Optimal vascular access and effective closure are fundamental for ensuring the safety and success of percutaneous cardiovascular interventions. As procedural complexity has increased, various access and closure devices have been developed to enhance efficacy and minimize complications. Radial artery access is favored for coronary interventions because it is associated with a lower risk of bleeding and fewer access site complications. However, femoral access remains indispensable for large-bore procedures. Large-bore sheaths are required for endovascular treatments of peripheral artery disease and structural heart interventions. Ultrasound-guided arterial and venous access has become essential for minimizing complications, especially with femoral access. Despite significant advances in closure techniques, complications such as retroperitoneal hemorrhage, pseudoaneurysm, and arteriovenous fistula remain challenging and can adversely affect patient outcomes. This review presents state-of-the-art strategies for the prevention and management of vascular access complications in cardiovascular intervention.

Neuropathic pain markedly impairs quality of life and imposes a substantial socioeconomic burden, while available treatments often provide only partial relief and are limited by safety concerns. The Neuropathic Pain Special Interest Group of the International Association for the Study of Pain (NeuPSIG-IASP) first published pharmacologic recommendations in 2007, followed by a major update in 2015 and a new guideline in 2025. This narrative review specifically compares the 2015 and 2025 NeuPSIG-IASP guidelines, outlining key methodological changes and therapeutic shifts. The 2025 guideline is based on a larger, more rigorous meta-analysis, maintains α2δ-ligands (adds mirogabalin), serotonin-noradrenaline reuptake inhibitors, and tricyclic antidepressants as first-line drugs, downgrades tramadol into the opioid third-line group. It also introduces high-frequency motor-cortex repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation as a weakly recommended third-line option and discusses implications for Korean clinical practice.

Purpose: This study aimed to develop and evaluate the effectiveness of the Trauma-nursing Education and Skill Support (TESS) program based on the ADDIE model (Analysis, Design, Development, Implementation, Evaluation model). The program was designed to enhance trauma nurses’ clinical competencies, including trauma-related knowledge, self-efficacy, and problem-solving ability, through the integration of theoretical education and simulation-based practice. Methods: A quasi-experimental study using a non-equivalent control group pretest–posttest design was conducted. Participants included 108 trauma nurses from regional trauma centers, military trauma centers, and emergency care facilities, who were assigned to an experimental group (n=52) or a control group (n=56). The TESS program consisted of a 2-day, 14-hour blended-learning course that included eight lecture sessions and four simulation-based practice stations. Data were collected at baseline, immediately after the intervention, and at 6 months using validated instruments measuring trauma-related knowledge, self-efficacy, and problem-solving ability. Two-way repeated-measures analysis of variance was used for data analysis. Results: The experimental group demonstrated significant improvements in trauma-related knowledge, self-efficacy, and problem-solving ability compared with baseline (all p<.001). These improvements were sustained at 6 months, although trauma-related knowledge scores showed a slight decline compared with immediate posttest levels. Between-group analyses confirmed significant group-by-time interaction effects for all outcomes: trauma-related knowledge (η2=0.12, p<.001), self-efficacy (η2=0.09, p=.002), and problem-solving ability (η2=0.08, p=.003). Conclusion The TESS program effectively enhanced trauma nurses’ trauma-related knowledge, self-efficacy, and problem-solving ability, with effects sustained for up to 6 months. Incorporating blended learning and simulation-based training into standardized trauma nursing education may strengthen clinical competencies and ultimately contribute to improved patient outcomes.

Purpose: Atherosclerotic plaques in peripheral arterial disease (PAD) include fatty, mixed, and calcified types. Plaque burden is significantly associated with restenosis, reintervention, and amputation-free survival. Rotational and aspirational atherectomy (RAA) may effectively remove such plaques. This study aimed to evaluate long-term outcomes of RAA for infrainguinal PAD. Methods: Patients with infrainguinal lesions underwent revascularization using the Jetstream Atherectomy System (Boston Scientific). This 60-month extension assessed primary patency rate (PPR) and clinically driven target lesion revascularization (CD-TLR). Kaplan-Meier curves were used for survival analysis; P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: A total of 150 patients (mean age, 70.9 years; male, 86.0%; 65.4% with diabetes) were enrolled. The mean lesion length was 15.8 cm, with 74.0% occlusions and 47.3% severe calcification. Lesions were sclerotic (72.4%), thrombosclerotic (13.4%), thrombotic (9.4%), or in-stent (4.7%). A drug-coated balloon (DCB) was used in 85.5% of cases. PPR at 1, 3, and 5 years was 84.1%, 68.1%, and 58.5%, respectively. CD-TLR rates were 93.0%, 81.5%, and 67.4%, respectively. The benefit of DCB was sustained through 3 years but attenuated thereafter, highlighting the need for extended follow-up in infrainguinal interventions. Conclusion RAA demonstrated durable 5-year patency and safety outcomes. Device type, DCB use, lesion morphology, and calcium grade did not significantly influence long-term results. Lesion complexity remains the primary predictor of clinical outcome. Despite the complexity of infrainguinal lesions, the use of RAA demonstrated sustained patency through 3 years, with lesion complexity (particularly TASC classification) emerging as the most critical predictor of long-term success.

Purpose: This study aimed to explore the practices, perceptions, and barriers related to specialty palliative care (SPC) referrals among oncologists in Korea, highlighting the clinical implications of early integration. Materials and Methods: A cross-sectional online survey targeting board-certified hemato-oncology specialists was conducted between August 1-25, 2024. The survey assessed referral practices, attitudes toward early SPC integration, referral criteria, barriers, and institutional characteristics. Results: A total of 227 oncologists participated (response rate, 36.7%). Among them, 68.7% reported frequent SPC referrals, with higher referral rates observed among younger physicians, those in tertiary hospitals, and institutions with in-house SPC teams (p < 0.001). Although 74.9% supported early SPC integration, referrals were often inconsistently timed, frequently occurring after disease progression or at the discontinuation of chemotherapy. For time-based referrals, the most commonly endorsed triggers were disease progression despite palliative second-line treatment and a prognosis of expected mortality within 6-12 months. Need-based referral triggers such as patient or family requests (96.5%), psychological distress (89.9%), or uncontrolled symptoms (83.3%), were also widely endorsed. The major barriers to early SPC integration included patient and family resistance (70.0%) and limited availability of SPC teams (34.4%). Conclusion This study emphasizes the importance of systematic efforts to promote timely SPC integration in Korea, including education to raise patient awareness, improved referral systems, and enhanced infrastructure. The positive attitudes toward early SPC among oncologists reflect a growing recognition of its value, highlighting the need for strategies that align with international standards.

Background: Quadratus lumborum (QL) block is used for multimodal analgesia following abdominal surgery. We introduced an ultrasound-guided QL block to treat postoperative pain for ileostomy closure. This study aimed to investigate the analgesic efficacy of the QL block compared to placebo after ileostomy closure. Methods: Fifty-seven patients undergoing elective ileostomy closure were randomized (1:1) to the placebo or QL block group in this double-blind randomized controlled trial. After general anesthesia, a unilateral QL block was performed under ultrasound guidance. Opioid consumption and numeric rating scale (NRS, 0–10) pain scores were recorded at 2, 6, 12, 24, 48, and 72 hours postoperatively. The primary outcome was the NRS pain score at rest at 6 hours. Secondary outcomes included pain scores, rescue analgesics over 72 hours, Quality of Recovery-15 scores in 24 hours, complications, and length of hospital stay. Results: Baseline characteristics were similar among the 54 patients (27 per group) who completed the study, excluding three who dropped out. The QL block did not reduce NRS pain scores at rest at 6 hours (median [interquartile range], 5 [4–6] vs. 5 [3–6]; p=0.78). Over the 72-hour postoperative period, pain scores at rest remained comparable between the groups, while the QL group showed slightly lower movement-induced pain at certain time points. The QL group required fewer analgesics and antiemetics at certain intervals, but the total opioid use, length of hospital stay, and quality of recovery were not significantly different. Conclusion The QL block showed no meaningful advantage in postoperative analgesia compared to placebo for ileostomy closures.

Background: The World Health Organization has declared the end of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) public health emergency. However, this did not indicate the end of COVID-19. Several months after the infection, numerous patients complain of respiratory or nonspecific symptoms; this condition is called long COVID. Even patients with mild COVID-19 can experience long COVID, thus the burden of long COVID remains considerable. Therefore, we conducted this study to comprehensively analyze the effects of long COVID using multi-faceted assessments. Materials and Methods: We conducted a prospective cohort study involving patients diagnosed with COVID-19 between February 2020 and September 2021 in six tertiary hospitals in Korea. Patients were followed up at 1, 3, 6, 12, 18, and 24 months after discharge. Long COVID was defined as the persistence of three or more COVID-19-related symptoms. The primary outcome of this study was the prevalence of long COVID after the period of COVID-19. Results: During the study period, 290 patients were enrolled. Among them, 54.5 and 34.6% experienced long COVID within 6 months and after more than 18 months, respectively. Several patients showed abnormal results when tested for post-traumatic stress disorder (17.4%) and anxiety (31.9%) after 18 months. In patients who underwent follow-up chest computed tomography 18 months after COVID-19, abnormal findings remained at 51.9%. Males (odds ratio [OR], 0.17; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.05–0.53; P=0.004) and elderly (OR, 1.04; 95% CI, 1.00–1.09; P=0.04) showed a significant association with long COVID after 12–18 months in a multivariable logistic regression analysis. Conclusion Many patients still showed long COVID after 18 months post SARS-CoV-2 infection. When managing these patients, the assessment of multiple aspects is necessary.

Purpose: Since 1995, the Korean Gastric Cancer Association (KGCA) has been periodically conducting nationwide surveys on patients with surgically treated gastric cancer. This study details the results of the survey conducted in 2023. Materials and Methods: The survey was conducted from March to December 2024 using a standardized case report form. Data were collected on 86 items, including patient demographics, tumor characteristics, surgical procedures, and surgical outcomes. The results of the 2023 survey were compared with those of previous surveys. Results: Data from 12,751 cases were collected from 66 institutions. The mean patient age was 64.6 years, and the proportion of patients aged ≥71 years increased from 9.1% in 1995 to 31.7% in 2023. The proportion of upper-third tumors slightly decreased to 16.8% compared to 20.9% in 2019. Early gastric cancer accounted for 63.1% of cases in 2023.Regarding operative procedures, a totally laparoscopic approach was most frequently applied (63.2%) in 2023, while robotic gastrectomy steadily increased to 9.5% from 2.1% in 2014.The most common anastomotic method was the Billroth II procedure (48.8%) after distal gastrectomy and double-tract reconstruction (51.9%) after proximal gastrectomy in 2023.However, the proportion of esophago-gastrostomy with anti-reflux procedures increased to 30.9%. The rates of post-operative mortality and overall complications were 1.0% and 15.3%, respectively. Conclusions The results of the 2023 nationwide survey demonstrate the current status of gastric cancer treatment in Korea. This information will provide a basis for future gastric cancer research.

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.