeons, cerebrovascular surgeons, and certified cerebrovascular centers. Proper selection of the most suitable treatment method by certified physicians and centers would greatly benefit patient outcomes and healthcare professionals.

Accurate and early identification of stroke and large vessel occlusion (LVO) in emergency settings is essential for improving patient outcomes and ensuring the efficient allocation of medical resources. This clinical practice guideline systematically reviews domestic and international literature and conducts meta-analyses to evaluate the utility and diagnostic accuracy of stroke assessment tools used in prehospital emergency medical services (EMS). We developed a guideline based on evidence from systematic reviews and meta-analyses via a de novo process. A systematic literature review was conducted to evaluate the usefulness of diagnostic EMS assessment tools for diagnosing stroke and LVO. Overall, 70 non-randomized control studies were selected for this study. A meta-analysis was conducted with a subgroup analysis to distinguish between patients with stroke and those with LVO. EMS tools demonstrated high sensitivity but low specificity for diagnosing stroke. In the prehospital setting, using validated EMS stroke assessment tools is recommended for the early identification of stroke and LVO. Upon hospital arrival, stroke specialists should conduct further evaluation and triage to confirm the diagnosis and guide appropriate management. Delays in diagnosing LVO are frequently unacceptable. While experts advocate for the use of EMS assessment tools to facilitate early identification of LVO, these tools alone lack adequate sensitivity. Therefore, further diagnostic evaluations and consultation with stroke specialists upon hospital arrival are recommended.

The mothership (MS) model, where patients are directly transferred to a thrombectomy-capable center, and the drip-and-ship (DS) model, where thrombolysis is initiated at the nearest primary stroke center before transfer for thrombectomy, are the primary transport modes for patients with stroke. We aimed to establish guidelines for selecting the appropriate transfer strategy based on emergent large vessel occlusion (LVO). We developed this guideline based on evidence from systematic reviews and meta-analyses via a de novo process. A systematic literature review was conducted across four databases (MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane, and KoreaMed) to answer three Population, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcome questions comparing MS and DS models. The risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses flow diagrams and meta-analyses were generated for functional outcomes, mortality, and successful recanalization. Twenty-six non-randomized controlled studies showed that the MS model improved good functional outcomes by approximately 14% compared with the DS model (odds ratio [OR], 1.14; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.00–1.30). Fifteen studies reported that mortality in the MS and DS models showed no significant differences (OR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.84–1.11). Twenty-four studies revealed no significant difference in successful recanalization between the MS and DS models (OR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.68–1.10). The MS model should be considered first to improve the functional outcome of patients with LVO. However, if thrombectomy cannot be performed immediately after thrombolysis, or if a thrombectomy-enabled hospital is not nearby, the DS model should be considered by stroke specialists depending on transportation time and regional factors. We suggest a mixed approach with the DS model based on specific circumstances or regions to ensure the optimum treatment of patients with acute ischemic stroke (AIS). Appropriate transport for patients with LVO improves the prognosis of AIS.

The sixth edition of the Korean Medication Algorithm Project for Depressive Disorder (KMAP-DD) was published in 2025. This review compared KMAP-DD 2025 with four major international clinical practice guidelines: Canadian Network for Mood and Anxiety Treatments Clinical Guidelines for the Management of Major Depressive Disorders, National Institute for Health and Care Excellence Depression Guideline, Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists Clinical Practice Guidelines for Mood Disorders, and British Association for Psychopharmacology Guideline. While KMAP-DD is based on expert consensus, and others on evidence-based methods, overall treatment strategies for depressive episodes were fairly consistent. Especially, KMAP-DD 2025 offers more structured recommendations in areas lacking strong evidence, such as premenstrual dysphoric disorder, perinatal depression, and depression with medical comorbidities. KMAP-DD 2025 also reflected Korean clinical practice patterns emphasizing rapid symptom relief and early use of combination strategies. Despite limitations as a consensus-based guideline, KMAP-DD 2025 complements evidence-based approaches and provides practical, situation-specific guidance for real-world clinical decision-making in Korea.

Background: This study aimed to identify key priorities for the development of guidelines for information and communication technology (ICT)-based patient education tailored to the needs of patients with rheumatic diseases (RDs) in the Republic of Korea, based on expert consensus. Methods: A two-round modified Delphi study was conducted with 20 rheumatology, patient education, and digital health literacy experts. A total of 35 items covering 7 domains and 18 subdomains were evaluated. Each item was evaluated for its level of importance, and the responses were rated on a 4-point Likert scale. Consensus levels were defined as “high” (interquartile range [IQR] ≤ 1, agreement ≥ 80%, content validity ratio [CVR] ≥ 0.7), "Moderate" (IQR ≥ 1, agreement 50–79%, CVR 0.5–0.7), and "Low" (IQR > 1, agreement < 50%, CVR < 0.5). Results: Strong consensus was reached for key priorities for developing guidelines in areas such as health literacy, digital health literacy, medical terminology, user interface, and user experience design for mobile apps. Chatbot use and video (e.g., YouTube) also achieved high consensus, whereas AI-powered platforms such as ChatGPT showed moderate-to-high agreement. Telemedicine was excluded because of insufficient consensus. Conclusion The key priorities identified in this study provide a foundation for the development of ICT-based patient education guidelines for RDs in the Republic of Korea.Future efforts should focus on integrating digital tools into clinical practice to enhance patient engagement and improve clinical outcomes.

Background: Shortage of organ donors in the Republic of Korea has become a major problem. To address this, it has been questioned whether heart transplant (HTx) allocation should be modified to reduce priority of older patients. We aimed to evaluate post-HTx outcomes according to recipient age and specific pre-HTx conditions using a nationwide prospective cohort. Methods: We analyzed clinical characteristics of 628 patients from the Korean Organ Transplant Registry who received HTx from January 2015 to December 2020. Enrolled recipients were divided into three groups according to age. We also included comorbidities including ambulatory status. Non-ambulatory status was defined as pre-HTx support with either extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, continuous renal replacement therapy, or mechanical ventilation. Results: Of the 628 patients, 195 were < 50 years, 322 were 50–64 years and 111 were ≥ 65years at transplant. Four hundred nine (65.1%) were ambulatory and 219 (34.9%) were nonambulatory. Older recipients tended to have more comorbidities, ischemic cardiomyopathy, and received older donors. Post-HTx survival was significantly lower in older recipients (P = 0.025) and recipients with non-ambulatory status (P < 0.001). However, in contrast to non-ambulatory recipients who showed significant survival differences according to the recipient’s age (P = 0.004), ambulatory recipients showed comparable outcomes (P = 0.465). Conclusion Our results do not support use of age alone as an allocation criterion. Transplant candidate age in combination with some comorbidities such as non-ambulatory status may identify patients at a sufficiently elevated risk at which suitability of HTx should be reconsidered.