Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) is a minimally invasive treatment modality used as an alternative to surgery in patients with benign thyroid nodules, recurrent thyroid cancers (RTCs), and primary thyroid microcarcinomas. The Korean Society of Thyroid Radiology (KSThR) initially developed recommendations for the optimal use of RFA for thyroid tumors in 2009 and revised them in 2012 and 2017. As new meaningful evidence has accumulated since 2017 and in response to a growing global interest in the use of RFA for treating malignant thyroid lesions, the task force committee members of the KSThR decided to update the guidelines on the use of RFA for the management of RTCs based on a comprehensive analysis of current literature and expert consensus.

Purpose: Biomarkers predicting clinically significant prostate cancer (sPC) before biopsy are currently lacking. This study aimed to develop a non-invasive urine test to predict sPC in at-risk men using urinary metabolomic profiles. Materials and Methods: Urine samples from 934 at-risk subjects and 268 treatment-naïve PC patients were subjected to liquid chromatography/mass spectrophotometry (LC-MS)-based metabolomics profiling using both C18 and hydrophilic interaction liquid chromatography (HILIC) column analyses. Four models were constructed (training cohort [n=647]) and validated (validation cohort [n=344]) for different purposes. Model I differentiates PC from benign cases. Models II, III, and a Gleason score model (model GS) predict sPC that is defined as National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN)-categorized favorable-intermediate risk group or higher (Model II), unfavorable-intermediate risk group or higher (Model III), and GS ≥7 PC (model GS), respectively. The metabolomic panels and predicting models were constructed using logistic regression and Akaike information criterion. Results: The best metabolomic panels from the HILIC column include 25, 27, 28 and 26 metabolites in Models I, II, III, and GS, respectively, with area under the curve (AUC) values ranging between 0.82 and 0.91 in the training cohort and between 0.77 and 0.86 in the validation cohort. The combination of the metabolomic panels and five baseline clinical factors that include serum prostate-specific antigen, age, family history of PC, previously negative biopsy, and abnormal digital rectal examination results significantly increased AUCs (range 0.88–0.91). At 90% sensitivity (validation cohort), 33%, 34%, 41%, and 36% of unnecessary biopsies were avoided in Models I, II, III, and GS, respectively. The above results were successfully validated using LC-MS with the C18 column. Conclusions Urinary metabolomic profiles with baseline clinical factors may accurately predict sPC in men with elevated risk before biopsy.

Purpose: Since 1995, the Korean Gastric Cancer Association (KGCA) has been periodically conducting nationwide surveys on patients with surgically treated gastric cancer. This study details the results of the survey conducted in 2023. Materials and Methods: The survey was conducted from March to December 2024 using a standardized case report form. Data were collected on 86 items, including patient demographics, tumor characteristics, surgical procedures, and surgical outcomes. The results of the 2023 survey were compared with those of previous surveys. Results: Data from 12,751 cases were collected from 66 institutions. The mean patient age was 64.6 years, and the proportion of patients aged ≥71 years increased from 9.1% in 1995 to 31.7% in 2023. The proportion of upper-third tumors slightly decreased to 16.8% compared to 20.9% in 2019. Early gastric cancer accounted for 63.1% of cases in 2023.Regarding operative procedures, a totally laparoscopic approach was most frequently applied (63.2%) in 2023, while robotic gastrectomy steadily increased to 9.5% from 2.1% in 2014.The most common anastomotic method was the Billroth II procedure (48.8%) after distal gastrectomy and double-tract reconstruction (51.9%) after proximal gastrectomy in 2023.However, the proportion of esophago-gastrostomy with anti-reflux procedures increased to 30.9%. The rates of post-operative mortality and overall complications were 1.0% and 15.3%, respectively. Conclusions The results of the 2023 nationwide survey demonstrate the current status of gastric cancer treatment in Korea. This information will provide a basis for future gastric cancer research.

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: The removal of a well-fixed acetabular cup is a challenging, labor-intensive, and time-consuming step during revision hip arthroplasty. Although the advent of the manual osteotome, Explant, has simplified the procedure, it is still a stressful process as it dissipates the surgeon’s strength and time and risks an iatrogenic pelvic fracture. Recently, EZX, a powered tool for extraction of well-fixed acetabular cups with semicircular blade was invented. This study aimed to compare Explant and EZX in an experimental condition for their efficacy and safety. Methods: Cementless acetabular cups were press-fitted to 20 hemipelvic polyurethane models using foam adhesives. Ten cups were removed with each tool for comparison of the elapsed time, loads on the entire hemipelvis, periacetabular strain and temperature, volume of periacetabular bone removed, and diameter of the remaining acetabular rim. Strains and loads were quantitatively assessed using strain gauges and load cells for precise and reliable measurements. Results: The mean duration required to remove a well-fixed cup with EZX was 38.5 seconds (range, 25–55), whereas that with Explant was 543.7 seconds (range, 214–1,051) (p < 0.001). The load on the entire hemipelvis with EZX (mean, 9.1 kgf; range, 6.4–11.3) was 33% lower than that with Explant (mean, 13.6 kgf; range, 9.2–17.1) (p < 0.001). The periacetabular peak strains at the 3 positions with EZX were significantly lower than those with Explant (p < 0.001). The temperature during the removal did not differ significantly between the 2 tools. Although the mean volume of bone loss with Explant was 2.4 mL more than that with EZX (p < 0.001), the mean diameters of the remaining acetabular rim were not significantly different, measuring 54.1 mm with both tools. Conclusions The present experiment revealed that a well-fixed cup could be removed using a powered tool with less strength and time and less load on the entire pelvis. Although the powered tool removed a larger volume of bone, the diameters of the remaining acetabular rims were equivalent. This tool may help surgeons remove well-fixed cups in a short time and reduce the deforming load on the bone around the cup without increasing the size of the subsequent reconstruction cup.

Background: The removal of a well-fixed acetabular cup is a challenging, labor-intensive, and time-consuming step during revision hip arthroplasty. Although the advent of the manual osteotome, Explant, has simplified the procedure, it is still a stressful process as it dissipates the surgeon’s strength and time and risks an iatrogenic pelvic fracture. Recently, EZX, a powered tool for extraction of well-fixed acetabular cups with semicircular blade was invented. This study aimed to compare Explant and EZX in an experimental condition for their efficacy and safety. Methods: Cementless acetabular cups were press-fitted to 20 hemipelvic polyurethane models using foam adhesives. Ten cups were removed with each tool for comparison of the elapsed time, loads on the entire hemipelvis, periacetabular strain and temperature, volume of periacetabular bone removed, and diameter of the remaining acetabular rim. Strains and loads were quantitatively assessed using strain gauges and load cells for precise and reliable measurements. Results: The mean duration required to remove a well-fixed cup with EZX was 38.5 seconds (range, 25–55), whereas that with Explant was 543.7 seconds (range, 214–1,051) (p < 0.001). The load on the entire hemipelvis with EZX (mean, 9.1 kgf; range, 6.4–11.3) was 33% lower than that with Explant (mean, 13.6 kgf; range, 9.2–17.1) (p < 0.001). The periacetabular peak strains at the 3 positions with EZX were significantly lower than those with Explant (p < 0.001). The temperature during the removal did not differ significantly between the 2 tools. Although the mean volume of bone loss with Explant was 2.4 mL more than that with EZX (p < 0.001), the mean diameters of the remaining acetabular rim were not significantly different, measuring 54.1 mm with both tools. Conclusions The present experiment revealed that a well-fixed cup could be removed using a powered tool with less strength and time and less load on the entire pelvis. Although the powered tool removed a larger volume of bone, the diameters of the remaining acetabular rims were equivalent. This tool may help surgeons remove well-fixed cups in a short time and reduce the deforming load on the bone around the cup without increasing the size of the subsequent reconstruction cup.

Pneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia (PJP) is a life-threatening infection commonly observed in immunocompromised patients, necessitating prompt diagnosis and treatment. This review evaluates the diagnostic performance of various tests used for PJP diagnosis through a comprehensive literature review. Additionally, we propose a diagnostic algorithm tailored to non-human immunodeficiency virus immunocompromised patients, considering the specific characteristics of current medical resources in Korea.

Background: The removal of a well-fixed acetabular cup is a challenging, labor-intensive, and time-consuming step during revision hip arthroplasty. Although the advent of the manual osteotome, Explant, has simplified the procedure, it is still a stressful process as it dissipates the surgeon’s strength and time and risks an iatrogenic pelvic fracture. Recently, EZX, a powered tool for extraction of well-fixed acetabular cups with semicircular blade was invented. This study aimed to compare Explant and EZX in an experimental condition for their efficacy and safety. Methods: Cementless acetabular cups were press-fitted to 20 hemipelvic polyurethane models using foam adhesives. Ten cups were removed with each tool for comparison of the elapsed time, loads on the entire hemipelvis, periacetabular strain and temperature, volume of periacetabular bone removed, and diameter of the remaining acetabular rim. Strains and loads were quantitatively assessed using strain gauges and load cells for precise and reliable measurements. Results: The mean duration required to remove a well-fixed cup with EZX was 38.5 seconds (range, 25–55), whereas that with Explant was 543.7 seconds (range, 214–1,051) (p < 0.001). The load on the entire hemipelvis with EZX (mean, 9.1 kgf; range, 6.4–11.3) was 33% lower than that with Explant (mean, 13.6 kgf; range, 9.2–17.1) (p < 0.001). The periacetabular peak strains at the 3 positions with EZX were significantly lower than those with Explant (p < 0.001). The temperature during the removal did not differ significantly between the 2 tools. Although the mean volume of bone loss with Explant was 2.4 mL more than that with EZX (p < 0.001), the mean diameters of the remaining acetabular rim were not significantly different, measuring 54.1 mm with both tools. Conclusions The present experiment revealed that a well-fixed cup could be removed using a powered tool with less strength and time and less load on the entire pelvis. Although the powered tool removed a larger volume of bone, the diameters of the remaining acetabular rims were equivalent. This tool may help surgeons remove well-fixed cups in a short time and reduce the deforming load on the bone around the cup without increasing the size of the subsequent reconstruction cup.

Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) is a minimally invasive treatment modality used as an alternative to surgery in patients with benign thyroid nodules, recurrent thyroid cancers (RTCs), and primary thyroid microcarcinomas. The Korean Society of Thyroid Radiology (KSThR) initially developed recommendations for the optimal use of RFA for thyroid tumors in 2009 and revised them in 2012 and 2017. As new meaningful evidence has accumulated since 2017 and in response to a growing global interest in the use of RFA for treating malignant thyroid lesions, the task force committee members of the KSThR decided to update the guidelines on the use of RFA for the management of RTCs based on a comprehensive analysis of current literature and expert consensus.