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.

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.

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.

Objectives: . This study was conducted to evaluate the user satisfaction, efficacy, and safety of round window (RW) vibroplasty using the Vibrant Soundbridge (VSB) in patients with persistent mixed hearing loss after mastoidectomy. Methods: . The study included 27 patients (mean age, 58.7 years; age range, 28–76 years; 11 men and 16 women) with mixed hearing loss after mastoidectomy from 15 tertiary referral centers in Korea. The VSB was implanted at the RW. The Korean translation of the Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit (APHAB) questionnaire and the Korean version of the International Outcome Inventory for Hearing Aids (K-IOI-HA) questionnaire were used to evaluate user satisfaction as the primary outcome. The secondary outcome measures were audiological test results and complication rates. Results: . The mean scores for ease of communication (61.3% to 29.7% to 30.2%), reverberation (62.1% to 43.1% to 37.4%), and background noise (63.3% to 37.7% to 34.3%) subscales of the APHAB questionnaire significantly decreased after VSB surgery. The mean K-IOI-HA scores at 3 and 6 months after surgery were significantly higher than the mean preoperative score (18.6 to 27.2 to 28.1). The postoperative VSB-aided thresholds were significantly lower than the preoperative unaided and hearing aid (HA)-aided thresholds. There was no significant difference between preoperative unaided, preoperative HA-aided, and postoperative VSB-aided maximum phonetically balanced word-recognition scores. None of the 27 patients experienced a change in postoperative bone conduction pure tone average. One patient developed temporary facial palsy and two developed surgical wound infections. Conclusion . RW vibroplasty resulted in improved satisfaction and audiological test results in patients with mixed hearing loss after mastoidectomy, and the complication rate was tolerable.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the correlation between mechanography and clinical parameters in older people at 3 and 6 months after hip fracture surgery.METHODS: A longitudinal follow-up study was conducted in university hospitals with 38 patients at 3 months and 29 patients at 6 months after hip fracture surgery. Subjects 65 years and older completed measurements on the Berg Balance Scale (BBS), Functional Ambulation Category (FAC), walking ability by Koval, Korean version of the fatigue, resistance, ambulation, illnesses, and loss of weight (K-FRAIL) scale, and hand grip strength. The Romberg test with center of foot pressure (COP), chair rise test (CRT), and maximal power (W/kg) were conducted using the Leonardo Mechanograph.RESULTS: COP area and pathway length were correlated with BBS at 3 and 6 months. Change in BBS was correlated with change in COP area, but not with change in COP length. COP area and pathway length were correlated with K-FRAIL at 3 months after hip fracture surgery. The same COP variables showed correlations with FAC and walking ability by Koval at 6 months after surgery. Maximal power during CRT had correlation with chair rise time but not with other clinical parameters.CONCLUSION: The study revealed correlations between mechanography and clinical parameters in older people at 3 and 6 months after hip fracture surgery. Both the clinical assessment and objective test with mechanography may be required for the quantitative and sensitive measurement of postural balance and lower limb muscle power.
Dependent Ambulation ; Fatigue ; Follow-Up Studies ; Foot ; Hand ; Hand Strength ; Hip Fractures ; Hip ; Hospitals, University ; Humans ; Lower Extremity ; Muscle Strength ; Postural Balance ; Walking

Endoscopic subureteral injection for treatment of vesicoureteral reflux (VUR) is known to be safe and efficient due to its minimal invasive nature. Being non-migratory, non-antigenic, and biocompatible, Macroplastique (Polydimethylsiloxane) is likely to be stable over time. A 5-year-old boy with a past history of subureteral administration of Macroplastique for unilateral Grade V VUR 4 years ago presented with recurrent gross and microscopic hematuria, along with suprapubic pain. On computed tomography (CT) abdomen, calcified material, suspected to be a stone, was visualized in the bladder. On diagnostic cystoscopy, calcification was seen around the orifice site where Macroplastique injection had been performed. We removed the calcific material by Holmium laser. Endoscopic subureteric implantation has several advantages, but nevertheless, vigilance is needed to detect long-term complications, especially in patients with gross or microscopic hematuria.
Abdomen ; Child, Preschool ; Cystoscopy ; Hematuria ; Humans ; Lasers, Solid-State ; Male ; Urinary Bladder ; Vesico-Ureteral Reflux

OBJECTIVE: Fibroblast growth factor (FGF) 21 is a recently established therapeutic target for treating metabolic syndromes, which include potential precursors to cardiovascular disease, suggesting a link between FGF21 and atherosclerosis. However, the association between serum FGF21 concentrations and coronary artery disease remain controversial. The aim of this study is to evaluate the association between circulating FGF21 concentrations and coronary artery lesions and clinical severity. METHODS: We enrolled 137 subjects who underwent coronary angiography, due to suspected acute coronary syndrome (ACS), from December 2009 to July 2012. Serum FGF21 levels were measured. Coronary artery lesions and clinical severities of the subjects were evaluated using the SYNergy between percutaneous coronary intervention with (paclitaxel-eluting) TAXus stent and cardiac surgery (SYNTAX) and Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events (GRACE) scoring system, respectively. RESULTS: After adjusting for established cardiovascular disease risk factors, including age, body mass index, total cholesterol, and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, patients with coronary artery lesions (n=112 men) had significantly higher levels of FGF21 than individuals without such lesions (n=25; men) (377.1±20.1 pg/mL vs. 267.1±43.5 pg/mL; p=0.026). However, no correlations were found between serum levels of FGF21 and either the calculated STNTAX score (r=0.117; p=0.176) or GRACE risk score, which is a risk prediction tool applicable for ACS subjects (r=0.113; p=0.193). CONCLUSION: Although serum levels of FGF21 were higher in individuals with coronary lesions than in those without such lesions, FGF21 levels were not associated with angiographic severity.
Acute Coronary Syndrome ; Atherosclerosis ; Body Mass Index ; Cardiovascular Diseases* ; Cholesterol ; Coronary Angiography ; Coronary Artery Disease ; Coronary Vessels* ; Fibroblast Growth Factors ; Humans ; Lipoproteins ; Percutaneous Coronary Intervention ; Risk Factors ; Stents ; Taxus ; Thoracic Surgery

BACKGROUND/AIMS: The diagnostic efficacy of current tissue sampling techniques for gastric subepithelial tumors (SETs) is limited. Better tissue sampling techniques are needed to improve pathological diagnosis. The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of a new technique, mucosal incision and forceps biopsy, for reliable tissue sampling of gastric SETs. METHODS: This study enrolled 12 consecutive patients who underwent mucosal incision and forceps biopsy of gastric SETs between November 2011 and September 2014 at Gangneung Asan Hospital. The medical records of patients were reviewed retrospectively. The safety and diagnostic yield of this method were evaluated. RESULTS: By performing mucosal incision and forceps biopsy, we were able to provide a definitive histological diagnosis for 11 out of 12 cases. The pathological diagnoses were leiomyoma (3/11), gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST; 2/11), lipoma (2/11), schwannoma (1/11), and ectopic pancreas (3/11). In cases of leiomyoma (n=3) and GIST (n=2), tissue samples were of sufficient size to allow immunohistochemical staining. In addition, the mitotic index was evaluated in two cases of GIST. There were no procedure-related complications. CONCLUSIONS: Mucosal incision and forceps biopsy can be used as one of several methods to obtain adequate tissue samples from gastric SETs.
Biopsy* ; Chungcheongnam-do ; Diagnosis ; Gangwon-do ; Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors ; Gastroscopy ; Humans ; Leiomyoma ; Lipoma ; Medical Records ; Methods ; Mitotic Index ; Neurilemmoma ; Pancreas ; Retrospective Studies ; Stomach ; Surgical Instruments*

“Clinical Practice Guideline for Stroke Rehabilitation in Korea 2016” is the 3rd edition of clinical practice guideline (CPG) for stroke rehabilitation in Korea, which updates the 2nd edition published in 2014. Forty-two specialists in stroke rehabilitation from 21 universities and 4 rehabilitation hospitals and 4 consultants participated in this update. The purpose of this CPG is to provide optimum practical guidelines for stroke rehabilitation teams to make a decision when they manage stroke patients and ultimately, to help stroke patients obtain maximal functional recovery and return to the society. The recent two CPGs from Canada (2015) and USA (2016) and articles that were published following the 2nd edition were used to develop this 3rd edition of CPG for stroke rehabilitation in Korea. The chosen articles' level of evidence and grade of recommendation were decided by the criteria of Scotland (2010) and the formal consensus was derived by the nominal group technique. The levels of evidence range from 1++ to 4 and the grades of recommendation range from A to D. Good Practice Point was recommended as best practice based on the clinical experience of the guideline developmental group. The draft of the developed CPG was reviewed by the experts group in the public hearings and then revised. “Clinical Practice Guideline for Stroke Rehabilitation in Korea 2016” consists of ‘Chapter 1; Introduction of Stroke Rehabilitation’, ‘Chapter 2; Rehabilitation for Stroke Syndrome, ‘Chapter 3; Rehabilitation for Returning to the Society’, and ‘Chapter 4; Advanced Technique for Stroke Rehabilitation’. “Clinical Practice Guideline for Stroke Rehabilitation in Korea 2016” will provide direction and standardization for acute, subacute and chronic stroke rehabilitation in Korea.
Canada ; Consensus ; Consultants ; Humans ; Korea* ; Practice Guidelines as Topic ; Rehabilitation* ; Scotland ; Specialization ; Stroke*

No abstract available.
Infarction* ; Middle Cerebral Artery*