Background/Aims: Early detection and removal of colon polyps are critical for preventing colorectal cancer. Computer-aided detection (CADe) systems have been introduced to increase the polyp detection rate (PDR) during colonoscopy, potentially enhancing its effectiveness. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of a CADe system in colorectal neoplasm detection. Methods: This prospective, randomized controlled trial was conducted at two tertiary centers (May 2023 to April 2025). Patients were randomly assigned to CADe or conventional colonoscopy and underwent screening, surveillance, or diagnostic colonoscopy. The primary endpoint was the adenoma detection rate (ADR), while the secondary endpoints were the PDR, relative risk (RR) of polyp detection, adenomas per colonoscopy (APC), and factors influencing adenoma detection. Results: Of 1,004 enrolled patients, 998 were randomly allocated into CADe and conventional colonoscopy groups (497 CADe system and 501 conventional colonoscopy). The CADe group had greater polyp counts (2.2 per colonoscopy vs 1.4 per colonoscopy; p<0.001) and APC values (1.2 vs 0.8; p<0.001). The CADe group showed significantly higher PDRs (72.2% vs 54.5%;p<0.001; RR, 2.173; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.669 to 2.828) and ADRs (52.3% vs 36.1%;p<0.001; RR, 1.940; 95% CI, 1.505 to 2.499). CADe also significantly increased the detection rate of hyperplastic polyps (p=0.007; RR, 1.474; 95% CI, 1.113 to 1.952) and increased the detection rates across all sizes and locations. In multivariable analysis, CADe use was the strongest independent predictor of adenoma detection (odds ratio, 1.914; 95% CI, 1.467 to 2.496), outweighing male sex, older age, diagnostic indication, and withdrawal time. Conclusions Real-time CADe-assisted colonoscopy significantly increased PDR and ADR and proved to be a strong independent predictor of adenoma detection (cris.nih.go.kr, KCT0009664).

Purpose: This study aimed to develop pilot clinical skills assessment (CSA) modules for Korean medicine-specific procedures and to examine their preliminary appropriateness, perceived necessity, and feasibility as a foundation for future licensing-related assessment development. Methods: A participatory action research framework, supplemented by qualitative interviews, was used to develop 4 CSA modules—acupuncture, Chuna manual therapy, pulse diagnosis, and constitutional diagnosis—in collaboration with expert evaluators, students, and standardized patients. The modules were implemented as formative examinations for third-year Korean medicine students, after which semi-structured interviews were conducted to obtain feedback on module content, implementation processes, and scoring procedures. Each module was also reviewed using the RUMBA checklist (Realistic, Understandable, Measurable, Behavioral, and Achievable), together with ratings of perceived necessity and feasibility for possible future use in licensing-related assessment. Interview data were analyzed inductively at the level of individual responses and then compared across modules and participant groups. Results: Qualitative analysis yielded 3 themes: content and scoring criteria, physical environment or simulators, and education or training. Participants emphasized the need to make key aspects of performance more observable, improve authenticity through simulators or task trainers, and strengthen the capacity of scoring systems to distinguish between levels of student performance. Across all modules, mean RUMBA scores were high in the understandable, behavioral, and achievable domains, whereas measurability was more problematic, especially for pulse diagnosis. Conclusion These pilot findings clarify both the strengths and the limitations of Korean medicine-specific CSA modules. The modules received favorable ratings for understandability and achievability, whereas lower ratings for measurability and realism identified priorities for refinement before wider use. This study provides preliminary guidance for the continued development and broader evaluation of Korean medicine-specific performance assessments.

Background: Liver transplantation (LT) is the standard treatment for end-stage liver disease; however, it can lead to biliary strictures in 25%–30% of cases. We aimed to develop a biodegradable stent loaded with paclitaxel that could be inserted during surgery without requiring removal. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of this stent using a porcine model. Methods: Fourteen pigs underwent simulated ischemic injury during LT, and a biodegradable paclitaxel-eluting stent was inserted after duct-to-duct anastomosis.Pigs were divided into four groups: no stent (n=3), bare stent (n=3), 300 µg paclitaxel stent (n=4), and 900 µg paclitaxel stent (n=4). After 3 months of follow-up, autopsies were conducted to obtain common bile duct tissue samples, and inflammation and fibrosis thicknesses were assessed under a microscope. Results: Most tissues had resolved the inflammatory reactions by the 3-month mark. The thinnest fibrosis thickness was observed in the 900 µg group (359.08±167.23 µm); however, no statistical significance was observed. Conclusion This study demonstrated the safety of paclitaxel-eluting biodegradable biliary stents and their positive effects on fibrosis in an ischemic bile duct porcine model. This biodegradable stent represents a potential approach for overcoming the complications associated with biliary strictures after LT.

Background: Tinnitus is a multifactorial condition with no universally accepted assessment guidelines. The Korean Tinnitus Study Group previously established consensus statements on the definition, classification, and diagnostic tests for tinnitus. As a continuation of this effort, this study aims to establish expert consensus on tinnitus assessment and treatment outcome evaluation, specifically tailored to the Korean clinical context. Methods: A modified Delphi method involving 26 otology experts from across Korea was used. A two-round Delphi survey was conducted to evaluate statements related to tinnitus assessment before and after treatment. Statements were rated on a scale of 1 to 9 for the level of agreement. Consensus was defined as ≥ 70% agreement (score of 7–9) and ≤ 15% disagreement (score of 1–3). Statistical measures such as content validity ratio and Kendall’s coefficient of concordance (W) were calculated to assess agreement levels. Results: Of the 46 assessment-related statements, 17 (37%) reached consensus, though overall pre-treatment assessments showed weak agreement (Kendall’s W = 0.319). Key areas of agreement included the use of the visual analogue scale, numeric rating scale, and validated questionnaires for pre-treatment evaluation. Five statements, such as the use of computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, and angiography for diagnosing pulsatile tinnitus, achieved over 90% agreement. For treatment outcome measurements, 8 of 12 statements (67%) reached a consensus, with moderate agreement (Kendall’s W = 0.513). Validated questionnaires and psychoacoustic tests were recommended for evaluating treatment effects within 12 weeks. While standardized imaging for pulsatile tinnitus and additional clinical tests were strongly recommended, full consensus was not achieved across all imaging modalities. Conclusion This study provides actionable recommendations for tinnitus assessment and treatment evaluation, emphasizing the use of standardized tools and individualized approaches based on patient needs. These findings offer a practical framework to enhance consistency and effectiveness in tinnitus management within Korean clinical settings.

Background: Tinnitus is a bothersome condition associated with various mechanisms of action. Although treatment methods vary according to these mechanisms, standardized guidelines would benefit both patients and clinicians. We conducted a Delphi study, a method that collects expert opinions through multiple rounds of questionnaires, to reach a consensus on tinnitus treatment with professional experts. Methods: A two-round modified Delphi survey was conducted to develop a clinical consensus on tinnitus treatment. The experts scored each statement on a scale of 1 (highest disagreement) to 9 (highest agreement) for their level of agreement on tinnitus treatment.Consensus was defined when 75% or more of the participants scored 7–9, and 15% or less scored 1–3. To ensure reliability of the responses, the content validity ratio and Kendall’s coefficient of concordance were evaluated. Results: Approximately 19 of 31 statements reached a consensus. All 3 statements reached a consensus regarding the candidates for treatment. Regarding treatment, 3 of 8 statements on medication, 2 of 2 statements on tinnitus retraining therapy/cognitive behavioral therapy, and 5 of 7 statements on auditory rehabilitation reached a positive consensus. Although all 6 statements regarding miscellaneous treatment reached a consensus, most were negatively agreed. For treatment with neuromodulation, none of the 5 statements reached a consensus. Conclusion The experts reached a high level of consensus on treatment candidates, tinnitus retraining therapy/cognitive behavioral therapy, and auditory rehabilitation in this modified Delphi study. The results of this study can provide beneficial and practical information for clinicians regarding the treatment of tinnitus.

Background: Tinnitus is a multifactorial condition with no universally accepted assessment guidelines. The Korean Tinnitus Study Group previously established consensus statements on the definition, classification, and diagnostic tests for tinnitus. As a continuation of this effort, this study aims to establish expert consensus on tinnitus assessment and treatment outcome evaluation, specifically tailored to the Korean clinical context. Methods: A modified Delphi method involving 26 otology experts from across Korea was used. A two-round Delphi survey was conducted to evaluate statements related to tinnitus assessment before and after treatment. Statements were rated on a scale of 1 to 9 for the level of agreement. Consensus was defined as ≥ 70% agreement (score of 7–9) and ≤ 15% disagreement (score of 1–3). Statistical measures such as content validity ratio and Kendall’s coefficient of concordance (W) were calculated to assess agreement levels. Results: Of the 46 assessment-related statements, 17 (37%) reached consensus, though overall pre-treatment assessments showed weak agreement (Kendall’s W = 0.319). Key areas of agreement included the use of the visual analogue scale, numeric rating scale, and validated questionnaires for pre-treatment evaluation. Five statements, such as the use of computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, and angiography for diagnosing pulsatile tinnitus, achieved over 90% agreement. For treatment outcome measurements, 8 of 12 statements (67%) reached a consensus, with moderate agreement (Kendall’s W = 0.513). Validated questionnaires and psychoacoustic tests were recommended for evaluating treatment effects within 12 weeks. While standardized imaging for pulsatile tinnitus and additional clinical tests were strongly recommended, full consensus was not achieved across all imaging modalities. Conclusion This study provides actionable recommendations for tinnitus assessment and treatment evaluation, emphasizing the use of standardized tools and individualized approaches based on patient needs. These findings offer a practical framework to enhance consistency and effectiveness in tinnitus management within Korean clinical settings.

Background: Tinnitus is a bothersome condition associated with various mechanisms of action. Although treatment methods vary according to these mechanisms, standardized guidelines would benefit both patients and clinicians. We conducted a Delphi study, a method that collects expert opinions through multiple rounds of questionnaires, to reach a consensus on tinnitus treatment with professional experts. Methods: A two-round modified Delphi survey was conducted to develop a clinical consensus on tinnitus treatment. The experts scored each statement on a scale of 1 (highest disagreement) to 9 (highest agreement) for their level of agreement on tinnitus treatment.Consensus was defined when 75% or more of the participants scored 7–9, and 15% or less scored 1–3. To ensure reliability of the responses, the content validity ratio and Kendall’s coefficient of concordance were evaluated. Results: Approximately 19 of 31 statements reached a consensus. All 3 statements reached a consensus regarding the candidates for treatment. Regarding treatment, 3 of 8 statements on medication, 2 of 2 statements on tinnitus retraining therapy/cognitive behavioral therapy, and 5 of 7 statements on auditory rehabilitation reached a positive consensus. Although all 6 statements regarding miscellaneous treatment reached a consensus, most were negatively agreed. For treatment with neuromodulation, none of the 5 statements reached a consensus. Conclusion The experts reached a high level of consensus on treatment candidates, tinnitus retraining therapy/cognitive behavioral therapy, and auditory rehabilitation in this modified Delphi study. The results of this study can provide beneficial and practical information for clinicians regarding the treatment of tinnitus.

Purpose: This study aimed to compare the wound cosmesis of a single-incision approach on scar assessment after laparoscopic surgery for colon cancer. Methods: This study included 32 patients undergoing single-port laparoscopic surgery (SPLS) and 61 patients undergoing multiport laparoscopic surgery (MPLS) for colon cancer at 3 tertiary referral hospitals between September 2011 and December 2019. We modified and applied the Korean version of the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS) to assess cosmetic outcomes. To assess the interobserver reliability using intraclass correlation coefficient values for the Observer Scar Assessment Scale (OSAS), the surgeons evaluated 5 images of postoperative scars. Results: No significant differences were observed in the time before the return of normal bowel function, time to sips of water and soft diet initiation, length of in-hospital stay, and postoperative complication rate. The SPLS group had a shorter total incision length than the MPLS group. The POSAS favored the SPLS approach, revealing significant differences in the Patient Scar Assessment Scale (PSAS), OSAS, and overall scores. The SPLS approach was an independent factor influencing the POSAS, PSAS, and OSAS scores. Eleven colorectal surgeons had a significantly substantial intraclass coefficient. Conclusion The cosmetic outcomes of SPLS as assessed by the patients and surgeons were superior to those of MPLS in colon cancer. Reducing the number of ports is an independent factor affecting scar assessment by patients and observers.

Purpose: This study aimed to compare the wound cosmesis of a single-incision approach on scar assessment after laparoscopic surgery for colon cancer. Methods: This study included 32 patients undergoing single-port laparoscopic surgery (SPLS) and 61 patients undergoing multiport laparoscopic surgery (MPLS) for colon cancer at 3 tertiary referral hospitals between September 2011 and December 2019. We modified and applied the Korean version of the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS) to assess cosmetic outcomes. To assess the interobserver reliability using intraclass correlation coefficient values for the Observer Scar Assessment Scale (OSAS), the surgeons evaluated 5 images of postoperative scars. Results: No significant differences were observed in the time before the return of normal bowel function, time to sips of water and soft diet initiation, length of in-hospital stay, and postoperative complication rate. The SPLS group had a shorter total incision length than the MPLS group. The POSAS favored the SPLS approach, revealing significant differences in the Patient Scar Assessment Scale (PSAS), OSAS, and overall scores. The SPLS approach was an independent factor influencing the POSAS, PSAS, and OSAS scores. Eleven colorectal surgeons had a significantly substantial intraclass coefficient. Conclusion The cosmetic outcomes of SPLS as assessed by the patients and surgeons were superior to those of MPLS in colon cancer. Reducing the number of ports is an independent factor affecting scar assessment by patients and observers.

Purpose: Common bile duct (CBD) stone recurrence after laparoscopic CBD exploration (LCBDE) is relatively common. No studies have been conducted evaluating the safety and feasibility of re-do LCBDE in the treatment of recurrent CBD stones. Methods: This single-center retrospective study reviewed 340 consecutive patients who underwent LCBDE for CBD stones between January 2004 and December 2020. Patients with pancreatobiliary malignancies and those who underwent other surgical procedures were excluded. Results: Of the 340 included patients, 45 experienced a recurrence after a mean follow-up period of 24.2 months. Of them, 18 underwent re-do LCBDE, 20 underwent endoscopic intervention, 2 underwent radiologic intervention, and 5 underwent observation. Re-do LCBDE and initial LCBDE showed similar surgical outcomes in terms of operative time (113.1 minutes vs. 107.5 minutes, P = 0.515), estimated blood loss (42.5 mL vs. 49.1 mL, P = 0.661), open conversion rate (2.9% vs. 0%, P = 0.461), postoperative complication (15.3% vs. 22.2%, P = 0.430), and postoperative hospital stay (6.5 days vs. 6.4 days, P = 0.921). Comparing re-do LCBDE and nonsurgical treatment (endoscopic or radiologic), no statistically significant differences were noted in posttreatment complication (22.2% vs. 13.6%, P = 0.477), hospital stay (6.4 days vs.7.3 days, P = 0.607), and recurrence (50.0% vs. 36.4%, P = 0.385). The clearance rate was higher in the re-do LCBDE group than in the nonsurgical group (100% vs. 81.8%, P = 0.057). Conclusion Compared to initial LCBDE and endoscopic or radiological treatments, re-do LCBDE for recurrent CBD stones is a treatment option worth considering in selected patients.