Rectal cancer, which accounts for approximately 40% of colorectal cancers, remains a major clinical concern. Recent advances in diagnostic imaging, surgical techniques, radiotherapy, and systemic treatment have steadily improved rectal cancer outcomes. Considering this, the Korean Rectal Cancer Multidisciplinary (KRCM) Committee has aimed to provide clinicians and policymakers with up-to-date, evidence-based clinical practice guidelines to support optimal decision-making, reflecting current evidence, the Korean healthcare context, and patient values and preferences. The Clinical Practice Guidelines for Rectal Cancer version 2.0 were developed through multidisciplinary collaboration with related academic societies, building upon and updating the KRCM Clinical Practice Guidelines version 1.0 (titled “Multidisciplinary guidelines for the management of rectal cancer”). These consensus guidelines of the KRCM were established based on a comprehensive literature review, evidence synthesis, with recommendation development guided by the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) methodology, and consideration of applicability in real-world clinical practice under the national health insurance system. Each recommendation has been presented with its strength and level of evidence.

Colorectal cancer is the third most common cancer in Korea and the third leading cause of death from cancer. Treatment outcomes for colon cancer are steadily improving due to national health screening programs with advances in diagnostic methods, surgical techniques, and therapeutic agents.. The Korea Colon Cancer Multidisciplinary (KCCM) Committee intends to provide professionals who treat colon cancer with the most up-to-date, evidence-based practice guidelines to improve outcomes and help them make decisions that reflect their patients’ values and preferences. These guidelines have been established by consensus reached by the KCCM Guideline Committee based on a systematic literature review and evidence synthesis and by considering the national health insurance system in real clinical practice settings. Each recommendation is presented with a recommendation strength and level of evidence based on the consensus of the committee.

Background: Maintaining a usual source of care (USC), which is crucial for primary healthcare, encompasses initial contact, comprehensive services, coordinated care, and ongoing support. However, limited research exists on the relationship between USC and medication adherence in patients with hypertension. This study aimed to investigate the association between USC and medication adherence among patients with hypertension. Methods: Data from the 2nd Korea Health Panel Survey 2020 were analyzed. The final sample consisted of 3,318 participants aged 19 years or older diagnosed with hypertension. USC was categorized into three groups: no USC, place only (without a regular doctor), and regular doctor. Medication adherence was assessed using detailed items (dose, frequency, time, no stop) and a 4-point Likert scale. A logistic regression analysis was conducted with control for relevant variables. Results: Compared to the no USC group, the regular doctor group had significantly higher odds ratios (ORs) for overall perfect/high medication adherence rates: 1.70 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.42–2.03) and 1.59 (95% CI, 1.14–2.20). Similar results were observed for each adherence item, including prefect dose (OR, 2.14; 95% CI, 1.73– 2.63), frequency (OR, 1.87; 95% CI, 1.53–2.28), time (OR, 1.72; 95% CI, 1.43–2.07), and no stop (OR, 1.56; 95% CI, 1.09–2.23)/high frequency (OR, 2.47; 95% CI, 1.21–5.01), time (OR, 2.30; 95% CI, 1.19–4.44). However, the place only group showed no significant differences in medication adherence except for perfect adherence to dose (OR, 1.35; 95% CI, 1.06–1.71). Conclusion These findings provide evidence supporting the need for healthcare policies that encourage having a regular doctor in South Korea, which has a healthcare system with limited primary care.

Patients on dialysis have numerous gastrointestinal problems related to uremia, which may represent concealed cholecystitis. We investigated the incidence and risk of acute cholecystitis in dialysis patients and used national health insurance data to identify acute cholecystitis in Korea. Methods: The Korean National Health Insurance Database was used, with excerpted data from the insurance claim of the International Classification of Diseases code of dialysis and acute cholecystitis treated with cholecystectomy. We included all patients who commenced dialysis between 2004 and 2013 and selected the same number of controls via propensity score matching. Results: A total of 59,999 dialysis and control patients were analyzed; of these, 3,940 dialysis patients (6.6%) and 647 controls (1.1%) developed acute cholecystitis. The overall incidence of acute cholecystitis was 8.04-fold higher in dialysis patients than in controls (95% confidence interval, 7.40–8.76). The acute cholecystitis incidence rate (incidence rate ratio, 23.13) was especially high in the oldest group of dialysis patients (aged ≥80 years) compared with that of controls. Dialysis was a significant risk factor for acute cholecystitis (adjusted hazard ratio, 8.94; 95% confidence interval, 8.19–9.76). Acute cholecystitis developed in 3,558 of 54,103 hemodialysis patients (6.6%) and in 382 of 5,896 patients (6.5%) undergoing peritoneal dialysis. Conclusion: Patients undergoing dialysis had a higher incidence and risk of acute cholecystitis than the general population. The possibility of a gallbladder disorder developing in patients with gastrointestinal problems should be considered in the dialysis clinic.

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is a condition in which gastric contents regurgitate into the esophagus or beyond, resulting in either troublesome symptoms or complications. GERD is heterogeneous in terms of varied manifestations, test findings, and treatment responsiveness. GERD diagnosis can be established with symptomatology, pathology, or physiology. Recently the Lyon consensus defined the “proven GERD” with concrete evidence for reflux, including advanced grade erosive esophagitis (Los Angeles classification grades C and or D esophagitis), long-segment Barrett’s mucosa or peptic strictures on endoscopy or distal esophageal acid exposure time > 6% on 24-hour ambulatory pH-impedance monitoring. However, some Asian researchers have different opinions on whether the same standards should be applied to the Asian population. The prevalence of GERD is increasing in Asia. The present evidence-based guidelines were developed using a systematic review and meta-analysis approach. In GERD with typical symptoms, a proton pump inhibitor test can be recommended as a sensitive, cost-effective, and practical test for GERD diagnosis. Based on a meta-analysis of 19 estimated acid-exposure time values in Asians, the reference range upper limit for esophageal acid exposure time was 3.2% (95% confidence interval 2.7-3.9%) in the Asian countries. Esophageal manometry and novel impedance measurements, including mucosal impedance and a post-reflux swallow-induced peristaltic wave, are promising in discrimination of GERD among different reflux phenotypes, thus increasing its diagnostic yield. We also propose a long-term strategy of evidence-based GERD treatment with proton pump inhibitors and other drugs.

Background: We investigated the incidence and risk of retinal vein occlusion (RVO) in endstage renal disease (ESRD) patients on dialysis in Korea. Methods: In this nationwide cohort study, we used Korean National Health Insurance Service data between 2004 and 2013 for analysis. ESRD patients who started dialysis from 2004 to 2013 and an equal number of controls were selected through propensity score matching. RVO incidence in both cohorts were calculated for 2004–2013 using washout data from 2003. The multivariable Cox proportional hazards model was used to assess the risk of RVO in dialysis cohort. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to generate the cumulative RVO incidence curve.Whether the dialysis modality affects the development of RVO was also evaluated. Results: In this study, 74,551 ESRD patients on dialysis and the same number of controls were included. The incidence of RVO was significantly higher in the dialysis cohort than in the control cohort (dialysis = 7.3/1,000 person-years [PY]; control = 1.9/1,000 PY; P < 0.001). The cumulative-incidence of RVO was also significantly higher in the dialysis cohort than in the control cohort (P < 0.001; log-rank test). However, there was no significant difference in the incidence of RVO between the two dialysis methods (P = 0.550; log-rank test). Conclusion This study provided epidemiological evidence that receiving dialysis for ESRD could increase the risk of developing RVO. We also found a rapid increase in the incidence of RVO with a longer dialysis period. These results strengthen the relationship between retinal vascular disease and renal function.

Background: We investigated the incidence and risk of retinal vein occlusion (RVO) in endstage renal disease (ESRD) patients on dialysis in Korea. Methods: In this nationwide cohort study, we used Korean National Health Insurance Service data between 2004 and 2013 for analysis. ESRD patients who started dialysis from 2004 to 2013 and an equal number of controls were selected through propensity score matching. RVO incidence in both cohorts were calculated for 2004–2013 using washout data from 2003. The multivariable Cox proportional hazards model was used to assess the risk of RVO in dialysis cohort. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to generate the cumulative RVO incidence curve.Whether the dialysis modality affects the development of RVO was also evaluated. Results: In this study, 74,551 ESRD patients on dialysis and the same number of controls were included. The incidence of RVO was significantly higher in the dialysis cohort than in the control cohort (dialysis = 7.3/1,000 person-years [PY]; control = 1.9/1,000 PY; P < 0.001). The cumulative-incidence of RVO was also significantly higher in the dialysis cohort than in the control cohort (P < 0.001; log-rank test). However, there was no significant difference in the incidence of RVO between the two dialysis methods (P = 0.550; log-rank test). Conclusion This study provided epidemiological evidence that receiving dialysis for ESRD could increase the risk of developing RVO. We also found a rapid increase in the incidence of RVO with a longer dialysis period. These results strengthen the relationship between retinal vascular disease and renal function.

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is a condition in which gastric contents regurgitate into the esophagus or beyond, resulting in either troublesome symptoms or complications. GERD is heterogeneous in terms of varied manifestations, test findings, and treatment responsiveness. GERD diagnosis can be established with symptomatology, pathology, or physiology. Recently the Lyon consensus defined the “proven GERD” with concrete evidence for reflux, including advanced grade erosive esophagitis (Los Angeles classification grades C and or D esophagitis), long-segment Barrett’s mucosa or peptic strictures on endoscopy or distal esophageal acid exposure time > 6% on 24-hour ambulatory pH-impedance monitoring. However, some Asian researchers have different opinions on whether the same standards should be applied to the Asian population. The prevalence of GERD is increasing in Asia. The present evidence-based guidelines were developed using a systematic review and meta-analysis approach. In GERD with typical symptoms, a proton pump inhibitor test can be recommended as a sensitive, cost-effective, and practical test for GERD diagnosis.Based on a meta-analysis of 19 estimated acid-exposure time values in Asians, the reference range upper limit for esophageal acid exposure time was 3.2% (95% confidence interval, 2.7-3.9%) in the Asian countries. Esophageal manometry and novel impedance measurements, including mucosal impedance and a post-reflux swallow-induced peristaltic wave, are promising in discrimination of GERD among different reflux phenotypes, thus increasing its diagnostic yield. We also propose a long-term strategy of evidence-based GERD treatment with proton pump inhibitors and other drugs.

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is a condition in which gastric contents regurgitate into the esophagus or beyond, resulting in either troublesome symptoms or complications. GERD is heterogeneous in terms of varied manifestations, test findings, and treatment responsiveness. GERD diagnosis can be established with symptomatology, pathology, or physiology. Recently the Lyon consensus defined the “proven GERD” with concrete evidence for reflux, including advanced grade erosive esophagitis (Los Angeles classification grades C and or D esophagitis), long-segment Barrett’s mucosa or peptic strictures on endoscopy or distal esophageal acid exposure time > 6% on 24-hour ambulatory pH-impedance monitoring. However, some Asian researchers have different opinions on whether the same standards should be applied to the Asian population. The prevalence of GERD is increasing in Asia. The present evidence-based guidelines were developed using a systematic review and meta-analysis approach. In GERD with typical symptoms, a proton pump inhibitor test can be recommended as a sensitive, cost-effective, and practical test for GERD diagnosis.Based on a meta-analysis of 19 estimated acid-exposure time values in Asians, the reference range upper limit for esophageal acid exposure time was 3.2% (95% confidence interval, 2.7-3.9%) in the Asian countries. Esophageal manometry and novel impedance measurements, including mucosal impedance and a post-reflux swallow-induced peristaltic wave, are promising in discrimination of GERD among different reflux phenotypes, thus increasing its diagnostic yield. We also propose a long-term strategy of evidence-based GERD treatment with proton pump inhibitors and other drugs.

BACKGROUND: The numbers of patients on dialysis and their life expectancies are increasing. Reduced renal function is associated with an increased risk of cancer, but the cancer incidence and sites in dialysis patients compared with those of the general population require further investigation. We investigated the incidences of various cancers in dialysis patients in Korea and used national health insurance data to identify cancers that should be screened in dialysis clinics. METHODS: We accessed the Korean National Health Insurance Database and excerpted data using the International Classification of Disease codes for dialysis and malignancies. We included all patients who commenced dialysis between 2004 and 2013 and selected the same number of controls via propensity score matching. RESULTS: A total of 48,315 dialysis patients and controls were evaluated; of these, 2,504 (5.2%) dialysis patients and 2,201 (4.6%) controls developed cancer. The overall cancer risk was 1.54-fold higher in dialysis patients than in controls (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.71; 95% confidence interval, 1.61–1.81). The cancer incidence rate (incidence rate ratio [IRR], 3.27) was especially high in younger dialysis patients (aged 0–29 years). The most common malignancy of end-stage renal disease patients and controls was colorectal cancer. The major primary cancer sites in dialysis patients were liver and stomach, followed by the lung, kidney, and urinary tract. Kidney cancer exhibited the highest IRR (6.75), followed by upper urinary tract (4.00) and skin cancer (3.38). The rates of prostate cancer (0.54) and oropharyngeal cancer (0.72) were lower than those in the general population. CONCLUSION: Dialysis patients exhibited a higher incidence of malignancy than controls. Dialysis patients should be screened in terms of colorectal, liver, lung, kidney and urinary tract malignancies in dialysis clinics.
Colorectal Neoplasms ; Dialysis ; Epidemiology ; Humans ; Incidence ; International Classification of Diseases ; Kidney ; Kidney Failure, Chronic ; Kidney Neoplasms ; Korea ; Life Expectancy ; Liver ; Lung ; National Health Programs ; Oropharyngeal Neoplasms ; Propensity Score ; Prostatic Neoplasms ; Renal Dialysis ; Skin Neoplasms ; Stomach ; Urinary Tract