Purpose: Although gastric cancer (GC) exhibits significant genomic heterogeneity, the clinical implications of its immune microenvironment remain poorly understood. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively evaluated patients with GC who underwent gastrectomies between 2011 and 2014. The tumors were analyzed for Epstein–Barr virus (EBV), microsatellite instability-high (MSI-H), tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (CD3), tumor-associated macrophages (CD68 and CD163), and programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression. Tumors were classified using the modified The Cancer Genome Atlas scheme, and their clinical characteristics were compared. Results: A total of 567 patients were classified into EBV (6%), MSI-H (10%), chromosomal instability-like (36%), and genomically stable-like (48%) subtypes. EBV tumors exhibited the highest PD-L1 expression (85%) and immune infiltration by CD3+ T cells (86%), CD68+ macrophages (58%), and CD163+ macrophages (40%). High CD68+ macrophage tumors were associated with advanced stages and worse 5-year disease-free survival (83% vs. 95%; P<0.001);however, this association was not independently significant after adjusting for the tumor-nodemetastasis stage. PD-L1 expression did not significantly affect the survival outcomes. Conclusions GC subtypes have distinct immune microenvironments that influence prognosis. Our findings highlight the prognostic and therapeutic potential of immune profiling in GC.

Background: In the era of nucleoside analogs (NA), we investigated the safety of using hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg)-positive grafts in liver transplantation (LT) using nationwide KOTRY data. Methods: Among 4,265 adult LTs in the KOTRY registry (April 2014–January 2020), 20 (0.5%) used HBsAg(+) grafts. The S(+) group was compared with HBsAg-nega-tive groups, both HBcAb(+) (C[+]) and HBcAb(−) (SC[−]), using 1:1 propensity scorematching. Patient and graft survival were evaluated using Kaplan–Meier analysis.Cox regression was used to identify prognostic factors. Results: No significant differences were observed in patient or graft survival be-tween S(+) and C(+) or SC(−) groups. Key prognostic factors for patient survivalincluded age, HCC, MELD score, ascites, and encephalopathy. For graft survival, HCC, preoperative HCC treatment, MELD score, ascites, and encephalopathy were significant. HBV recurrence occurred in the S(+) group, but did not compromise outcomes. Conclusion In HBV-endemic regions, HBsAg(+) liver grafts can be safely used to expand the donor pool without compromising LT outcomes when combined with appropriate prophylaxis.

Purpose: This study aimed to report the real-world outcomes of intravesical gemcitabine for bacillus Calmette–Guérin (BCG)–unresponsive, high-risk, non–muscle-invasive bladder cancer (HR-NMIBC) in Korean patients who were unable or unwilling to undergo radical cystectomy (RC). Materials and Methods: This retrospective study included 131 patients (median age, 69 years; 88.5% men) treated with intravesical gemcitabine for BCG-unresponsive HR-NMIBC at nine centers between May 2019 and April 2022. The primary endpoint was 1-year recurrence-free survival (RFS). The secondary endpoints included factors influencing RFS, progression-free survival (PFS), cystectomy- free survival, cancer-specific survival (CSS), overall survival (OS), and safety. Survival analysis was performed using the Kaplan-Meier method, and risk factors for recurrence were assessed using Cox regression models. Results: Patients were followed up for a median duration of 25 months, with carcinoma in situ (CIS) in 41.9% of the patients. The 1-year and 2-year RFS rates were 68% and 42%, while the 1-year and 2-year PFS rates were 87% and 77%, respectively. No significant factors influencing RFS were identified. Seventeen patients underwent RC during a median follow-up of 16 months, with the condition in three patients progressing to muscle-invasive disease on final pathological analysis. The 2-year CSS and OS rates were 98% and 97%, respectively. Intravesical gemcitabine was well-tolerated, with only seven patients (5.3%) unable to complete the full induction course. Conclusion Our research highlights the potential of intravesical gemcitabine as a viable bladder-sparing treatment option for BCG-unresponsive HR-NMIBC, providing real-world evidence on its safety, efficacy, and tolerability.

Background: Although total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) with propofol and remifentanil is frequently used to optimize intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring (IONM), the exact effect of remimazolam on IONM remains unknown. Here, we compared the effects of propofol and remimazolam along with remifentanil on IONM during TIVA. Methods: In this prospective, double-blind, randomized controlled trial, 64 patients requiring IONM during cervical spine surgery were administered either propofol (Group P) or remimazolam (Group R). The preoperative latencies of the somatosensory-evoked potentials (SEP; N20 for the median nerve and P37 for the tibial nerve) were measured. SEP latencies and amplitudes and motor-evoked potential (MEP) amplitudes were measured 30 min after anesthetic induction (T1), 30 min after surgical incision (T2), after laminectomy or discectomy (T3), immediately after plate insertion or pedicle screw fixation (T4), and before surgical wound closure (T5). The primary outcome was the between-group difference in the N20 latency changes measured at T1 and preoperatively. Results: The change in SEP latencies including N20 and P37 at T1 compared with preoperative time was not significantly different between Groups P and R. Except for the amplitude of the right abductor brevis, there was no significant group-by-time interaction effect for intraoperative MEP amplitudes or SEP latencies and amplitudes. Conclusions TIVA with remimazolam and remifentanil for cervical spine surgery yielded stable IONM, comparable to those observed with conventional TIVA with propofol and remifentanil. Further clinical trials are needed in other surgical contexts and with more diverse patient populations to determine the effects of remimazolam on IONM.

Purpose: To investigate the role of combined periprostatic nerve block (PNB) and intrarectal local anesthesia with heated lidocaine gel (ILAHL) in reducing pain during transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided prostate biopsy, compared with PNB alone. Materials and Methods: We performed a prospective randomized trial with 140 participants who underwent systematic TRUS-guid ed, 12-core prostate biopsy from July 2021 to June 2022. These participants were divided into two groups. Before prostate biopsy, group 1 (n=70) received PNB and group 2 (n=70) received PNB combined intrarectal local anesthesia with 20 mL of heated (40ºC) 2% lidocaine gel. The primary outcome was pain score on a 0–10 visual analogue scale (VAS) at four time points (VAS A: during local anesthesia procedure, VAS B: during probe insertion, VAS C: during biopsy procedure, VAS D: 30 minutes after biopsy). The secondary outcome included adverse events during and after the procedure. Results: Mean pain scores were significantly lower in group 2 than in group 1 at VAS A (2.53 vs. 1.60, p=0.001) and VAS B (2.47 vs.1.49, p<0.001). The mean VAS C pain score in group 2 was significantly less than in group 1 (3.07 vs. 2.20, p=0.001), while there was no significant difference in the mean VAS D pain score between two groups (1.06 vs. 0.89, p=0.318). There were no significant differences in the occurrence of complications in both groups. Conclusions The combination of PNB and ILAHL provides more effective pain control than PNB alone without increase of complication rates in patients undergoing TRUS-guided prostate biopsy.

Background: The Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocol has garnered global attention for optimizing perioperative care. It holds significant potential for orthopedic hip surgery, especially in elderly patients requiring rehabilitation. However, largescale studies or meta-analyses specific to this field remain limited. Methods: A systematic search was performed using Medline (PubMed), Embase, and Cochrane Library databases for studies assessing the effects of the ERAS protocol in hip surgery up to August 13, 2024. A double-arm meta-analysis was designed to compare perioperative outcomes, including postoperative pain scores, transfusion rates, medical and surgical complications, and length of hospital stay, between ERAS and control groups. Results: Twenty-one studies were systematically reviewed, and 13 were included in the pooled analysis, comprising 1,004 patients in the ERAS group and 1,159 in the control group. Meta-analysis results demonstrated that the ERAS protocol significantly improved postoperative pain management, reduced blood transfusion requirements, decreased medical complications, and shortened hospital stays compared to standard protocols. Conclusions This meta-analysis supports the hypothesis that the ERAS protocol enhances perioperative outcomes in orthopedic hip surgery.

Background: The Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocol has garnered global attention for optimizing perioperative care. It holds significant potential for orthopedic hip surgery, especially in elderly patients requiring rehabilitation. However, largescale studies or meta-analyses specific to this field remain limited. Methods: A systematic search was performed using Medline (PubMed), Embase, and Cochrane Library databases for studies assessing the effects of the ERAS protocol in hip surgery up to August 13, 2024. A double-arm meta-analysis was designed to compare perioperative outcomes, including postoperative pain scores, transfusion rates, medical and surgical complications, and length of hospital stay, between ERAS and control groups. Results: Twenty-one studies were systematically reviewed, and 13 were included in the pooled analysis, comprising 1,004 patients in the ERAS group and 1,159 in the control group. Meta-analysis results demonstrated that the ERAS protocol significantly improved postoperative pain management, reduced blood transfusion requirements, decreased medical complications, and shortened hospital stays compared to standard protocols. Conclusions This meta-analysis supports the hypothesis that the ERAS protocol enhances perioperative outcomes in orthopedic hip surgery.

Background: Although total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) with propofol and remifentanil is frequently used to optimize intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring (IONM), the exact effect of remimazolam on IONM remains unknown. Here, we compared the effects of propofol and remimazolam along with remifentanil on IONM during TIVA. Methods: In this prospective, double-blind, randomized controlled trial, 64 patients requiring IONM during cervical spine surgery were administered either propofol (Group P) or remimazolam (Group R). The preoperative latencies of the somatosensory-evoked potentials (SEP; N20 for the median nerve and P37 for the tibial nerve) were measured. SEP latencies and amplitudes and motor-evoked potential (MEP) amplitudes were measured 30 min after anesthetic induction (T1), 30 min after surgical incision (T2), after laminectomy or discectomy (T3), immediately after plate insertion or pedicle screw fixation (T4), and before surgical wound closure (T5). The primary outcome was the between-group difference in the N20 latency changes measured at T1 and preoperatively. Results: The change in SEP latencies including N20 and P37 at T1 compared with preoperative time was not significantly different between Groups P and R. Except for the amplitude of the right abductor brevis, there was no significant group-by-time interaction effect for intraoperative MEP amplitudes or SEP latencies and amplitudes. Conclusions TIVA with remimazolam and remifentanil for cervical spine surgery yielded stable IONM, comparable to those observed with conventional TIVA with propofol and remifentanil. Further clinical trials are needed in other surgical contexts and with more diverse patient populations to determine the effects of remimazolam on IONM.

Background: Although total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) with propofol and remifentanil is frequently used to optimize intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring (IONM), the exact effect of remimazolam on IONM remains unknown. Here, we compared the effects of propofol and remimazolam along with remifentanil on IONM during TIVA. Methods: In this prospective, double-blind, randomized controlled trial, 64 patients requiring IONM during cervical spine surgery were administered either propofol (Group P) or remimazolam (Group R). The preoperative latencies of the somatosensory-evoked potentials (SEP; N20 for the median nerve and P37 for the tibial nerve) were measured. SEP latencies and amplitudes and motor-evoked potential (MEP) amplitudes were measured 30 min after anesthetic induction (T1), 30 min after surgical incision (T2), after laminectomy or discectomy (T3), immediately after plate insertion or pedicle screw fixation (T4), and before surgical wound closure (T5). The primary outcome was the between-group difference in the N20 latency changes measured at T1 and preoperatively. Results: The change in SEP latencies including N20 and P37 at T1 compared with preoperative time was not significantly different between Groups P and R. Except for the amplitude of the right abductor brevis, there was no significant group-by-time interaction effect for intraoperative MEP amplitudes or SEP latencies and amplitudes. Conclusions TIVA with remimazolam and remifentanil for cervical spine surgery yielded stable IONM, comparable to those observed with conventional TIVA with propofol and remifentanil. Further clinical trials are needed in other surgical contexts and with more diverse patient populations to determine the effects of remimazolam on IONM.

Background: Although total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) with propofol and remifentanil is frequently used to optimize intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring (IONM), the exact effect of remimazolam on IONM remains unknown. Here, we compared the effects of propofol and remimazolam along with remifentanil on IONM during TIVA. Methods: In this prospective, double-blind, randomized controlled trial, 64 patients requiring IONM during cervical spine surgery were administered either propofol (Group P) or remimazolam (Group R). The preoperative latencies of the somatosensory-evoked potentials (SEP; N20 for the median nerve and P37 for the tibial nerve) were measured. SEP latencies and amplitudes and motor-evoked potential (MEP) amplitudes were measured 30 min after anesthetic induction (T1), 30 min after surgical incision (T2), after laminectomy or discectomy (T3), immediately after plate insertion or pedicle screw fixation (T4), and before surgical wound closure (T5). The primary outcome was the between-group difference in the N20 latency changes measured at T1 and preoperatively. Results: The change in SEP latencies including N20 and P37 at T1 compared with preoperative time was not significantly different between Groups P and R. Except for the amplitude of the right abductor brevis, there was no significant group-by-time interaction effect for intraoperative MEP amplitudes or SEP latencies and amplitudes. Conclusions TIVA with remimazolam and remifentanil for cervical spine surgery yielded stable IONM, comparable to those observed with conventional TIVA with propofol and remifentanil. Further clinical trials are needed in other surgical contexts and with more diverse patient populations to determine the effects of remimazolam on IONM.