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.

Purpose: In general, bile is normally sterile. However, there are reports bactibilia may occur in certain instances, though the causal factors are unclear. We analyzed possible preoperative predictors of bactibilia upon cholecystectomy. Methods: Bile samples were collected during cholecystectomies from November 2018 to November 2019. A total of 428 open or laparoscopic cholecystectomies were performed. Preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative variables were compared between the culture-positive and culture-negative groups. Results: One hundred fifty-seven patients (36.7%) were culture-positive. Gram-negative bacteria (95 [61.0%]) were more common. Escherichia coli (38 [40.0%]) and Enterobacter (22 [23.2%]) were the most common species. In univariate analysis, age of ≥70 years (P < 0.001), male sex (P < 0.001), high American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status grades (P = 0.001), diabetes mellitus (P = 0.002), jaundice (P = 0.007), high Tokyo Guideline grades (P = 0.008), percutaneous transhepatic gallbladder drainage (PTGBD; P < 0.001), endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP; P < 0.001) were identified as a risk factors for bactibilia. In multivariate analysis, age of ≥70 years (hazard ratio [HR], 2.874; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.769–4.670; P = 0.001), ERCP (HR, 9.001; 95% CI, 4.833–16.75; P < 0.001), and PTGBD (HR, 2.866; 95% CI, 1.440–4.901; P = 0.002) were independent risk factors for bactibilia. Conclusion Among patients who underwent cholecystectomy, those who were elderly, symptomatic, and underwent preoperative drainage were more likely to have bactibilia. In such cases, surgeons should take care to prevent bile leakage during surgery and consider administering appropriate antibiotics.

Acquired fluconazole resistance (FR) in bloodstream infection (BSI) isolates of Candida albicans is rare. We investigated the FR mechanisms and clinical features of 14 fluconazole non-susceptible (FNS; FR and fluconazole-susceptible dose-dependent) BSI isolates of C. albicans recovered from Korean multicenter surveillance studies during 2006–2021. Mutations causing amino acid substitutions (AASs) in the drug-target gene ERG11 and the FR-associated transcription factor genes TAC1 , MRR1, and UPC2 of the 14 FNS isolates were compared with those of 12 fluconazole-susceptible isolates. Of the 14 FNS isolates, eight and seven had Erg11p (K143R, F145L, or G464S) and Tac1p (T225A, R673L, A736T, or A736V) AASs, respectively, which were previously described in FR isolates. Novel Erg11p, Tac1p, and Mrr1p AASs were observed in two, four, and one FNS isolates, respectively. Combined Erg11p and Tac1p AASs were observed in seven FNS isolates. None of the FR-associated Upc2p AASs were detected. Of the 14 patients, only one had previous azole exposure, and the 30-day mortality rate was 57.1% (8/14). Our data show that Erg11p and Tac1p AASs are likely to contribute to FR in C. albicans BSI isolates in Korea and that most FNS C. albicans BSIs develop without azole exposure.

Background/Aims: To prevent the perinatal transmission of hepatitis B virus (HBV) from mother to child, administration of an antiviral agent during pregnancy has been attempted in women who are either hepatitis B e antigen positive or have a high viral load. In this systematic review and meta-analysis with randomized controlled trials, we analyzed the efficacy and safety of tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) in preventing the perinatal transmission of HBV in pregnant women who have high HBV DNA titers. Methods: Multiple comprehensive databases (PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases) were searched for studies evaluating the efficacy of TDF for the prevention of perinatal transmission of HBV. Results: Two studies (one open label study and one double blind study) were included and analyzed. Intention-to-treat analysis (527 pregnancies) showed that the preventive effect of TDF was not significant (odds ratio [OR], 0.53; 95% confidence interval[CI], 0.13 to 2.17; p = 0.38, I2 = 81%). However, the per-protocol analysis showed that TDF significantly reduced perinatal transmission (OR, 0.10; 95% CI, 0.01 to 0.77; p = 0.03, I2 = 0%). There was no significant difference between the TDF group and the control group with respect to maternal and fetal safety outcomes. Conclusions In pregnant women who have high HBV DNA titers, TDF can reduce the perinatal transmission from mother to child without significant adverse events.

Background: In 2015, the Korean Atopic Dermatitis Association (KADA) working group published consensus guidelines for treating atopic dermatitis (AD). Objective: We aimed to provide updated consensus recommendations for systemic treatment of AD in South Korea based on recent evidence and experience. Methods: We compiled a database of references from relevant systematic reviews and guidelines on the systemic management of AD. Evidence for each statement was graded and classified based on thestrength of the recommendation. Forty-two council members from the KADA participated in three rounds of voting to establish a consensus on expert recommendations. Results: We do not recommend long-term treatment with systemic steroids forpatients with moderate-to-severe AD due to the risk of adverse effects. We recommend treatment with cyclosporine or dupilumab and selective treatment with methotrexate or azathioprine for patients with moderate-to-severe AD. We suggest treatment with antihistamines as an option for alleviating clinical symptoms of AD. We recommend selective treatment with narrowband ultraviolet B for patients with chronic moderate-to-severe AD. We do not recommend treatment with oral antibiotics for patients with moderate-to-severe AD but who have no signs of infection. We did not reach a consensus on recommendations for treatment with allergen-specific immunotherapy, probiotics, evening primrose oil, orvitamin D for patients with moderate-to-severe AD. We also recommend educational interventions and counselling for patients with AD and caregivers to improve the treatment success rate. Conclusion We look forward to implementing a new and updated consensus of systemic therapy in controlling patients with moderate-to-severe AD.

Purpose: To assess patient radiation doses during diagnostic and therapeutic neurointerventional procedures from multiple centers and propose dose reference level (RL). Materials and Methods: Consecutive neurointerventional procedures, performed in 22 hospitals from December 2020 to June 2021, were retrospectively studied. We collected data from a sample of 429 diagnostic and 731 therapeutic procedures. Parameters including dose-area product (DAP), cumulative air kerma (CAK), fluoroscopic time (FT), and total number of image frames (NI) were obtained. RL were calculated as the 3rd quartiles of the distribution. Results: Analysis of 1160 procedures from 22 hospitals confirmed the large variability in patient dose for similar procedures. RLs in terms of DAP, CAK, FT, and NI were 101.6 Gy·cm2, 711.3 mGy, 13.3 minutes, and 637 frames for cerebral angiography, 199.9 Gy·cm2, 3,458.7 mGy, 57.3 minutes, and 1,000 frames for aneurysm coiling, 225.1 Gy·cm2, 1,590 mGy, 44.7 minutes, and 800 frames for stroke thrombolysis, 412.3 Gy·cm2, 4,447.8 mGy, 99.3 minutes, and 1,621.3 frames for arteriovenous malformation (AVM) embolization, respectively. For all procedures, the results were comparable to most of those already published. Statistical analysis showed male and presence of procedural complications were significant factors in aneurysmal coiling. Male, number of passages, and procedural combined technique were significant factors in stroke thrombolysis. In AVM embolization, a significantly higher radiation dose was found in the definitive endovascular cure group. Conclusion Various RLs introduced in this study promote the optimization of patient doses in diagnostic and therapeutic interventional neuroradiology procedures. Proposed 3rd quartile DAP (Gy·cm2) values were 101.6 for diagnostic cerebral angiography, 199.9 for aneurysm coiling, 225.1 for stroke thrombolysis, and 412.3 for AVM embolization. Continual evolution of practices and technologies requires regular updates of RLs.

PURPOSE: Prediabetes is an independent risk factor for cardiovascular disease. However, data on the long term adverse clinical outcomes of prediabetic patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stents (DESs) are scarce. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study population comprised 674 consecutive non-diabetic patients who underwent elective PCI between April 2007 and November 2010. Prediabetes was defined as hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) of 5.7% to 6.4%. Two-year cumulative clinical outcomes of prediabetic patients (HbA1c of 5.7% to 6.4%, n=242) were compared with those of a normoglycemic group (< 5.7%, n=432). RESULTS: Baseline clinical and angiographic characteristics were similar between the two groups, except for higher glucose levels (104.8±51.27 mg/dL vs. 131.0±47.22 mg/dL, p < 0.001) on admission in the prediabetes group. There was no significant difference between the two groups in coronary angiographic parameters, except for a higher incidence of diffuse long lesion in the prediabetes group. For prediabetic patients, trends toward higher incidences of binary restenosis (15.6% vs. 9.8 %, p=0.066) and late loss (0.71±0.70 mm vs. 0.59±0.62 mm, p=0.076) were noted. During the 24 months of follow up, the incidence of mortality in prediabetic patients was higher than that in normoglycemic patients (5.5% vs. 1.5%, p=0.007). CONCLUSION: In our study, a higher death rate and a trend toward a higher incidence of restenosis in patients with prediabetes up to 2 years, compared to those in normoglycemic patients, undergoing elective PCI with contemporary DESs.
Cardiovascular Diseases ; Drug-Eluting Stents ; Follow-Up Studies ; Glucose ; Humans ; Incidence ; Mortality ; Percutaneous Coronary Intervention* ; Prediabetic State* ; Risk Factors

PURPOSE: Many recent studies have reported that successful percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stents (DESs) for chronic total occlusion (CTO) has more beneficial effects than failed CTO-PCI; however, there are only limited data available from comparisons of successful CTO-PCI with medical therapy (MT) in the Korean population. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 840 consecutive CTO patients who underwent diagnostic coronary angiography, receiving either PCI with DESs or MT, were enrolled. Patients were divided into two groups according to the treatment assigned. To adjust for potential confounders, propensity score matching (PSM) analysis was performed using logistic regression. Individual major clinical outcomes and major adverse cardiac events, a composite of total death, myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, and revascularization, were compared between the two groups up to 5 years. RESULTS: After PSM, two propensity-matched groups (265 pairs, n=530) were generated, and the baseline characteristics were balanced. Although the PCI group showed a higher incidence of target lesion and vessel revascularization on CTO, the incidence of MI tended to be lower [hazard ratio (HR): 0.339, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.110 to 1.043, p=0.059] and the composite of total death or MI was lower (HR: 0.454, 95% CI: 0.224 to 0.919, p=0.028), compared with the MT group up to 5 years. CONCLUSION: In this study, successful CTO PCI with DESs was associated with a higher risk of repeat PCI for the target vessel, but showed a reduced incidence of death or MI.
Coronary Angiography ; Drug-Eluting Stents* ; Humans ; Incidence ; Logistic Models ; Myocardial Infarction ; Percutaneous Coronary Intervention* ; Propensity Score ; Stroke