1.Clinical Outcomes Based on the Corneal Limbus–Scleral Tunnel Distance in Flanged Intrascleral Intraocular Lens Fixation
Dong Hyeon KIM ; Yu Min KIM ; Seong Yong JEONG ; Yong Koo KANG ; Dong Ho PARK ; Jae Rock DO
Journal of the Korean Ophthalmological Society 2026;67(4):103-109
Purpose:
To compare the anatomical and clinical outcomes based on the distance from the corneal limbus to the scleral tunnel in flanged intrascleral intraocular lens (IOL) fixation.
Methods:
We retrospectively analyzed the medical records of patients who underwent scleral fixation of flanged IOLs. Group 1 (54 eyes) had a distance of 2.1 mm from the corneal limbus to the scleral tunnel, and Group 2 (48 eyes) had a distance of 2.8 mm. We evaluated the best corrected visual acuity (BCVA), postoperative complications, IOL tilt and decentration, refractive prediction error (RPE), effective lens position, and iris-IOL distance.
Results:
The BCVA, postoperative complications, IOL tilt, and IOL decentration did not differ between the two groups (p > 0.05). The RPE showed a hyperopic shift in Group 1 and a myopic shift in Group 2 (Group 1: +0.24 ± 0.68 D, Group 2: -0.03 ± 0.43 D, p = 0.03). The iris-IOL distance was statistically longer in Group 1 compared to Group 2 (Group 1: 1.02 ± 0.40 mm, Group 2: 0.57 ± 0.32 mm, p = 0.02). The incidence of pupillary optic capture was significantly higher in Group 2 compared to Group 1 (Group 1; 0%, Group 2; 8.3%, p = 0.03).
Conclusions
It should be considered that a shorter distance from the corneal limbus to the scleral tunnel results in a postoperative hyperopic shift and reduces the incidence of pupillary optic capture when performing flanged intrascleral IOLs fixation.
2.Korean Practice Guidelines for Gastric Cancer 2024: An Evidence-based, Multidisciplinary Approach (Update of 2022 Guideline)
In-Ho KIM ; Seung Joo KANG ; Wonyoung CHOI ; An Na SEO ; Bang Wool EOM ; Beodeul KANG ; Bum Jun KIM ; Byung-Hoon MIN ; Chung Hyun TAE ; Chang In CHOI ; Choong-kun LEE ; Ho Jung AN ; Hwa Kyung BYUN ; Hyeon-Su IM ; Hyung-Don KIM ; Jang Ho CHO ; Kyoungjune PAK ; Jae-Joon KIM ; Jae Seok BAE ; Jeong Il YU ; Jeong Won LEE ; Jungyoon CHOI ; Jwa Hoon KIM ; Miyoung CHOI ; Mi Ran JUNG ; Nieun SEO ; Sang Soo EOM ; Soomin AHN ; Soo Jin KIM ; Sung Hak LEE ; Sung Hee LIM ; Tae-Han KIM ; Hye Sook HAN ; On behalf of The Development Working Group for the Korean Practice Guideline for Gastric Cancer 2024
Journal of Gastric Cancer 2025;25(1):5-114
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.
3.Korean Practice Guidelines for Gastric Cancer 2024: An Evidence-based, Multidisciplinary Approach (Update of 2022 Guideline)
In-Ho KIM ; Seung Joo KANG ; Wonyoung CHOI ; An Na SEO ; Bang Wool EOM ; Beodeul KANG ; Bum Jun KIM ; Byung-Hoon MIN ; Chung Hyun TAE ; Chang In CHOI ; Choong-kun LEE ; Ho Jung AN ; Hwa Kyung BYUN ; Hyeon-Su IM ; Hyung-Don KIM ; Jang Ho CHO ; Kyoungjune PAK ; Jae-Joon KIM ; Jae Seok BAE ; Jeong Il YU ; Jeong Won LEE ; Jungyoon CHOI ; Jwa Hoon KIM ; Miyoung CHOI ; Mi Ran JUNG ; Nieun SEO ; Sang Soo EOM ; Soomin AHN ; Soo Jin KIM ; Sung Hak LEE ; Sung Hee LIM ; Tae-Han KIM ; Hye Sook HAN ; On behalf of The Development Working Group for the Korean Practice Guideline for Gastric Cancer 2024
Journal of Gastric Cancer 2025;25(1):5-114
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.
4.Korean Practice Guidelines for Gastric Cancer 2024: An Evidence-based, Multidisciplinary Approach (Update of 2022 Guideline)
In-Ho KIM ; Seung Joo KANG ; Wonyoung CHOI ; An Na SEO ; Bang Wool EOM ; Beodeul KANG ; Bum Jun KIM ; Byung-Hoon MIN ; Chung Hyun TAE ; Chang In CHOI ; Choong-kun LEE ; Ho Jung AN ; Hwa Kyung BYUN ; Hyeon-Su IM ; Hyung-Don KIM ; Jang Ho CHO ; Kyoungjune PAK ; Jae-Joon KIM ; Jae Seok BAE ; Jeong Il YU ; Jeong Won LEE ; Jungyoon CHOI ; Jwa Hoon KIM ; Miyoung CHOI ; Mi Ran JUNG ; Nieun SEO ; Sang Soo EOM ; Soomin AHN ; Soo Jin KIM ; Sung Hak LEE ; Sung Hee LIM ; Tae-Han KIM ; Hye Sook HAN ; On behalf of The Development Working Group for the Korean Practice Guideline for Gastric Cancer 2024
Journal of Gastric Cancer 2025;25(1):5-114
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.
5.Evidence‑based Korean guidelines for the clinical management of multiple myeloma: addressing 12 key clinical questions
Sung‑Hoon JUNG ; Youngil KOH ; Min Kyoung KIM ; Jin Seok KIM ; Joon Ho MOON ; Chang‑Ki MIN ; Dok Hyun YOON ; Sung‑Soo YOON ; Je‑Jung LEE ; Chae Moon HONG ; Ka‑Won KANG ; Jihyun KWON ; Kyoung Ha KIM ; Dae Sik KIM ; Sung Yong KIM ; Sung‑Hyun KIM ; Yu Ri KIM ; Young Rok DO ; Yeung‑Chul MUN ; Sung‑Soo PARK ; Young Hoon PARK ; Ho Jin SHIN ; Hyeon‑Seok EOM ; Sang Eun YOON ; Sang Mee HWANG ; Won Sik LEE ; Myung‑won LEE ; Jun Ho YI ; Ji Yun LEE ; Ji Hyun LEE ; Ho Sup LEE ; Sung‑Nam LIM ; Jihyang LIM ; Ho‑Young YHIM ; Yoon Hwan CHANG ; Jae‑Cheol JO ; Jinhyun CHO ; Hyungwoo CHO ; Yoon Seok CHOI ; Hee jeong CHO ; Ari AHN ; Jong Han CHOI ; Hyun Jung KIM ; Kihyun KIM
Blood Research 2025;60():9-
Multiple myeloma (MM), a hematological malignancy, is characterized by malignant plasma cell proliferation in the bone marrow. Recent treatment advances have significantly improved patient outcomes associated with MM.In this study, we aimed to develop comprehensive, evidence-based guidelines for the diagnosis, prognosis, and treat‑ ment of MM. We identified 12 key clinical questions essential for MM management, guiding the extensive literature review and meta-analysis of the study. Our guidelines provide evidence-based recommendations by integrating patient preferences with survey data. These recommendations include current and emerging diagnostic tools, thera‑ peutic agents, and treatment strategies. By prioritizing a patient-centered approach and rigorous data analysis, these guidelines were developed to enhance MM management, both in Korea and globally.
6.Clinical Practice Guidelines for Diagnosis and Non-Surgical Treatment of Primary Frozen Shoulder
Byung Chan LEE ; Gi-Wook KIM ; Keewon KIM ; Nackhwan KIM ; Dong Hwan KIM ; Doo Young KIM ; Du Hwan KIM ; Beom Suk KIM ; Seong Hun KIM ; In Jong KIM ; Hyun Jung KIM ; Yoonju NA ; Kyung Eun NAM ; Sung Gyu MOON ; Chang-Won MOON ; Kyunghoon MIN ; Donghwi PARK ; Myung Woo PARK ; Yong Bok PARK ; Jae Hyeon PARK ; Chul-Hyun PARK ; Hyeng-Kyu PARK ; Yunsoo SOH ; Jaeki AHN ; Seoyon YANG ; Kyeong Eun UHM ; Sun Jae WON ; Yu Hui WON ; Dong Hwan YUN ; Yu Sung YOON ; Jin A YOON ; Byeong-Ju LEE ; Woo Hyung LEE ; Yun Jung LEE ; Jae-Hyun LEE ; Jong Hwa LEE ; Yu Jin IM ; Jae-Young LIM ; Min Cheol CHANG ; Sung Joon CHUNG ; Il Young JUNG ; Sungju JEE ; Kyoung Hyo CHOI ; Jong-Moon HWANG ; Jae-Young HAN
Clinical Pain 2025;24(1):1-26
Objective:
Primary frozen shoulder causes significant pain and progressively restricts shoulder movements. Diagnosis is made clinically based on patient history and physical examination. Management is mainly non-invasive owing to its self-limiting clinical course. However, clinical practice guidelines for frozen shoulder have not yet been developed in Korea. The developed guidelines aim to provide evidence-based recommendations for the diagnosis and treatment of frozen shoulder.
Methods:
A guideline development committee reviewed the literature from four databases (PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and KMbase). Using the Population, Intervention, Comparator, and Outcome (PICO) framework, the committee formulated two backgrounds and 16 key questions to address common clinical concerns. Recommendations were made using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation framework.
Results:
Diabetes, thyroid disease, and dyslipidemia significantly increase the risk of developing a frozen shoulder. Although frozen shoulder is often self-limiting, some patients may experience long-term functional disabilities. Ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging should be used as adjunctive tools alongside clinical diagnosis, and rather than as independent diagnostic methods. Noninvasive approaches, such as medications, physical modalities, exercises, electrical stimulation, and manual therapy, may reduce pain and improve shoulder function. Other noninvasive interventions have limited evidence, and their application should be based on clinical judgment. Intra-articular steroid injections are recommended for treatment, and physiotherapy or hydrodilation with steroid injections can also be beneficial.
Conclusion
These guidelines provide evidence-based recommendations for diagnosing and treating primary frozen shoulder.
7.Urinary mRNA biomarkers for the noninvasive diagnosis of calcineurin inhibitor toxicity in kidney transplant recipients with graft dysfunction: a retrospective study
Jihyun BAEK ; Jung-Woo SEO ; Hyeon Seok HWANG ; So-Young LEE ; Hye Yun JEONG ; Yang Gyun KIM ; Ju-Young MOON ; Jin Sug KIM ; Kyung-Hwan JEONG ; Byung Ha CHUNG ; Chan-Duck KIM ; Jae Berm PARK ; Yu Ho LEE ; Sang-Ho LEE
Clinical Transplantation and Research 2025;39(4):346-354
Background:
Calcineurin inhibitor (CNI) toxicity is a significant cause of graft dysfunction in kidney transplant recipients, yet distinguishing it from acute rejection (AR) and acute tubular necrosis (ATN) remains challenging. This study investigated the use of urinary mRNA biomarkers as a noninvasive tool for identifying CNI toxicity.
Methods:
We retrospectively enrolled 110 kidney transplant recipients and classified them into four groups based on pathological findings: stable graft function (n=35), CNI toxicity (n=25), AR (n=30), and ATN (n=20). Candidate biomarkers were selected using the GEO database. Urinary mRNA was extracted from cell pellets, reverse-transcribed, and quantified by real-time polymerase chain reaction.
Results:
Estimated glomerular filtration rates were comparable among the CNI toxicity, AR, and ATN groups. Four transcripts (LTF, NNMT, WFDC2, and HIF1A) were identified as candidate biomarkers. Urinary mRNA levels of LTF, NNMT, and HIF1A were significantly lower in the CNI toxicity group than the AR group. NNMT and HIF1A levels were also significantly lower than those observed in the ATN group. In contrast, WFDC2 levels did not differ significantly across groups. A three-gene signature (LTF, NNMT, and HIF1A) effectively differentiated CNI toxicity from AR and ATN (area under the curve [AUC], 0.867;95% confidence interval [CI], 0.787–0.947) and significantly enhanced the diagnostic performance of the clinical variable-based model (AUC increased from 0.776; 95% CI, 0.660–0.892, to 0.934; 95% CI, 0.881–0.986).
Conclusions
Urinary mRNA levels of LTF, NNMT, and HIF1A may serve as useful biomarkers for identifying CNI toxicity in kidney transplant recipients with graft dysfunction.
8.Comparison of Statin With Ezetimibe Combination Therapy Versus Statin Monotherapy for Primary Prevention in Middle-Aged Adults
Jung-Joon CHA ; Soon Jun HONG ; Subin LIM ; Ju Hyeon KIM ; Hyung Joon JOO ; Jae Hyoung PARK ; Cheol Woong YU ; Do-Sun LIM ; Jang Young KIM ; Jin-Ok JEONG ; Jeong-Hun SHIN ; Chi Young SHIM ; Jong-Young LEE ; Young-Hyo LIM ; Sung Ha PARK ; Eun Joo CHO ; Hasung KIM ; Jungkuk LEE ; Ki-Chul SUNG ;
Korean Circulation Journal 2024;54(9):534-544
Background and Objectives:
Lipid lowering therapy is essential to reduce the risk of major cardiovascular events; however, limited evidence exists regarding the use of statin with ezetimibe as primary prevention strategy for middle-aged adults. We aimed to investigate the impact of single pill combination therapy on clinical outcomes in relatively healthy middleaged patients when compared with statin monotherapy.
Methods:
Using the Korean National Health Insurance Service database, a propensity score match analysis was performed for baseline characteristics of 92,156 patients categorized into combination therapy (n=46,078) and statin monotherapy (n=46,078) groups. Primary outcome was composite outcomes, including death, coronary artery disease, and ischemic stroke. And secondary outcome was all-cause death. The mean follow-up duration was 2.9±0.3 years.
Results:
The 3-year composite outcomes of all-cause death, coronary artery disease, and ischemic stroke demonstrated no significant difference between the 2 groups (10.3% vs.10.1%; hazard ratio [HR], 1.022; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.980–1.064; p=0.309).Meanwhile, the 3-year all-cause death rate was lower in the combination therapy group than in the statin monotherapy group (0.2% vs. 0.4%; p<0.001), with a significant HR of 0.595 (95% CI, 0.460–0.769; p<0.001). Single pill combination therapy exhibited consistently lower mortality rates across various subgroups.
Conclusions
Compared to the statin monotherapy, the combination therapy for primary prevention showed no difference in composite outcomes but may reduce mortality risk in relatively healthy middle-aged patients. However, since the study was observational, further randomized clinical trials are needed to confirm these findings.
9.Energy Metabolism in Human Pluripotent Stem and Differentiated Cells Compared Using a Seahorse XF96 Extracellular Flux Analyzer
Hyun Kyu KIM ; Yena SONG ; Minji KYE ; Byeongho YU ; Sang Beom PARK ; Ji Hyeon KIM ; Sung-Hwan MOON ; Hyungkyu CHOI ; Jong-Seok MOON ; Jae Sang OH ; Man Ryul LEE
International Journal of Stem Cells 2024;17(2):194-203
Evaluating cell metabolism is crucial during pluripotent stem cell (PSC) differentiation and somatic cell reprogramming as it affects cell fate. As cultured stem cells are heterogeneous, a comparative analysis of relative metabolism using existing metabolic analysis methods is difficult, resulting in inaccuracies. In this study, we measured human PSC basal metabolic levels using a Seahorse analyzer. We used fibroblasts, human induced PSCs, and human embryonic stem cells to monitor changes in basal metabolic levels according to cell number and determine the number of cells suitable for analysis. We evaluated normalization methods using glucose and selected the most suitable for the metabolic analysis of heterogeneous PSCs during the reprogramming stage. The response of fibroblasts to glucose increased with starvation time, with oxygen consumption rate and extracellular acidification rate responding most effectively to glucose 4 hours after starvation and declining after 5 hours of starvation. Fibroblasts and PSCs achieved appropriate responses to glucose without damaging their metabolism 2∼4 and 2∼3 hours after starvation, respectively. We developed a novel method for comparing basal metabolic rates of fibroblasts and PSCs, focusing on quantitative analysis of glycolysis and oxidative phosphorylation using glucose without enzyme inhibitors. This protocol enables efficient comparison of energy metabolism among cell types, including undifferentiated PSCs, differentiated cells, and cells undergoing cellular reprogramming, and addresses critical issues, such as differences in basal metabolic levels and sensitivity to normalization, providing valuable insights into cellular energetics.
10.Pediatric Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation in Korea: A Multicenter Retrospective Study on Utilization and Outcomes Spanning Over a Decade
Yu Hyeon CHOI ; Won Kyoung JHANG ; Seong Jong PARK ; Hee Joung CHOI ; Min-su OH ; Jung Eun KWON ; Beom Joon KIM ; Ju Ae SHIN ; In Kyung LEE ; June Dong PARK ; Bongjin LEE ; Hyun CHUNG ; Jae Yoon NA ; Ah Young CHOI ; Joongbum CHO ; Jaeyoung CHOI ; Hwa Jin CHO ; Ah Young KIM ; Yu Rim SHIN ; Joung-Hee BYUN ; Younga KIM
Journal of Korean Medical Science 2024;39(3):e33-
Background:
Over the last decade, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) use in critically ill children has increased and is associated with favorable outcomes. Our study aims to evaluate the current status of pediatric ECMO in Korea, with a specific focus on its volume and changes in survival rates based on diagnostic indications.
Methods:
This multicenter study retrospectively analyzed the indications and outcomes of pediatric ECMO over 10 years in patients at 14 hospitals in Korea from January 2012 to December 2021. Four diagnostic categories (neonatal respiratory, pediatric respiratory, postcardiotomy, and cardiac-medical) and trends were compared between periods 1 (2012–2016) and 2 (2017–2021).
Results:
Overall, 1065 ECMO runs were performed on 1032 patients, with the annual number of cases remaining unchanged over the 10 years. ECMO was most frequently used for post-cardiotomy (42.4%), cardiac-medical (31.8%), pediatric respiratory (17.5%), and neonatal respiratory (8.2%) cases. A 3.7% increase and 6.1% decrease in pediatric respiratory and post-cardiotomy cases, respectively, were noted between periods 1 and 2.Among the four groups, the cardiac-medical group had the highest survival rate (51.2%), followed by the pediatric respiratory (46.4%), post-cardiotomy (36.5%), and neonatal respiratory (29.4%) groups. A consistent improvement was noted in patient survival over the 10 years, with a significant increase between the two periods from 38.2% to 47.1% (P = 0.004). Improvement in survival was evident in post-cardiotomy cases (30–45%, P = 0.002).Significant associations with mortality were observed in neonates, patients requiring dialysis, and those treated with extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (P < 0.001). In pediatric respiratory ECMO, immunocompromised patients also showed a significant correlation with mortality (P < 0.001).
Conclusion
Pediatric ECMO demonstrated a steady increase in overall survival in Korea;however, further efforts are needed since the outcomes remain suboptimal compared with global outcomes.

Result Analysis
Print
Save
E-mail