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.

Background/Aims: Endoscopic anti-reflux therapy is a therapeutic option for gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), providing durable effects. However, clinical data from Korea remain limited. This study evaluates the clinical outcomes of endoscopic radiofrequency Stretta therapy in Korean patients. Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted on 71 patients with GERD who underwent Stretta therapy at 2 tertiary hospitals in Korea between November 2015 and July 2021. Clinical outcomes, including patient satisfaction, medication cessation or reduction, and complications, were evaluated. Pre- and post-procedural esophageal manometry and 24-hour pH monitoring test results were also analyzed. Results: Patient satisfaction rates at 1, 6, and 12 months post-procedure were 54.7% (35/64), 70.0% (28/40), and 75.0% (21/28), respectively. Medication cessation or reduction was achieved in 31.2% (20/64) at 1 month, 70.0% (28/40) at 6 months, and 67.9% (19/28) at 12 months. Esophageal manometry (n = 21) showed no significant changes in mean lower esophageal sphincter pressure (18.7 mmHg [2.5-52.9] vs 17.4 mmHg [0.0-43.0], P = 0.702) or mean integrated relaxation pressure (8.2 mmHg [0.0-28.0] vs 10.1 mmHg [0.0-31.0], P = 0.840). The 24-hour pH monitoring (n = 18) demonstrated a nonsignificant decrease in acid exposure time (pH < 4) from 2.3% (0.0-8.4) to 1.6% (0.0-7.3) (P = 0.182). Similarly, the DeMeester score decreased non-significantly from 8.4 (0.8-27.7) to 6.6 (0.8-21.8) (P = 0.352). No procedure-related complications occurred. Conclusion Endoscopic radiofrequency Stretta therapy appears to be a safe treatment option for GERD and may provide favorable patient satisfaction and medication reduction.

Purpose: Technological advancements have enabled reduced-port robotic systems, enhancing the benefits of robotic surgery. This study compared the surgical outcomes of conventional multiport (5 ports), single-site (2 ports), and singleport (2 ports) robotic gastrectomy for gastric cancer. Methods: A prospectively collected database was retrospectively reviewed for patients who underwent robotic distal subtotal gastrectomy between January 2010 and August 2022 at Severance Hospital, Yonsei University Health System. The initial 20 cases from each group (multiport, single-site, and SP) were analyzed, focusing on demographics, surgical procedures, pathological results, and postoperative outcomes. The “textbook outcome” metric was employed to assess surgical quality. Results: The SP group showed lower visual analog pain scale compared to the multiport and single-site groups (3.5, 4.4, and 4.3, respectively, P = 0.017), faster time to first flatus (2.0, 2.7, and 2.8 days, respectively; P < 0.001), and shorter hospital stays (3.5, 6.2, and 5.5 days, respectively; P < 0.001). No significant differences were observed in major complications, unplanned intensive care unit care, readmission, or mortality between the groups. The rate of patients achieving textbook outcomes were 85.0% for the multiport group, 100% for the single-site group, and 95.0% for the SP group (P = 0.310). Conclusion Reduced-port robotic gastrectomy, including single-site and SP, has shown surgical safety with a high proportion of patients meeting textbook outcomes. The SP system demonstrated less pain and faster recovery, aligning with minimally invasive surgical goals. Therefore, the SP system could be a reliable and safe option for robotic gastrectomy, offering enhanced recovery without compromising surgical quality.

Purpose: Radiotherapy (RT) remains a cornerstone of curative treatment for localized and locally advanced prostate cancer. However, dose escalation to improve tumor control is often constrained by the proximity of the rectum, which increases the risk of gastrointestinal (GI) and genitourinary toxicities. Biodegradable rectal spacers inserted between the prostate and rectum have emerged as an effective approach to reduce rectal radiation exposure. This guideline provides evidence-based recommendations on indications, contraindications, procedural standards, and clinical management for biodegradable rectal spacer insertion during prostate cancer RT. Materials and Methods: This guideline was developed by a multidisciplinary expert panel through a systematic review of the literature, analysis of international guidelines (National Comprehensive Cancer Network, European Association of Urology, American Society for Radiation Oncology), and expert consensus among radiation oncologists, radiologists, and urologists with clinical experience in spacer insertion. The strength of each recommendation and the level of evidence were classified according to the modified GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) system. Results: Spacer insertion is conditionally recommended (Grade C, Level I) for patients receiving definitive external-beam RT without rectal invasion. It reduces the high-dose rectal irradiation volume (V70–75) by >50%, decreases acute GI toxicity, and helps maintain bowel-related quality of life. However, the benefit for late severe toxicity (grade 2 or higher) remains debated in recent meta-analyses. Contraindications include rectal invasion, anatomical inaccessibility, infection, and material hypersensitivity. Procedures should be performed under local anesthesia in a sterile environment by trained physicians. Short-course antibiotics and simulator-based training, including completion of multiple supervised cases, are advised. Conclusion Biodegradable rectal spacer insertion is clinically validated and effective in reducing acute rectal toxicity. Although pivotal trials demonstrated a favorable procedural safety profile, real-world postmarket data include reports of rare but severe procedural complications. This guideline provides standardized recommendations tailored to Korean clinical practice while remaining consistent with international standards, emphasizing the importance of operator training and careful patient selection.

Background and Objectives: Clinical characteristics and outcomes in acute heart failure (AHF) vary by phenotype. We assessed phenotype-specific features, treatment patterns, and outcomes in a nationwide Korean cohort. Methods: The Korean Heart Failure III registry prospectively enrolled 7,351 AHF admissions at 47 hospitals. Among 6,777 patients with available left ventricular ejection fraction (EF), phenotypes were defined as heart failure with reduced EF (HFrEF, ≤40%), mildly reduced EF (HFmrEF,41–49%), or preserved EF (HFpEF, ≥50%). The primary endpoint was a 12-month composite of all-cause death or heart transplantation, evaluated from index admission and, among hospital survivors, from discharge. We used inverse probability weighting (multinomial generalized boosted models with stabilized, trimmed weights) and weighted Cox proportional-hazards models to estimate hazard ratios (HRs). Results: Phenotype distribution was 58.9% HFrEF, 13.6% HFmrEF, and 27.5% HFpEF. Crude 12-month composite rates from index admission were 13.4% (HFrEF), 12.7% (HFmrEF), and 16.8% (HFpEF). After weighting, from index admission, HFmrEF (HR, 0.892; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.731–1.088) and HFpEF (HR, 1.101; 95% CI, 0.939–1.291) did not differ from HFrEF; from discharge, HFpEF had modestly higher risk (HR, 1.207; 95% CI, 1.008–1.445) whereas HFmrEF did not (HR, 1.039; 95% CI, 0.844–1.279). Hyponatremia and chronic kidney disease were consistent adverse markers, while angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/ angiotensin II receptor blocker use at discharge was protective. Conclusions Across the EF spectrum, phenotypes showed distinct profiles and risk. Postdischarge risk was modestly higher in HFpEF, supporting phenotype-tailored care and systematic discharge optimization in Korean patients with AHF.

Purpose: The technique for transanal resection of rectal tumors has evolved from conventional methods to minimally invasive approaches. However, the research comparing long-term results between these approaches is limited. Methods: Between 2016 and 2022, a total of 133 patients who underwent transanal excision were analyzed. Patients were classified into 2 groups according to surgical approach: conventional transanal approach (CTA) and minimally invasive transanal approach (MTA). Medical records were analyzed to compare surgical and oncological outcomes between the 2 groups. Results: There were no significant differences observed in patient’s demographics and tumor characteristics, except the MTA group exhibited a statistically longer distance from the anal verge. Although statistical significance was not reached, the MTA group demonstrated a 100% margin-negative rate in contrast to the CTA group, which had worse outcomes for both margin status and fragmentation. Recurrence was observed only in the CTA group containing pT1 rectal cancer and grade 1 neuroendocrine tumor, with negative margins and no fragmentation. Conclusion The minimally invasive approach did not demonstrate statistical superiority but showed technical feasibility through the absence of margin-positive cases and the use of the clip handle method. Further studies are needed to validate these findings and assess broader applicability.

Purpose: The technique for transanal resection of rectal tumors has evolved from conventional methods to minimally invasive approaches. However, the research comparing long-term results between these approaches is limited. Methods: Between 2016 and 2022, a total of 133 patients who underwent transanal excision were analyzed. Patients were classified into 2 groups according to surgical approach: conventional transanal approach (CTA) and minimally invasive transanal approach (MTA). Medical records were analyzed to compare surgical and oncological outcomes between the 2 groups. Results: There were no significant differences observed in patient’s demographics and tumor characteristics, except the MTA group exhibited a statistically longer distance from the anal verge. Although statistical significance was not reached, the MTA group demonstrated a 100% margin-negative rate in contrast to the CTA group, which had worse outcomes for both margin status and fragmentation. Recurrence was observed only in the CTA group containing pT1 rectal cancer and grade 1 neuroendocrine tumor, with negative margins and no fragmentation. Conclusion The minimally invasive approach did not demonstrate statistical superiority but showed technical feasibility through the absence of margin-positive cases and the use of the clip handle method. Further studies are needed to validate these findings and assess broader applicability.

Purpose: While fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy regimens are recommended second-line treatment for patients with advanced biliary tract cancer (BTC), there have been no studies comparing different regimens head-to-head. Materials and Methods: We performed individual patient-level meta-analysis based on data from the intention-to-treat population of the phase 2b NIFTY trial (liposomal irinotecan [nal-IRI] plus fluorouracil and leucovorin [5-FU/LV] vs. 5-FU/LV; NCT03542508) and the phase 2 FIReFOX trial (modified oxaliplatin plus 5-FU/LV [mFOLFOX] vs. modified irinotecan plus 5-FU/LV [mFOLFIRI]; NCT03464968). Pairwise log-rank tests and multivariable analysis using Cox proportional hazards modeling with shared frailty to account for the trial's effect were used to compare overall survival (OS) between regimens. Results: A total of 277 patients were included. The nal-IRI plus 5-FU/LV group (n=88) showed significantly better OS compared to the mFOLFOX group (n=49, pairwise log-rank, p=0.02), and mFOLFIRI group (n=50, p=0.03). Multivariable analysis showed consistent trends in OS with adjusted hazard ratios of 1.39 (mFOLFOX vs. nal-IRI plus 5-FU/LV: 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.93 to 2.07; p=0.11) and 1.36 (mFOLFIRI vs. nal-IRI plus 5-FU/LV: 95% CI, 0.92 to 2.03; p=0.13), respectively. Compared to the 5-FU/LV group, the mFOLFOX group and the mFOLFIRI group did not show differences in terms of OS (pairwise log-rank p=0.83 and p=0.58, respectively). The nal-IRI plus 5-FU/LV group experienced more frequent diarrhea, while the mFOLFOX group experienced peripheral neuropathy. Conclusion Nal-IRI plus 5-FU/LV showed favorable survival outcomes compared to mFOLFOX, mFOLFIRI, or 5-FU/LV. The safety profiles of these regimens should be considered along with efficacy.

Purpose: Recent development in perioperative treatment of resectable non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) have changed the landscape of early lung cancer management. The ADAURA trial has demonstrated the efficacy of adjuvant osimertinib treatment in resectable NSCLC patients; however, studies are required to show which subgroup of patients are at a high risk of relapse and require adjuvant epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitor treatment. This study evaluated risk factors for postoperative relapse among patients who underwent complete resection. Materials and Methods: Data were obtained from the Korean Association for Lung Cancer Registry (KALC-R), a database created using a retrospective sampling survey by the Korean Central Cancer Registry (KCCR) and the Lung Cancer Registration Committee. Results: A total of 3,176 patients who underwent curative resection was evaluated. The mean observation time was approximately 35.4 months. Among stage I to IIIA NSCLC patients, the EGFR-mutant subgroup included 867 patients, and 75.2%, 11.2%, and 11.8% were classified as stage I, stage II, and stage III, respectively. Within the EGFR-mutant subgroup, 44 (5.1%) and 121 (14.0%) patients showed early and late recurrence, respectively. Multivariate analysis on association with postoperative relapse among the EGFR-mutant subgroup showed that age, pathologic N and TNM stages, pleural invasion status, and surgery type were independent significant factors. Conclusion Among the population that underwent complete resection for early NSCLC with EGFR mutation, patients with advanced stage, pleural invasion, or limited resection are more likely to show postoperative relapse.

Purpose: Proximal gastrectomy is an alternative to total gastrectomy (TG) for early gastric cancer (EGC) treatment in the upper stomach. However, its benefits in terms of perioperative and long-term outcomes remain controversial. The aim of this study was to compare the perioperative, body compositional, nutritional, and survival outcomes of patients undergoing proximal gastrectomy with double-tract reconstruction (PG-DTR) and TG for pathological stage I gastric cancer in upper stomach. Materials and Methods: The study included 506 patients who underwent gastrectomy for pathological stage I gastric cancer in the upper stomach between 2015 and 2019. Clinicopathological, perioperative, body compositional, nutritional, and survival outcomes were compared between the PG-DTR and TG groups. Results: The PG-DTR and TG groups included 197 (38.9%) and 309 (61.1%) patients, respectively. The PG-DTR group had a lower rate of early complications (p=0.041), lower diagnosis rate of anemia and vitamin B12 deficiency (all p < 0.001), and lower replacement rate of iron and vitamin B12 compared to TG group (all p < 0.001). The PG-DTR group showed reduced incidence of sarcopenia at 6-months postoperatively, preserved higher amount of visceral fat after surgery (p=0.032 and p=0.040, respectively), and showed a higher hemoglobin level (p=0.007). Oncologic outcomes were comparable between the groups. Conclusion The PG-DTR for EGC located in the upper stomach offered advantages of fewer complications, lower incidence of anemia and vitamin B12 deficiency, less decrease in visceral fat volume, and similar survival compared to TG. Consequently, PG-DTR may be considered a superior alternative treatment option to TG.