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.

Purpose: Neoadjuvant treatment (NAT) is now the standard for borderline resectable pancreatic cancer (RPC) and is being considered for RPC. Early recurrence after curative surgery in RPC is often seen as a treatment failure, prompting considerations for NAT. Our goal was to develop an artificial intelligence (AI)-based predictive model utilizing preoperatively available factors to forecast early recurrences of resected RPC. Methods: This study included 469 patients who underwent surgery for RPC between 2011 and 2019. Clinicopathologic and oncologic data were retrospectively reviewed. Preoperative variables, including laboratory data and imaging findings, were collected. Early recurrence was defined as recurrence occurring within a year after surgery. Deep neural networks were then used to select variables by assessing their importance. A new model predicting early recurrence of RPC was subsequently developed. Results: Of the patients evaluated, 199 (42.4%) experienced early recurrence. The predictive model included 14 preoperative variables: CA 19-9, preoperative pancreatitis, serum albumin, platelet count, lymphocyte count, the American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status classification, tumor size, monocyte count, age, body mass index, CRP, hemoglobin, WBC count, and CEA. The area under the curve for the model was 0.786 in the training set and 0.734 in the test set. Conclusion We developed an AI-based model to predict the early recurrence of RPC using preoperative parameters. By identifying patients at risk of early recurrence, optimal individualized treatments such as NAT can be considered. Future prospective studies are crucial to establish clear indications for NAT in RPC.

Purpose: This study evaluated the clinical outcomes and prognostic factors in patients with borderline resectable pancreatic cancer (BRPC) and locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC) treated with upfront FOLFIRINOX followed by local-regional therapy (LRT), surgical resection (SR), and radiotherapy (RT). We aimed to identify specific patient subgroups for which RT may serve as a reasonable alternative to SR for local tumor control. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed 116 patients (SR group, n= 70; RT group, n= 46) at a single center between 2015 and 2020. Survival outcomes were compared based on LRT modalities, focusing on identifying subgroups in which RT provided an efficacy comparable to that of SR. Results: Among 116 patients, the SR group achieved a significantly higher 5-year overall survival (OS) than the RT group (27.1% vs. 8.7%, P< 0.0001), despite similar progression-free survival (P= 0.23). Significant prognostic factors for OS included carbohydrate antigen 19-9 (CA19-9) response in BRPC (P= 0.02) and radiologic partial response in LAPC (P= 0.05). Subgroup analysis revealed that, while SR provided a survival advantage in CA19-9 responders, no significant difference in OS was observed between SR and RT in CA19-9 non-responders (P= 0.37). Conclusion Although surgery remains the gold standard, RT may be considered a justifiable local alternative for CA19-9 non-responders and surgically ineligible patients with LAPC, yielding comparable outcomes in these specific, biologically unfavorable subgroups.

Objective: This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of romosozumab, a bone anabolic agent, versus vertebroplasty, a conventional surgical intervention, in treating osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures (OVCFs). Methods: A retrospective analysis included 86 thoracic/lumbar compression fracture patients from 2014 to 2022 at a medical center. Forty-two patients received romosozumab (monthly injections for 1 year) followed by 1 year of denosumab, while 44 underwent vertebroplasty followed by denosumab injections biannually for 2 years. Outcomes were assessed using the Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) for pain, bone mineral density (BMD), vertebral compression ratio, and Cobb angle over 12 months. Results: At 12 months, the romosozumab group showed a greater reduction in NRS scores (4.90 ± 1.01 vs. 4.27 ± 1.34, p = 0.015) and a higher increase in lumbar BMD (0.8 ± 0.5 vs. 0.5 ± 0.3, p = 0.000) compared to the vertebroplasty group. There were no significant differences in changes in hip total BMD and femur neck BMD (p = 0.190, p = 0.167, respectively). Radiographic assessments showed no significant differences in vertebral compression ratio (14.7% vs. 14.8%; p = 0.960) or Cobb angle (4.2° vs. 4.9°; p = 0.302). The incidence of major osteoporotic fractures was lower in the romosozumab group (7.1% vs. 25.0%, p = 0.051), with similar rates of cardiovascular events in both groups (4.8% vs. 9.1%, p = 0.716). Conclusion Romosozumab has demonstrated superior pain reduction and lumbar BMD improvement compared to vertebroplasty at 12 months, with no significant differences in radiographic outcomes or adverse events, suggesting it as an alternative to vertebroplasty for OVCF.

Objective: : In degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis, interbody fusion surgery (IFS) has long been recommended as the gold standard of surgical management. However, IFS is less recommended for high-risk patients such as the elderly because it involves extensive surgery, with a long operation time and high volumes of blood loss, which lead to marked perioperative morbidity. We report an alternative primary and salvage treatment technique for high-risk lumbar spondylolisthesis through posterior lumbar element reinforcement using interspinous fixation and decompression alone without interbody fusion. Methods: : Plain radiographs, computed tomography scans, and magnetic resonance imaging, taken at different intervals, were used to measure local disc height (DH), vertebral body slippage (BS), and segmental motion angle (SMA). A Visual analogue scale and the Oswestry disability index (ODI) were applied pre-operation and at the last follow-up. Results: : The local SMA decreased significantly by 3.46°±3.07°, from 10.61°±3.42° preoperatively to 7.15±3.70 at the last follow-up (p<0.001). The DH decreased from 8.61±2.88 mm preoperatively to 8.41±2.48 mm at the last follow-up (p=0.074). The BS decreased from 3.49±4.29 mm preoperatively to 3.41±4.91 mm at the last follow-up (p=0.092). None of the patients reported worsening pain or an increased ODI after surgery, and there were no surgery-related complications. Conclusion : Posterior lumbar element reinforcement by decompression alone with SPIRE™ fixation is an alternative primary and salvage treatment option for select patients with spondylolisthesis.

Objective: : In degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis, interbody fusion surgery (IFS) has long been recommended as the gold standard of surgical management. However, IFS is less recommended for high-risk patients such as the elderly because it involves extensive surgery, with a long operation time and high volumes of blood loss, which lead to marked perioperative morbidity. We report an alternative primary and salvage treatment technique for high-risk lumbar spondylolisthesis through posterior lumbar element reinforcement using interspinous fixation and decompression alone without interbody fusion. Methods: : Plain radiographs, computed tomography scans, and magnetic resonance imaging, taken at different intervals, were used to measure local disc height (DH), vertebral body slippage (BS), and segmental motion angle (SMA). A Visual analogue scale and the Oswestry disability index (ODI) were applied pre-operation and at the last follow-up. Results: : The local SMA decreased significantly by 3.46°±3.07°, from 10.61°±3.42° preoperatively to 7.15±3.70 at the last follow-up (p<0.001). The DH decreased from 8.61±2.88 mm preoperatively to 8.41±2.48 mm at the last follow-up (p=0.074). The BS decreased from 3.49±4.29 mm preoperatively to 3.41±4.91 mm at the last follow-up (p=0.092). None of the patients reported worsening pain or an increased ODI after surgery, and there were no surgery-related complications. Conclusion : Posterior lumbar element reinforcement by decompression alone with SPIRE™ fixation is an alternative primary and salvage treatment option for select patients with spondylolisthesis.

Objective: : In degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis, interbody fusion surgery (IFS) has long been recommended as the gold standard of surgical management. However, IFS is less recommended for high-risk patients such as the elderly because it involves extensive surgery, with a long operation time and high volumes of blood loss, which lead to marked perioperative morbidity. We report an alternative primary and salvage treatment technique for high-risk lumbar spondylolisthesis through posterior lumbar element reinforcement using interspinous fixation and decompression alone without interbody fusion. Methods: : Plain radiographs, computed tomography scans, and magnetic resonance imaging, taken at different intervals, were used to measure local disc height (DH), vertebral body slippage (BS), and segmental motion angle (SMA). A Visual analogue scale and the Oswestry disability index (ODI) were applied pre-operation and at the last follow-up. Results: : The local SMA decreased significantly by 3.46°±3.07°, from 10.61°±3.42° preoperatively to 7.15±3.70 at the last follow-up (p<0.001). The DH decreased from 8.61±2.88 mm preoperatively to 8.41±2.48 mm at the last follow-up (p=0.074). The BS decreased from 3.49±4.29 mm preoperatively to 3.41±4.91 mm at the last follow-up (p=0.092). None of the patients reported worsening pain or an increased ODI after surgery, and there were no surgery-related complications. Conclusion : Posterior lumbar element reinforcement by decompression alone with SPIRE™ fixation is an alternative primary and salvage treatment option for select patients with spondylolisthesis.

Background/Aims: The Korean guidelines for Helicobacter pylori treatment were revised in 2020, however, the extent of adherence to these guidelines in clinical practice remains unclear. Herein, we initiated a prospective, nationwide, multicenter registry study in 2021 to evaluate the current management of H.pylori infection in Korea. Methods: This interim report describes the adherence to the revised guidelines and their impact on firstline eradication rates. Data on patient demographics, diagnoses, treatments, and eradication outcomes were collected using a web-based electronic case report form. Results: A total of 7,261 patients from 66 hospitals who received first-line treatment were analyzed.The modified intention-to-treat eradication rate for first-line treatment was 81.0%, with 80.4% of the prescriptions adhering to the revised guidelines. The most commonly prescribed regimen was the 14-day clarithromycin-based triple therapy (CTT; 42.0%), followed by tailored therapy (TT; 21.2%), 7-day CTT (14.1%), and 10-day concomitant therapy (CT; 10.1%). Time-trend analysis demonstrated significant increases in guideline adherence and the use of 10-day CT and TT, along with a decrease in the use of 7-day CTT (all p<0.001). Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that guideline adherence was significantly associated with first-line eradication success (odds ratio, 2.03; 95% confidence interval, 1.61 to 2.56; p<0.001). Conclusions The revised guidelines for the treatment of H. pylori infection have been increasingly adopted in routine clinical practice in Korea, which may have contributed to improved first-line eradication rates. Notably, the 14-day CTT, 10-day CT, and TT regimens are emerging as the preferred first-line treatment options among Korean physicians.

Purpose: Pancreatic cancer has a poor prognosis; however, the implementation of neoadjuvant treatment enables borderline resectable cases to undergo curative resection and improves the overall survival rate. Attempts have been made to expand the eligibility criteria for neoadjuvant treatment, even in resectable cases. Some studies have suggested a correlation between vein abutment and poor prognosis or that the abutment angle may affect prognosis. This study investigated the anatomical factors affecting the vessel abutment angle and its prognostic value in pancreatic cancer. Methods: Patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma who underwent surgery between 2012 and 2017 were included in this study. Patients who underwent neoadjuvant treatment were excluded. Data from only the intent-to-treat pancreaticoduodenectomy group were included in the analysis. Clinicopathological characteristics; preoperative factors such as CA 19-9, preoperative biliary drainage, American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status classification, portal vein/superior mesenteric vein contact angle measured via CT scan; and intraoperative factors were collected for analysis. Results: A total of 365 patients were included in this study, and the abutment group included 92 patients (25.2%). The abutment and no-contact groups did not show any significant differences in terms of the overall survival or diseasefree survival rate. Among the abutment groups, patients with less than 90° and 90°–180° did not show any significant differences. In the multivariate analysis, the only preoperative factor that had a prognostic effect was CA 19-9, a biological factor. Conclusion When there is no vessel invasion in the abutment group, upfront surgery should be considered because the angle does not affect the overall prognosis.

Objective: This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of romosozumab, a bone anabolic agent, versus vertebroplasty, a conventional surgical intervention, in treating osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures (OVCFs). Methods: A retrospective analysis included 86 thoracic/lumbar compression fracture patients from 2014 to 2022 at a medical center. Forty-two patients received romosozumab (monthly injections for 1 year) followed by 1 year of denosumab, while 44 underwent vertebroplasty followed by denosumab injections biannually for 2 years. Outcomes were assessed using the Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) for pain, bone mineral density (BMD), vertebral compression ratio, and Cobb angle over 12 months. Results: At 12 months, the romosozumab group showed a greater reduction in NRS scores (4.90 ± 1.01 vs. 4.27 ± 1.34, p = 0.015) and a higher increase in lumbar BMD (0.8 ± 0.5 vs. 0.5 ± 0.3, p = 0.000) compared to the vertebroplasty group. There were no significant differences in changes in hip total BMD and femur neck BMD (p = 0.190, p = 0.167, respectively). Radiographic assessments showed no significant differences in vertebral compression ratio (14.7% vs. 14.8%; p = 0.960) or Cobb angle (4.2° vs. 4.9°; p = 0.302). The incidence of major osteoporotic fractures was lower in the romosozumab group (7.1% vs. 25.0%, p = 0.051), with similar rates of cardiovascular events in both groups (4.8% vs. 9.1%, p = 0.716). Conclusion Romosozumab has demonstrated superior pain reduction and lumbar BMD improvement compared to vertebroplasty at 12 months, with no significant differences in radiographic outcomes or adverse events, suggesting it as an alternative to vertebroplasty for OVCF.