Background: A systematic evaluation of potential living liver donors is essential to ensure donor safety and optimize recipient outcomes in living donor liver transplantation (LDLT). This study aimed to assess donor acceptance rates and reasons for disqualification among individuals evaluated for LDLT at a high-volume transplant center over a one-year period. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 1,087 potential living liver donors who presented for LDLT evaluation in 2023. Of these, 991 candidates advanced beyond the initial screening (Stage 1) and underwent comprehensive clinical, imaging, and pathological assessments (Stages 2 and 3). Candidates who discontinued after Stage 1 were excluded due to the absence of documented reasons for non-progression. Results: Among the 991 candidates who proceeded beyond initial screening, 473 (47.7%) completed the full donor evaluation, of whom 466 were judged to be suitable donors. Among suitable donors, 384 (82.4%) proceeded to donor hepatectomy, whereas 82 did not, primarily due to recipient-related factors such as clinical deterioration or withdrawal of consent. Donor ineligibility was determined in 422 candidates (42.6%), most commonly due to inadequate remnant liver volume (52.8%), hepatic steatosis (20.6%), and insufficient graft size (10.2%). Among candidates undergoing Stage 2 evaluation, 162 (16.3%) failed to meet steatosis criteria; 126 were excluded solely for steatosis and advised weight reduction, and 39 subsequently became eligible and successfully donated. Conclusion In this high-volume LDLT center, donor disqualification was primarily driven by remnant liver volume and hepatic steatosis. Targeted interventions such as weight reduction enabled successful donation in a subset of initially ineligible candidates, underscoring the importance of individualized donor evaluation and pre-donation optimization.

Background: We developed a simplified variant of the ADV score, the AFP-PIVKAII (AP) score for post-transplant hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) prognosis, which considers only AFP and PIVKA-II levels excluding morphometric tumor size information from the ADV score. This study investigated the prognostic performance of the AP score in predicting HCC recurrence and overall survival (OS) after living donor liver transplantation (LDLT). Methods: We analyzed 843 patients with HCC who underwent LDLT between 2006 and 2015, assessing HCC recurrence and OS in relation to AP score. Results: The median pretransplant AFP and PIVKA-II levels were 12.8 ng/mL and 27 mAU/mL, respectively. The median and mean AP scores were 2.6 log (range: 0.6–9.2 log) and 2.9±1.1 log, respectively. The 5-year time-dependent area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for the AP score in predicting post-transplant HCC recurrence was 0.672 (p<0.001). HCC recurrence and OS curves along AP score intervals of 1.0 log showed statistical differences in accordance with the AP scores (both p<0.001). Using a Youden index J-derived AP score cutoff of 4.0 log, two-tiered groups (ADV <4.0 log vs. ADV ≥4.0 log) showed statistically significant differences in HCC recurrence and OS (both p<0.001). Harrell’s c-indices for AP score with cutoff of 4.0 log and ADV scores with cutoff of 5.0 log regarding HCC recurrence and OS were similar. Conclusion The AP score functions as an integrated surrogate marker for predicting post-transplant outcomes in patients with HCC undergoing LDLT. It may serve as a simplified alternative to the ADV score, particularly in patients with small HCCs.

Background: Studies on whether donor-to-recipient sex match status affects long-term survival after liver transplantation (LT) have yielded contradictory results. This study evaluated whether donor-to-recipient sex match status influenced long-term survival after living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) or deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT) at a high-volume center. Methods: The study included 6,664 patients who underwent primary LT between January 2000 and December 2022 at our institution. Patients were divided into four groups according to donor-to-recipient sex match status: male-to-male (n=3,427 [51.4%]), male-to-female (n=1,152 [17.3%]), female-to-male (n=1,385 [20.8%]), and female-to-female (n=700 [10.5%]). Results: Regarding clinical characteristics, the four groups differed significantly regarding background liver disease (P<0.001), model for end-stage liver disease score (P<0.001), serum protein induced by vitamin K absence or antagonist II level (P=0.003), presence of concurrent hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC; P<0.001), and type of LT (P=0.003). Overall survival (OS) of all LT recipients did not differ significantly among the groups (P=0.377). Donor-to-recipient sex match status did not affect long-term OS in either LDLT (P=0.176) or DDLT (P=0.220) groups. In addition, sex match status did not significantly influence posttransplant OS among patients who underwent LDLT without HCC (P=0.464), LDLT with HCC (P=0.236), DDLT without HCC (P=0.338), or DDLT with HCC (P=0.818). Conclusions Donor-to-recipient sex match status does not significantly affect posttransplant patient survival or HCC prognosis after LDLT or DDLT.

Purpose: Huge (≥10 cm) hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) poses significant treatment and prognosis challenges. This study aimed to determine whether preoperative transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) for huge HCC is necessary. Methods: This single-center, retrospective cohort study evaluated 435 patients with huge HCC who underwent upfront hepatectomy or hepatectomy after preoperative TACE from January 2009 to December 2018. TACE’s impact on survival and prognostic factors, including microvascular invasion (MVI) and satellite nodules (SNs), was analyzed. Results: The preoperative TACE group (n = 33) had a lower incidence of MVI (P = 0.009) and higher postoperative morbidity (P = 0.001), particularly pleural effusion (P = 0.004) and Clavien-Dindo class III–IV complications (P = 0.033), compared with the upfront hepatectomy group (n = 402). Short-term mortality (P = 0.828) and recurrence within 6 months (P = 0.654) were comparable between groups. The 1-, 3-, and 5-year survival curves showed no significant between-group differences in recurrence-free survival (RFS) (P = 0.172) and overall survival (OS) (P = 0.450). Local regional therapy for intrahepatic recurrences and surgical resection for extrahepatic recurrences were associated with better OS. MVI, SN, and hepatic vein tumor thrombosis were identified as significant risk factors for poorer RFS and OS. In patients without SN, preoperative TACE improved RFS (P = 0.039) but not OS. Conclusion Preoperative TACE for huge HCC was associated with reduced MVI but did not improve RFS and OS. Survival outcomes were more significantly influenced by SN, suggesting that upfront hepatectomy without TACE should be prioritized.

Purpose: This study aimed to describe adult living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) for acute liver failure and evaluate its clinical significance by comparing its surgical and survival outcomes with those of deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT). Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of 267 consecutive patients (161 LDLT recipients and 106 DDLT recipients) aged 18 years or older who underwent liver transplantation between January 2006 and December 2020. Results: The mean periods from hepatic encephalopathy to liver transplantation were 5.85 days and 8.35 days for LDLT and DDLT, respectively (P = 0.091). Among these patients, 121 (45.3%) had grade III or IV hepatic encephalopathy (living, 34.8% vs. deceased, 61.3%; P < 0.001), and 38 (14.2%) had brain edema (living, 16.1% vs. deceased, 11.3%; P = 0.269) before liver transplantation. There were no significant differences in in-hospital mortality (living, 11.8% vs. deceased, 15.1%; P = 0.435), 10-year overall survival (living, 90.8% vs. deceased, 84.0%; P = 0.096), and graft survival (living, 83.5% vs. deceased, 71.3%;P = 0.051). However, postoperatively, the mean intensive care unit stay was shorter in the LDLT group (5.0 days vs. 9.5 days, P < 0.001). In-hospital mortality was associated with vasopressor use (odds ratio [OR], 3.40; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.45–7.96; P = 0.005) and brain edema (OR, 2.75; 95% CI, 1.16–6.52; P = 0.022) of recipient at the time of transplantation. However, LDLT (OR, 1.26; 95% CI, 0.59–2.66; P = 0.553) was not independently associated with in-hospital mortality. Conclusion LDLT is feasible for acute liver failure when organs from deceased donors are not available.

Background/Aims: Acute pancreatitis (AP) is a leading cause of emergency hospitalization. We present the current diagnostic and therapeutic status of AP as revealed by analysis of a large multicenter dataset. Methods: The medical records of patients diagnosed with AP between 2018 and 2019 in 12 tertiary medical centers in Korea were retrospectively reviewed. Results: In total, 676 patients were included, of whom 388 (57.4%) were male, and the mean age of all patients was 58.6 years. There were 355 (52.5%), 301 (44.5%), and 20 (3.0%) patients with mild, moderate, and severe AP, respectively, as assessed by the revised Atlanta classification. The most common etiologies of AP were biliary issues (41.6%) and alcohol consumption (24.6%), followed by hypertriglyceridemia (6.8%). The etiology was not identified in 111 (16.4%) patients at the time of initial admission. The overall mortality rate was 3.3%, increasing up to 45.0% among patients with severe AP. Notably, 70.0% (14/20) of patients with severe AP and 81.5% (154/189) of patients with systemic inflammatory response syndrome had received <4 L per day during the initial 24 hours of admission. Only 23.8% (67/281) of acute biliary pancreatitis patients underwent cholecystectomy during their initial admission. In total, 17.8% of patients experienced recurrent attacks during follow-up. However, none of the patients with acute biliary pancreatitis experienced recurrent attacks if they had undergone cholecystectomy during their initial admission. Conclusions This study provides insights into the current status of AP in Korea, including its etiology, severity, and management. Results reveal disparities between clinical guidelines and their practical implementation for AP treatment.

Remarkable progress has recently been achieved in blood pressure (BP) control based on key research findings in the general population. It has been observed that maintaining BP slightly lower than previously recommended goals leads to better clinical outcomes, provided that patients can tolerate it. Previously, BP control targets for dialysis patients were extrapolated from studies conducted on the general population. However, dialysis patients are considered a distinct group with unique characteristics, which makes defining appropriate BP targets a matter of debate. Several observational studies measuring BP in hemodialysis (HD) patients within dialysis units have shown that lower peridialysis BP (pre-, post-, and interdialytic BP) is associated with worse clinical outcomes. However, this association is likely confounded by factors specific to dialysis patients. The relationship between BP and mortality appears to be more linear in patients with fewer underlying cardiovascular diseases and longer survival. Recent studies have indicated that BP measurements taken outside of dialysis sessions, such as standardized BP on nondialysis days, home BP, and ambulatory BP monitoring between HD sessions, are more predictive of clinical outcomes. Due to the varied effects of dialysis-related treatment practices on BP, there is a lack of data from large-scale clinical trials. As a result, it is challenging to provide strong recommendations for BP targets directly applicable to dialysis patients. This review addresses various factors influencing BP in dialysis patients, including the establishment of individualized target BP levels and discussions on maintenance strategies, while incorporating a recent literature review.

Purpose: To investigate the prevalence of lower urinary tract symptoms/benign prostatic hyperplasia in a Korean population. Materials and Methods: The Korean Prostate & Voiding Health Association provided free prostate-related community health care and conducted surveys in all regions of Korea from 2001 to 2022 with the cooperation of local government public health centers. A total of 72,068 males older than 50 were surveyed and analyzed. History taking, International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), transrectal ultrasonography, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing, uroflowmetry, and urine volume testing were performed. Results: The mean prostate volumes in males in their 50s, 60s, 70s, and 80s or above were 24.7 g, 27.7 g, 31 g, and 33.7 g, respectively. The proportion of males with high PSA greater than 3 ng/mL was 3.8% among males in their 50s, 7.7% among males in their 60s, 13.1% among males in their 70s, and 17.9% among males 80 years of age or older. The mean IPSS total scores in males in their 50s, 60s, 70s, and 80s or above were 10.7, 12.7, 14.5, and 16, respectively. Severe symptoms were reported by 27.3% of males, whereas 51.7% reported moderate symptoms. The mean Qmax in males in their 50s, 60s, 70s, and 80s or above were 20 mL/s, 17.4 mL/s, 15.4 mL/s, and 13.8 mL/s, respectively. Conclusions In this population-based study, mean prostate volume, IPSS, PSA, and Qmax were 30.6±15.1 g, 14.8±8.2, 1.9±4.7 ng/mL, and 15.6±6.5 mL/s, respectively. Aging was significantly associated with increased prostate volume, PSA levels, and IPSS scores, and with decreased Qmax and urine volume.

Background: As the prevalence of obesity and nonalcoholic fatty liver disease increases in recent years, the number of living donor liver transplantation from donor with high body mass index (BMI) is increasing. However, data on the effect of high BMI on outcomes in liver donors are lacking. This study aimed to investigate the influence of donor obesity (BMI ≥30 kg/m2 ) on and clinical outcomes after donor right liver resection (DRLR). Methods: Records of all living donors who underwent DRLR between January 2015 and December 2020 at Asan Medical Center were retrospectively reviewed. We divided donors into obese (BMI ≥30 kg/m2 , n=41) and normal-weight (BMI ≤25 kg/m2 , n=1,125) groups. To eliminate bias, matching was performed using the greedy method, and 34 donors involved in this study in each group. Results: After matching, preoperatively, the obese group had significantly higher preoperative levels of serum aspartate aminotransferase (p=0.021), alanine aminotransferase (p=0.003), and a larger celiac artery depth ratio (p<0.001) and graft volume (p<0.001) than the normal-weight group. When comparing perioperative outcomes of donor, the operation time was longer in the obese group (p=0.019), but no difference was observed in postoperative major complication rates (p=0.314), lengths of hospital stay (p=0.607), and readmission rate (p>0.999). Furthermore, both groups had similar major surgical outcomes of recipients including biliary (p=0.163) complications and lengths of hospital stay (p=0.445). Conclusion DRLR may be safely performed in a select group of high BMI donors with ≥30 kg/m2 without uncontrolled metabolic disease and significant liver steatosis in the absence of other suitable living donors.

Allergic rhinitis is the most common chronic disease worldwide. Various upper airway symptoms lower quality of life, and due to the recurrent symptoms, multiple treatments are usually attempted rather than one definitive treatment. There are alternatives to medical (medication-based) and nonmedical treatments. A guideline is needed to understand allergic rhinitis and develop an appropriate treatment plan. We have developed guidelines for medical treatment based on previous reports. The current guidelines herein are associated with the “KAAACI Evidence-Based Guidelines for Allergic Rhinitis in Korea, Part 1: Update in pharmacotherapy” in which we aimed to provide evidence-based recommendations for the medical treatment of allergic rhinitis. Part 2 focuses on nonpharmacological management, including allergen-specific immunotherapy, subcutaneous or sublingual immunotherapy, nasal saline irrigation, environmental management strategies, companion animal management, and nasal turbinate surgery. The evidence to support the treatment efficacy, safety, and selection has been systematically reviewed. However, larger controlled studies are needed to elevate the level of evidence to select rational non-medical therapeutic options for patients with allergic rhinitis.