Objective: Although most gallbladder polyps are benign, some neoplastic polyps may be malignant or may serve as precursors to malignancy. Distinguishing neoplastic and non-neoplastic polyps using imaging examinations remains a major challenge.This meta-analysis aimed to identify the ultrasound (US) features that are significantly associated with neoplastic polyps. Materials and Methods: The MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane, and KoreaMed databases were searched for articles published up to August 31, 2025. Bivariate random-effects models were used to calculate the meta-analytic pooled diagnostic odds ratios (DORs), sensitivities, and specificities, along with their 95% confidence intervals (CIs), for each US imaging feature in the diagnosis of neoplastic polyps. Results: Thirty studies evaluating 8,953 patients, including 1,216 (13.6%) patients with neoplastic polyps, were included.Among the nine evaluated US imaging features, namely, size ≥10 mm, sessile morphology, single polyp, coexisting gallstones, hypoechogenicity, heterogeneous echogenicity, gallbladder wall thickening (GBWT), absence of hyperechoic spot, and vascularity, eight were significantly associated with neoplastic polyps: size ≥10 mm (DOR: 6.23 [95% CI: 1.86– 20.90]), sessile morphology (DOR: 3.54 [1.93–5.97]), single polyp (DOR: 2.21 [1.76–2.74]), coexisting gallstones (DOR:1.86 [1.29–2.60]), hypoechogenicity (DOR: 3.55 [1.47–7.30]), GBWT (DOR: 9.38 [1.47–32.20]), absence of hyperechoic spots (DOR: 4.23 [2.46–6.83]), and vascularity (DOR: 9.72 [5.81–15.30]). Of these, size ≥10 mm demonstrated the highest pooled sensitivity (0.79 [95% CI: 0.68–0.87]), whereas hypoechogenicity showed the highest pooled specificity (0.93 [95% CI: 0.82–0.98]). Conclusion Eight US imaging features (size ≥10 mm, sessile morphology, single polyp, coexisting gallstones, hypoechogenicity, GBWT, absence of hyperechoic spots, and vascularity) were significantly associated with the presence of neoplastic polyps.These features may facilitate the management of gallbladder polyps.

Incidentally detected gallbladder polyps (GBPs) and gallbladder wall thickening (GBWT) are frequently encountered in clinical practice. However, characterizing GBPs and GBWT in asymptomatic patients can be challenging and may result in overtreatment, including unnecessary follow-ups or surgeries. The Korean Society of Abdominal Radiology (KSAR) Clinical Practice Guideline Committee has developed expert recommendations that focus on standardized imaging interpretation and follow-up strategies for both GBPs and GBWT, with support from the Korean Society of Radiology and KSAR. These guidelines, which address 24 key questions, aim to standardize the approach for the interpretation of imaging findings, reporting, imaging-based workups, and surveillance of incidentally detected GBPs and GBWT. This recommendation promotes evidence-based practice, facilitates communication between radiologists and referring physicians, and reduces unnecessary interventions.

Incidentally detected gallbladder polyps (GBPs) and gallbladder wall thickening (GBWT) are frequently encountered in clinical practice. However, characterizing GBPs and GBWT in asymptomatic patients can be challenging and may result in overtreatment, including unnecessary follow-ups or surgeries. The Korean Society of Abdominal Radiology (KSAR) Clinical Practice Guideline Committee has developed expert recommendations that focus on standardized imaging interpretation and follow-up strategies for both GBPs and GBWT, with support from the Korean Society of Radiology and KSAR. These guidelines, which address 24 key questions, aim to standardize the approach for the interpretation of imaging findings, reporting, imaging-based workups, and surveillance of incidentally detected GBPs and GBWT. This recommendation promotes evidence-based practice, facilitates communication between radiologists and referring physicians, and reduces unnecessary interventions.

Incidentally detected gallbladder polyps (GBPs) and gallbladder wall thickening (GBWT) are frequently encountered in clinical practice. However, characterizing GBPs and GBWT in asymptomatic patients can be challenging and may result in overtreatment, including unnecessary follow-ups or surgeries. The Korean Society of Abdominal Radiology (KSAR) Clinical Practice Guideline Committee has developed expert recommendations that focus on standardized imaging interpretation and follow-up strategies for both GBPs and GBWT, with support from the Korean Society of Radiology and KSAR. These guidelines, which address 24 key questions, aim to standardize the approach for the interpretation of imaging findings, reporting, imaging-based workups, and surveillance of incidentally detected GBPs and GBWT. This recommendation promotes evidence-based practice, facilitates communication between radiologists and referring physicians, and reduces unnecessary interventions.

Incidentally detected gallbladder polyps (GBPs) and gallbladder wall thickening (GBWT) are frequently encountered in clinical practice. However, characterizing GBPs and GBWT in asymptomatic patients can be challenging and may result in overtreatment, including unnecessary follow-ups or surgeries. The Korean Society of Abdominal Radiology (KSAR) Clinical Practice Guideline Committee has developed expert recommendations that focus on standardized imaging interpretation and follow-up strategies for both GBPs and GBWT, with support from the Korean Society of Radiology and KSAR. These guidelines, which address 24 key questions, aim to standardize the approach for the interpretation of imaging findings, reporting, imaging-based workups, and surveillance of incidentally detected GBPs and GBWT. This recommendation promotes evidence-based practice, facilitates communication between radiologists and referring physicians, and reduces unnecessary interventions.

Incidentally detected gallbladder polyps (GBPs) and gallbladder wall thickening (GBWT) are frequently encountered in clinical practice. However, characterizing GBPs and GBWT in asymptomatic patients can be challenging and may result in overtreatment, including unnecessary follow-ups or surgeries. The Korean Society of Abdominal Radiology (KSAR) Clinical Practice Guideline Committee has developed expert recommendations that focus on standardized imaging interpretation and follow-up strategies for both GBPs and GBWT, with support from the Korean Society of Radiology and KSAR. These guidelines, which address 24 key questions, aim to standardize the approach for the interpretation of imaging findings, reporting, imaging-based workups, and surveillance of incidentally detected GBPs and GBWT. This recommendation promotes evidence-based practice, facilitates communication between radiologists and referring physicians, and reduces unnecessary interventions.

Purpose: Hilar cholangiocarcinoma is known for its poor prognosis due to late diagnosis. To achieve long-term survival, curative resection often is necessary. However, after surgical resection, the 5-year survival rates vary from 14% to 48%.The aim of this study is to evaluate the prognostic factors for long-term survival in hilar cholangiocarcinoma. Methods: Patients who underwent curative resection for hilar cholangiocarcinoma at Samsung Medical Center from January 2000 to December 2020 were included. Demographics, surgical and oncological outcomes, short-term complications, recurrence, pathologic results, and survival were analyzed. Prognostic factors were analyzed with Cox proportional hazards models. Results: A total of 449 patients diagnosed with hilar cholangiocarcinoma who underwent intent-to-treat resection at Samsung Medical Center from 2000 to 2020 were included in this study. The median disease-free survival was 19 months, and the median survival was 40 months. One-, 3-, and 5-year survival rates were 82.8%, 53.7%, and 35.8%, respectively. Conclusion The 5-year survival rate of patients with hilar cholangiocarcinoma was 35.8% at Samsung Medical Center.Median survival was 40 months. N2 stage and tumor biology were factors affecting 5-year survival.

Background: Although insulin resistance is common, its significance in kidney transplant recipients remains unclear. We explored clinical implications of the triglyceride-glucose (TyG) index as a marker for unfavorable allograft outcomes in kidney transplant recipients. Methods: A total of 6,354 kidney transplant recipients were enrolled in a multicenter prospective cohort study between May 2014 and December 2022. The TyG index was assessed between 6 and 12 months after transplantation. We evaluated the association between the TyG index and the risk of adverse kidney outcomes. Results: The cumulative rates of ≥50% decline in estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), death-censored graft survival, and major adverse kidney events differed across TyG index quartiles, with the highest rate observed in quartile 4 (p < 0.001). TyG index quartile 4 was associated with the highest risk of death-censored graft loss after multivariable adjustment (adjusted hazard ratio, 2.13; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.28–3.55). The risk of ≥30% decline in eGFR was 1.46 times higher (95% CI, 1.17–1.82) in quartile 4 compared with quartile 1, and the risk of ≥50% decline was 1.78 times higher (95% CI, 1.30–2.44). Quartile 4 also showed a significantly steeper decline in renal function, with an adjusted mean difference in eGFR slope of –4.72 mL/min/1.73 m2 (95% CI, –7.39 to –2.04). Conclusion Kidney transplant recipients with high TyG index were at increased risk of eGFR decline and graft loss, and also exhibited a more rapid deterioration in renal function. The TyG index is a useful marker for identifying individuals at high risk for adverse graft outcomes.

Objective: To survey experts’ opinions in abdominal radiology (radiologists) and pancreas-specialized gastroenterology (pancreatologists) in South Korea regarding diagnosing and managing pancreatic cystic neoplasms (PCNs). Materials and Methods: Between August 25, 2023, and October 5, 2023, an online survey was conducted among members of the Korean Society of Abdominal Radiology and the Korean Pancreatobiliary Association via email invitation. Results: The responses from 100 radiologists and 41 pancreatologists were analyzed. Of the respondents, 55.3% (78/141) reported seeing more than 50 patients or reading more than 50 exams related to PCN each month. The most common and preferred diagnostic modality for PCN was contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CECT), favored by 87.8% (36/41) of pancreatologists. When discrepancies arose between CECT or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and endoscopic ultrasound, 31.2% (44/141) of the respondents opted for multidisciplinary team discussion, whereas 29.1% (41/141) chose short-term follow-up using CECT or MRI. A total of 88.7% (125/141) of the respondents adhered to the 2017 International Association of Pancreatology (IAP) guidelines in their practice. Among the radiologists, 51.0% (51/100) endorsed a cut-off value of 5 mm for enhancing mural nodules, and 22.0% (22/100) supported a 5 mm/2 yr growth rate in the IAP guidelines v.2017.Additionally, 73.0% (73/100) of radiologists favored discontinuing surveillance, whereas 41.5% (17/41) of pancreatologists disagreed with stopping surveillance. Conclusion The survey underscores the clinical burden PCN poses and identifies CECT as the foremost diagnostic tool.Variability was noted in the terminology, differential diagnosis, approaches for resolving discrepancies between imaging examinations, and opinions on surveillance discontinuation among the respondents as a whole, as well as between radiologists and pancreatologists. Although the 2017 IAP guidelines are primarily followed, there remains a level of dissatisfaction with risk stratification among radiologists. This highlights the need for more standardized diagnostic algorithms and improved consensus among specialists to address these challenges.

Objective: To survey experts’ opinions in abdominal radiology (radiologists) and pancreas-specialized gastroenterology (pancreatologists) in South Korea regarding diagnosing and managing pancreatic cystic neoplasms (PCNs). Materials and Methods: Between August 25, 2023, and October 5, 2023, an online survey was conducted among members of the Korean Society of Abdominal Radiology and the Korean Pancreatobiliary Association via email invitation. Results: The responses from 100 radiologists and 41 pancreatologists were analyzed. Of the respondents, 55.3% (78/141) reported seeing more than 50 patients or reading more than 50 exams related to PCN each month. The most common and preferred diagnostic modality for PCN was contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CECT), favored by 87.8% (36/41) of pancreatologists. When discrepancies arose between CECT or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and endoscopic ultrasound, 31.2% (44/141) of the respondents opted for multidisciplinary team discussion, whereas 29.1% (41/141) chose short-term follow-up using CECT or MRI. A total of 88.7% (125/141) of the respondents adhered to the 2017 International Association of Pancreatology (IAP) guidelines in their practice. Among the radiologists, 51.0% (51/100) endorsed a cut-off value of 5 mm for enhancing mural nodules, and 22.0% (22/100) supported a 5 mm/2 yr growth rate in the IAP guidelines v.2017.Additionally, 73.0% (73/100) of radiologists favored discontinuing surveillance, whereas 41.5% (17/41) of pancreatologists disagreed with stopping surveillance. Conclusion The survey underscores the clinical burden PCN poses and identifies CECT as the foremost diagnostic tool.Variability was noted in the terminology, differential diagnosis, approaches for resolving discrepancies between imaging examinations, and opinions on surveillance discontinuation among the respondents as a whole, as well as between radiologists and pancreatologists. Although the 2017 IAP guidelines are primarily followed, there remains a level of dissatisfaction with risk stratification among radiologists. This highlights the need for more standardized diagnostic algorithms and improved consensus among specialists to address these challenges.