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: Early diagnosis of esophageal cancer (EC) remains challenging despite the increasing frequency of endoscopic screenings globally. The rapidly increasing number of endoscopic screenings performed over a certain period might influence diagnostic performance. This study evaluated the association between the number of endoscopic screenings and EC detection rates in a nationwide cohort. Methods: This retrospective population-based study used the Korean National Cancer Screening Program database, comprising 32,774,742 males and females aged ≥40 years between 2015and 2019. Negative binomial regression model and least-squares mean evaluation were used to assess the association between month of the year and EC detection rates. Results: This study enrolled 28,032,590 participants who underwent upper endoscopy. The number of participants in the fourth quarter (October to December: 10,923,142 [39.0%]) was 2.1 times higher than that in the first quarter (January to March: 5,085,087 [18.1%]); this trend continued for all 5 years. Contrarily, detection rates for EC in the fourth quarter (0.08/1,000 person) were half that in the first quarter (0.15/1,000 person). The odds of detecting EC were lowest in November; in 2015 the odds were 0.57 (95% confidence interval, 0.41 to 0.79; p=0.001) times lower and in 2016, they were 0.51 (95% confidence interval, 0.37 to 0.68; p<0.001) times lower compared to January. The predicted detection rates showed a decreasing trend toward the end of the year (p>0.05 for all). Conclusions The workload of endoscopists increased excessively with the rising number of endoscopies toward the end of the year, which was reflected by the decreased EC detection rates during this period.

Background/Aims: Although the urea breath test (UBT) is widely used as a representative monitoring test after Helicobacter pylori eradication, false-negative results can occur because of the gray zone related to its cutoff value. This study aimed to compare the diagnostic performances of the rapid urease test (RUT), the RUT with sweeping method, and the UBT, and to investigate the role of the sweeping method in the gray zone of UBT values. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 216 patients who received standard first-line H. pylori eradication treatments (n=216). All participants underwent to testing using the sweeping method and UBT on the same day. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy were analyzed to compare the two methods. Results: The sensitivity (0.537 vs 0.806, p=0.002) and accuracy (0.843 vs 0.870, p=0.026) of the UBT were inferior to those of the sweeping method. A total of 31 individuals tested positive for H. pylori according to the UBT, whereas 54 individuals tested positive according to the sweeping method. In the group for which the gold standard definition indicated H. pylori positivity but UBT results were negative (n=31), all individuals had a UBT value under 2.5‰. In the multivariate logistic regression model, a UBT value of 1.4‰ to 2.5‰ increased the risk of false-negative results by 6.5 times (odds ratio, 6.5; 95% confidence interval, 2.077 to 20.288; p=0.001). Conclusions After H. pylori eradication, false-negative results can occur for individuals undergoing the UBT, primarily for values below the UBT cutoff. The RUT with the sweeping method can potentially help detect H. pylori in the gray zone of the UBT, improving diagnostic accuracy.

Background/Aims: Early diagnosis of esophageal cancer (EC) remains challenging despite the increasing frequency of endoscopic screenings globally. The rapidly increasing number of endoscopic screenings performed over a certain period might influence diagnostic performance. This study evaluated the association between the number of endoscopic screenings and EC detection rates in a nationwide cohort. Methods: This retrospective population-based study used the Korean National Cancer Screening Program database, comprising 32,774,742 males and females aged ≥40 years between 2015and 2019. Negative binomial regression model and least-squares mean evaluation were used to assess the association between month of the year and EC detection rates. Results: This study enrolled 28,032,590 participants who underwent upper endoscopy. The number of participants in the fourth quarter (October to December: 10,923,142 [39.0%]) was 2.1 times higher than that in the first quarter (January to March: 5,085,087 [18.1%]); this trend continued for all 5 years. Contrarily, detection rates for EC in the fourth quarter (0.08/1,000 person) were half that in the first quarter (0.15/1,000 person). The odds of detecting EC were lowest in November; in 2015 the odds were 0.57 (95% confidence interval, 0.41 to 0.79; p=0.001) times lower and in 2016, they were 0.51 (95% confidence interval, 0.37 to 0.68; p<0.001) times lower compared to January. The predicted detection rates showed a decreasing trend toward the end of the year (p>0.05 for all). Conclusions The workload of endoscopists increased excessively with the rising number of endoscopies toward the end of the year, which was reflected by the decreased EC detection rates during this period.

Background/Aims: Although the urea breath test (UBT) is widely used as a representative monitoring test after Helicobacter pylori eradication, false-negative results can occur because of the gray zone related to its cutoff value. This study aimed to compare the diagnostic performances of the rapid urease test (RUT), the RUT with sweeping method, and the UBT, and to investigate the role of the sweeping method in the gray zone of UBT values. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 216 patients who received standard first-line H. pylori eradication treatments (n=216). All participants underwent to testing using the sweeping method and UBT on the same day. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy were analyzed to compare the two methods. Results: The sensitivity (0.537 vs 0.806, p=0.002) and accuracy (0.843 vs 0.870, p=0.026) of the UBT were inferior to those of the sweeping method. A total of 31 individuals tested positive for H. pylori according to the UBT, whereas 54 individuals tested positive according to the sweeping method. In the group for which the gold standard definition indicated H. pylori positivity but UBT results were negative (n=31), all individuals had a UBT value under 2.5‰. In the multivariate logistic regression model, a UBT value of 1.4‰ to 2.5‰ increased the risk of false-negative results by 6.5 times (odds ratio, 6.5; 95% confidence interval, 2.077 to 20.288; p=0.001). Conclusions After H. pylori eradication, false-negative results can occur for individuals undergoing the UBT, primarily for values below the UBT cutoff. The RUT with the sweeping method can potentially help detect H. pylori in the gray zone of the UBT, improving diagnostic accuracy.

Background/Aims: Early diagnosis of esophageal cancer (EC) remains challenging despite the increasing frequency of endoscopic screenings globally. The rapidly increasing number of endoscopic screenings performed over a certain period might influence diagnostic performance. This study evaluated the association between the number of endoscopic screenings and EC detection rates in a nationwide cohort. Methods: This retrospective population-based study used the Korean National Cancer Screening Program database, comprising 32,774,742 males and females aged ≥40 years between 2015and 2019. Negative binomial regression model and least-squares mean evaluation were used to assess the association between month of the year and EC detection rates. Results: This study enrolled 28,032,590 participants who underwent upper endoscopy. The number of participants in the fourth quarter (October to December: 10,923,142 [39.0%]) was 2.1 times higher than that in the first quarter (January to March: 5,085,087 [18.1%]); this trend continued for all 5 years. Contrarily, detection rates for EC in the fourth quarter (0.08/1,000 person) were half that in the first quarter (0.15/1,000 person). The odds of detecting EC were lowest in November; in 2015 the odds were 0.57 (95% confidence interval, 0.41 to 0.79; p=0.001) times lower and in 2016, they were 0.51 (95% confidence interval, 0.37 to 0.68; p<0.001) times lower compared to January. The predicted detection rates showed a decreasing trend toward the end of the year (p>0.05 for all). Conclusions The workload of endoscopists increased excessively with the rising number of endoscopies toward the end of the year, which was reflected by the decreased EC detection rates during this period.

Background/Aims: Although the urea breath test (UBT) is widely used as a representative monitoring test after Helicobacter pylori eradication, false-negative results can occur because of the gray zone related to its cutoff value. This study aimed to compare the diagnostic performances of the rapid urease test (RUT), the RUT with sweeping method, and the UBT, and to investigate the role of the sweeping method in the gray zone of UBT values. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 216 patients who received standard first-line H. pylori eradication treatments (n=216). All participants underwent to testing using the sweeping method and UBT on the same day. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy were analyzed to compare the two methods. Results: The sensitivity (0.537 vs 0.806, p=0.002) and accuracy (0.843 vs 0.870, p=0.026) of the UBT were inferior to those of the sweeping method. A total of 31 individuals tested positive for H. pylori according to the UBT, whereas 54 individuals tested positive according to the sweeping method. In the group for which the gold standard definition indicated H. pylori positivity but UBT results were negative (n=31), all individuals had a UBT value under 2.5‰. In the multivariate logistic regression model, a UBT value of 1.4‰ to 2.5‰ increased the risk of false-negative results by 6.5 times (odds ratio, 6.5; 95% confidence interval, 2.077 to 20.288; p=0.001). Conclusions After H. pylori eradication, false-negative results can occur for individuals undergoing the UBT, primarily for values below the UBT cutoff. The RUT with the sweeping method can potentially help detect H. pylori in the gray zone of the UBT, improving diagnostic accuracy.

Background/Aims: Early diagnosis of esophageal cancer (EC) remains challenging despite the increasing frequency of endoscopic screenings globally. The rapidly increasing number of endoscopic screenings performed over a certain period might influence diagnostic performance. This study evaluated the association between the number of endoscopic screenings and EC detection rates in a nationwide cohort. Methods: This retrospective population-based study used the Korean National Cancer Screening Program database, comprising 32,774,742 males and females aged ≥40 years between 2015and 2019. Negative binomial regression model and least-squares mean evaluation were used to assess the association between month of the year and EC detection rates. Results: This study enrolled 28,032,590 participants who underwent upper endoscopy. The number of participants in the fourth quarter (October to December: 10,923,142 [39.0%]) was 2.1 times higher than that in the first quarter (January to March: 5,085,087 [18.1%]); this trend continued for all 5 years. Contrarily, detection rates for EC in the fourth quarter (0.08/1,000 person) were half that in the first quarter (0.15/1,000 person). The odds of detecting EC were lowest in November; in 2015 the odds were 0.57 (95% confidence interval, 0.41 to 0.79; p=0.001) times lower and in 2016, they were 0.51 (95% confidence interval, 0.37 to 0.68; p<0.001) times lower compared to January. The predicted detection rates showed a decreasing trend toward the end of the year (p>0.05 for all). Conclusions The workload of endoscopists increased excessively with the rising number of endoscopies toward the end of the year, which was reflected by the decreased EC detection rates during this period.

Background/Aims: Although the urea breath test (UBT) is widely used as a representative monitoring test after Helicobacter pylori eradication, false-negative results can occur because of the gray zone related to its cutoff value. This study aimed to compare the diagnostic performances of the rapid urease test (RUT), the RUT with sweeping method, and the UBT, and to investigate the role of the sweeping method in the gray zone of UBT values. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 216 patients who received standard first-line H. pylori eradication treatments (n=216). All participants underwent to testing using the sweeping method and UBT on the same day. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy were analyzed to compare the two methods. Results: The sensitivity (0.537 vs 0.806, p=0.002) and accuracy (0.843 vs 0.870, p=0.026) of the UBT were inferior to those of the sweeping method. A total of 31 individuals tested positive for H. pylori according to the UBT, whereas 54 individuals tested positive according to the sweeping method. In the group for which the gold standard definition indicated H. pylori positivity but UBT results were negative (n=31), all individuals had a UBT value under 2.5‰. In the multivariate logistic regression model, a UBT value of 1.4‰ to 2.5‰ increased the risk of false-negative results by 6.5 times (odds ratio, 6.5; 95% confidence interval, 2.077 to 20.288; p=0.001). Conclusions After H. pylori eradication, false-negative results can occur for individuals undergoing the UBT, primarily for values below the UBT cutoff. The RUT with the sweeping method can potentially help detect H. pylori in the gray zone of the UBT, improving diagnostic accuracy.

Purpose: Esophagojejunostomy leakage (EJL) remains one of the most critical complications following total gastrectomy for gastric cancer. This study aimed to evaluate the evolving therapeutic approaches and clinical outcomes of EJL using data from a large-scale multicenter retrospective cohort. Methods: Among 6,577 patients who underwent total gastrectomy or proximal gastrectomy with double tract reconstruction at nine institutions from 2003 to 2024, 196 (3.0%) developed EJL. Of these, 162 patients with comprehensive clinical data were included in the final analysis. The study examined treatment modalities, changes in management over time, patient characteristics, surgical variables, and clinical outcomes. Four groups were defined according to treatment approach: conservative, endoscopic, reoperation, and multimodal (combined) therapy. Results: Endoscopic therapy was first introduced in 2011 and has progressively supplanted reoperation, now comprising 32.5% of cases. The average time to EJL diagnosis was 8.4 days after surgery. Overall in-hospital mortality was 6.1% (10/162). When conservative management was excluded, endoscopic treatment demonstrated the highest rate of therapeutic success (94.3%, p = 0.004). Both the duration until diet resumption and length of hospital stay were notably reduced in the endoscopic and conservative groups compared with reoperation and multimodal therapy (p < 0.001). Moreover, although the highest post-leakage hospitalization costs were observed with multimodal treatment (p < 0.001), overall hospitalization expenses were significantly lower for patients managed conservatively or with endoscopic intervention (p < 0.001). Conclusion Over the past two decades, management of EJL has shifted toward endoscopic approaches. Endoscopic therapies yield superior clinical outcomes and should be considered a primary option for appropriate candidates.