Purpose: This study aimed to explore the practices, perceptions, and barriers related to specialty palliative care (SPC) referrals among oncologists in Korea, highlighting the clinical implications of early integration. Materials and Methods: A cross-sectional online survey targeting board-certified hemato-oncology specialists was conducted between August 1-25, 2024. The survey assessed referral practices, attitudes toward early SPC integration, referral criteria, barriers, and institutional characteristics. Results: A total of 227 oncologists participated (response rate, 36.7%). Among them, 68.7% reported frequent SPC referrals, with higher referral rates observed among younger physicians, those in tertiary hospitals, and institutions with in-house SPC teams (p < 0.001). Although 74.9% supported early SPC integration, referrals were often inconsistently timed, frequently occurring after disease progression or at the discontinuation of chemotherapy. For time-based referrals, the most commonly endorsed triggers were disease progression despite palliative second-line treatment and a prognosis of expected mortality within 6-12 months. Need-based referral triggers such as patient or family requests (96.5%), psychological distress (89.9%), or uncontrolled symptoms (83.3%), were also widely endorsed. The major barriers to early SPC integration included patient and family resistance (70.0%) and limited availability of SPC teams (34.4%). Conclusion This study emphasizes the importance of systematic efforts to promote timely SPC integration in Korea, including education to raise patient awareness, improved referral systems, and enhanced infrastructure. The positive attitudes toward early SPC among oncologists reflect a growing recognition of its value, highlighting the need for strategies that align with international standards.

Limited data exist regarding the real-world practices and clinical outcomes in patients with ischemic heart failure with reduced left ventricular ejection fractions (LVEFs).Using nationwide registry data from South Korea, we aimed to investigate long-term outcomes and clinical practices, especially implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) implantation, in patients with reduced LVEFs at least 40 days after acute myocardial infarction (AMI). Of 13,056 patients with AMI between 2011 and 2015, we analyzed 350 (median age, 66 years [interquartile range, 56-75]) who had LVEFs <40% on follow-up transthoracic echocardiogram 40 days after the index event. The primary outcome was cardiac-cause mortality at 3 years. Secondary outcomes comprised major cardiovascular events as well as outcomes defined by the use of ICDs, cardiac resynchronization therapy defibrillators (CRT-Ds), and electrophysiology studies. Among 350 patients, 39 (11.1%) died from cardiac causes during 3 years of follow-up. Eleven (3.1%) were hospitalized for ventricular tachycardia. The rate of ICD or CRT-D implantation up to 3 years was 5.7% (20/350). Cox time-to-event analysis revealed older age, LVEF <30%, diabetes mellitus, and previous MI or revascularization as positively associated with cardiac death, whereas the use of statins and body weight <67 kg were negatively associated. This nationwide Korean registry demonstrated that only 5.7% of patients who had reduced LVEFs after 40 days of AMI underwent ICD implantations over 3 years. Considering the high mortality, concerted efforts are needed to improve clinical outcomes for patients who may have been candidates for ICD implantation.

Purpose: Atypical hyperplasia (AH) management remains controversial due to variable malignant disease progression rates. While Western studies report 10% to 25% upgrade rates, data from Asian populations, particularly from referral academic centers, are limited. We aimed to identify predictive factors for malignant upgrade in Korean women with AH at academic hospitals. Methods: This retrospective multi-institutional study analyzed 340 patients diagnosed with AH on initial biopsy who underwent subsequent excision at five Korean academic hospitals from 2000 to 2022. Malignant upgrade was defined as ductal carcinoma in situ or invasive cancer on the final pathology. Multivariate logistic regression was used to identify independent predictors of upgrades. Results: Among 340 patients (319 atypical ductal hyperplasia, 20 atypical lobular hyperplasia, and 1 mixed), 128 (37.6%) experienced a malignant upgrade, 98 (76.6%) to ductal carcinoma in situ, and 30 (23.4%) to invasive cancer. In multivariate analysis, multifocal atypia (odds ratio [OR], 25.61; 95% confidence interval [CI], 11.20–58.55; P<0.001) and Breast Imaging-Reporting and Data System 4c-5 lesions (OR, 11.02; 95% CI, 1.43–84.86; P=0.021) were significant predictors. Multifocal atypia showed an 84.4% upgrade rate. Core needle biopsy had higher upgrade rates than vacuum-assisted biopsy (45.2% vs. 20.0%; P<0.001). The upgrade rates decreased from 50% to 25% over the study period (P<0.05). Conclusion The 37.6% upgrade rate in this tertiary referral cohort exceeded that in Western reports, with multifocal atypia emerging as the strongest predictor. These findings support immediate excision for multifocal atypia while allowing individualized management for unifocal lesions with favorable imaging in Korean tertiary care settings.

Background: and Purpose Criteria for amyloid-related imaging abnormalities in anti-amyloid therapy are based on T2* gradient-recalled echo (GRE), but susceptibility-weighted imaging (SWI) is widely used, creating uncertainty. This study quantitatively compared the detectability of SWI and GRE for cerebral microbleeds and established evidence supporting distinct microbleed criteria for each. Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted following PRISMA guidelines. PubMed and Embase were searched for studies directly comparing SWI and GRE up to August 8, 2024. Study quality was assessed with QUADAS-2. The pooled proportion of microbleed detection and detection ratio were calculated. Subgroup analyses were performed based on magnetic field strength (1.5 T vs. 3 T) and SWI slice thickness (<2 mm vs. ≥2 mm), equipment vendor, and study quality. Results: Thirteen studies were included. SWI detected cerebral microbleeds approximately 1.6times more effectively than GRE. At 3.0 T and 1.5 T, SWI exhibited 1.7-fold and 1.5-fold greater detectability, respectively. SWI with thinner slices (<2 mm) showed a 1.9-fold improvement, while thicker slices (≥2 mm) showed a 1.3-fold improvement. Subgroup analyses revealed no significant differences between vendors (0.61 vs. 0.60, p=0.89), or by study quality (0.61 vs. 0.59,p=0.89). Conclusions SWI detects cerebral microbleeds about 1.6 times more effectively than GRE, highlighting important differences between the two techniques. Cautious exploration of adjusted thresholds may be needed, and prospective validation in therapy-specific cohorts will be essential before clinical application.

Abrupt vessel closure (AVC) is a complication of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and is defined as the sudden cessation of forward coronary blood flow due to a variety of mechanisms. The incidence of AVC has markedly decreased from approximately 3.0% in the early era to about 0.3% today. Nevertheless, cardiovascular interventionists must remain prepared to manage AVC effectively, given its significant impact on clinical outcomes.AVC can arise from several mechanisms, including dissection, intramural hematoma, intracoronary thrombosis, air embolism, vasospasm, and no-reflow. The clinical impact of AVC varies depending on the extent of myocardium affected, ranging from asymptomatic events or transient ischemic chest pain to cardiogenic shock or cardiac arrest. Both a general approach for stabilizing hemodynamic consequences and an etiology-specific management strategy are essential. Hasty decision-making may worsen the situation, whereas a structured approach—focused on hemodynamic stabilization, logical diagnostic processes, and targeted interventions—can improve outcomes. In this narrative review, we describe the mechanisms underlying each etiology, outline mechanism-specific management strategies, and discuss general approaches to managing patients with AVC through logical diagnostic and treatment processes. We hope this review offers valuable insights into this uncommon but significant complication and enhances readers’ skills in managing AVC more effectively during PCI.

Background: and Purpose: This clinical practice guideline provides evidence-based recommendations for treatment of dementia, focusing on cholinesterase inhibitors and N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) receptor antagonists for Alzheimer’s disease (AD) and other types of dementia. Methods: Using the Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcomes (PICO) framework, we developed key clinical questions and conducted systematic literature reviews. A multidisciplinary panel of experts, organized by the Korean Dementia Association, evaluated randomized controlled trials and observational studies. Recommendations were graded for evidence quality and strength using Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology. Results: Three main recommendations are presented: (1) For AD, cholinesterase inhibitors (donepezil, rivastigmine, galantamine) are strongly recommended for improving cognition and daily function based on moderate evidence; (2) Cholinesterase inhibitors are conditionally recommended for vascular dementia and Parkinson’s disease dementia, with a strong recommendation for Lewy body dementia; (3) For moderate to severe AD, NMDA receptor antagonist (memantine) is strongly recommended, demonstrating significant cognitive and functional improvements. Both drug classes showed favorable safety profiles with manageable side effects. Conclusions This guideline offers standardized, evidence-based pharmacologic recommendations for dementia management, with specific guidance on cholinesterase inhibitors and NMDA receptor antagonists. It aims to support clinical decision-making and improve patient outcomes in dementia care. Further updates will address emerging treatments, including amyloid-targeting therapies, to reflect advances in dementia management.

Background: and Purpose: This clinical practice guideline provides evidence-based recommendations for treatment of dementia, focusing on cholinesterase inhibitors and N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) receptor antagonists for Alzheimer’s disease (AD) and other types of dementia. Methods: Using the Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcomes (PICO) framework, we developed key clinical questions and conducted systematic literature reviews. A multidisciplinary panel of experts, organized by the Korean Dementia Association, evaluated randomized controlled trials and observational studies. Recommendations were graded for evidence quality and strength using Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology. Results: Three main recommendations are presented: (1) For AD, cholinesterase inhibitors (donepezil, rivastigmine, galantamine) are strongly recommended for improving cognition and daily function based on moderate evidence; (2) Cholinesterase inhibitors are conditionally recommended for vascular dementia and Parkinson’s disease dementia, with a strong recommendation for Lewy body dementia; (3) For moderate to severe AD, NMDA receptor antagonist (memantine) is strongly recommended, demonstrating significant cognitive and functional improvements. Both drug classes showed favorable safety profiles with manageable side effects. Conclusions This guideline offers standardized, evidence-based pharmacologic recommendations for dementia management, with specific guidance on cholinesterase inhibitors and NMDA receptor antagonists. It aims to support clinical decision-making and improve patient outcomes in dementia care. Further updates will address emerging treatments, including amyloid-targeting therapies, to reflect advances in dementia management.

Gastric cancer is one of the most common cancers in both Korea and worldwide. Since 2004, the Korean Practice Guidelines for Gastric Cancer have been regularly updated, with the 4th edition published in 2022. The 4th edition was the result of a collaborative work by an interdisciplinary team, including experts in gastric surgery, gastroenterology, endoscopy, medical oncology, abdominal radiology, pathology, nuclear medicine, radiation oncology, and guideline development methodology. The current guideline is the 5th version, an updated version of the 4th edition. In this guideline, 6 key questions (KQs) were updated or proposed after a collaborative review by the working group, and 7 statements were developed, or revised, or discussed based on a systematic review using the MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, and KoreaMed database. Over the past 2 years, there have been significant changes in systemic treatment, leading to major updates and revisions focused on this area.Additionally, minor modifications have been made in other sections, incorporating recent research findings. The level of evidence and grading of recommendations were categorized according to the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation system. Key factors for recommendation included the level of evidence, benefit, harm, and clinical applicability. The working group reviewed and discussed the recommendations to reach a consensus. The structure of this guideline remains similar to the 2022 version.Earlier sections cover general considerations, such as screening, diagnosis, and staging of endoscopy, pathology, radiology, and nuclear medicine. In the latter sections, statements are provided for each KQ based on clinical evidence, with flowcharts supporting these statements through meta-analysis and references. This multidisciplinary, evidence-based gastric cancer guideline aims to support clinicians in providing optimal care for gastric cancer patients.

Lecanemab and donanemab have received full U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval, and subsequently, lecanemab has been approved by the Korean FDA and it has recently entered commercial use in Korea. This has increased interest in anti-amyloid immunotherapy for Alzheimer’s disease. Anti-amyloid immunotherapy has shown potential to modify the progression of the disease by specifically binding to amyloid β, a key pathological product in Alzheimer’s disease, and eliminating accumulated amyloid plaques in the brain. However, this treatment can be accompanied by a side-effect, amyloid-related imaging abnormalities (ARIA), which requires periodic monitoring by MRI. It is crucial to detect ARIA and accurately assess the severity by radiology. The role of the radiologist is important in this context, requiring proficiency in basic knowledge of ARIA, and in diagnosing/evaluating ARIA. This review aims to comprehensively cover aspects of ARIA, including its definition, pathophysiology, incidence, risk factors, assessment of severity by radiology, differential diagnosis, and management.