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.

This study evaluates the effectiveness of Therapeutic Hypothermia (TH) in treating poor-grade aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH), focusing on functional outcomes, mortality, and complications such as vasospasm, delayed cerebral ischemia (DCI), and hydrocephalus. Methods: Adhering to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 guidelines, a comprehensive literature search was conducted across multiple databases, including Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Central, up to November 2023. Nine studies involving 368 patients were selected based on eligibility criteria focusing on TH in poor-grade SAH patients. Data extraction, bias assessment, and evidence certainty were systematically performed. Results: The primary analysis of unfavorable outcomes in 271 participants showed no significant difference between the TH and standard care groups (risk ratio [RR], 0.87). However, a significant reduction in vasospasm was observed in the TH group (RR, 0.63) among 174 participants. No significant differences were found in DCI, hydrocephalus, and mortality rates in the respective participant groups. Conclusions: TH did not significantly improve primary unfavorable outcomes in poor-grade SAH patients. However, the reduction in vasospasm rates indicates potential specific benefits. The absence of significant findings in other secondary outcomes and mortality highlights the need for further research to better understand TH's role in treating this patient population.

This study evaluates the effectiveness of Therapeutic Hypothermia (TH) in treating poor-grade aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH), focusing on functional outcomes, mortality, and complications such as vasospasm, delayed cerebral ischemia (DCI), and hydrocephalus. Methods: Adhering to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 guidelines, a comprehensive literature search was conducted across multiple databases, including Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Central, up to November 2023. Nine studies involving 368 patients were selected based on eligibility criteria focusing on TH in poor-grade SAH patients. Data extraction, bias assessment, and evidence certainty were systematically performed. Results: The primary analysis of unfavorable outcomes in 271 participants showed no significant difference between the TH and standard care groups (risk ratio [RR], 0.87). However, a significant reduction in vasospasm was observed in the TH group (RR, 0.63) among 174 participants. No significant differences were found in DCI, hydrocephalus, and mortality rates in the respective participant groups. Conclusions: TH did not significantly improve primary unfavorable outcomes in poor-grade SAH patients. However, the reduction in vasospasm rates indicates potential specific benefits. The absence of significant findings in other secondary outcomes and mortality highlights the need for further research to better understand TH's role in treating this patient population.

This study evaluates the effectiveness of Therapeutic Hypothermia (TH) in treating poor-grade aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH), focusing on functional outcomes, mortality, and complications such as vasospasm, delayed cerebral ischemia (DCI), and hydrocephalus. Methods: Adhering to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 guidelines, a comprehensive literature search was conducted across multiple databases, including Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Central, up to November 2023. Nine studies involving 368 patients were selected based on eligibility criteria focusing on TH in poor-grade SAH patients. Data extraction, bias assessment, and evidence certainty were systematically performed. Results: The primary analysis of unfavorable outcomes in 271 participants showed no significant difference between the TH and standard care groups (risk ratio [RR], 0.87). However, a significant reduction in vasospasm was observed in the TH group (RR, 0.63) among 174 participants. No significant differences were found in DCI, hydrocephalus, and mortality rates in the respective participant groups. Conclusions: TH did not significantly improve primary unfavorable outcomes in poor-grade SAH patients. However, the reduction in vasospasm rates indicates potential specific benefits. The absence of significant findings in other secondary outcomes and mortality highlights the need for further research to better understand TH's role in treating this patient population.

This study evaluates the effectiveness of Therapeutic Hypothermia (TH) in treating poor-grade aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH), focusing on functional outcomes, mortality, and complications such as vasospasm, delayed cerebral ischemia (DCI), and hydrocephalus. Methods: Adhering to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 guidelines, a comprehensive literature search was conducted across multiple databases, including Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Central, up to November 2023. Nine studies involving 368 patients were selected based on eligibility criteria focusing on TH in poor-grade SAH patients. Data extraction, bias assessment, and evidence certainty were systematically performed. Results: The primary analysis of unfavorable outcomes in 271 participants showed no significant difference between the TH and standard care groups (risk ratio [RR], 0.87). However, a significant reduction in vasospasm was observed in the TH group (RR, 0.63) among 174 participants. No significant differences were found in DCI, hydrocephalus, and mortality rates in the respective participant groups. Conclusions: TH did not significantly improve primary unfavorable outcomes in poor-grade SAH patients. However, the reduction in vasospasm rates indicates potential specific benefits. The absence of significant findings in other secondary outcomes and mortality highlights the need for further research to better understand TH's role in treating this patient population.

Background: s/Aims: Reported incidence of extrahepatic bile duct cancer is higher in Asians than in Western populations. Korea, in particular, is one of the countries with the highest incidence rates of extrahepatic bile duct cancer in the world. Although research and innovative therapeutic modalities for extrahepatic bile duct cancer are emerging, clinical guidelines are currently unavailable in Korea. The Korean Society of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic Surgery in collaboration with related societies (Korean Pancreatic and Biliary Surgery Society, Korean Society of Abdominal Radiology, Korean Society of Medical Oncology, Korean Society of Radiation Oncology, Korean Society of Pathologists, and Korean Society of Nuclear Medicine) decided to establish clinical guideline for extrahepatic bile duct cancer in June 2021. Methods: Contents of the guidelines were developed through subgroup meetings for each key question and a preliminary draft was finalized through a Clinical Guidelines Committee workshop. Results: In November 2021, the finalized draft was presented for public scrutiny during a formal hearing. Conclusions The extrahepatic guideline committee believed that this guideline could be helpful in the treatment of patients.

Gastric cancer is one of the most common cancers in Korea and the world. Since 2004, this is the 4th gastric cancer guideline published in Korea which is the revised version of previous evidence-based approach in 2018. Current guideline is a collaborative work of the interdisciplinary working group including experts in the field of gastric surgery, gastroenterology, endoscopy, medical oncology, abdominal radiology, pathology, nuclear medicine, radiation oncology and guideline development methodology. Total of 33 key questions were updated or proposed after a collaborative review by the working group and 40 statements were developed according to the systematic review using the MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library and KoreaMed database. The level of evidence and the grading of recommendations were categorized according to the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation proposition. Evidence level, benefit, harm, and clinical applicability was considered as the significant factors for recommendation. The working group reviewed recommendations and discussed for consensus. In the earlier part, general consideration discusses screening, diagnosis and staging of endoscopy, pathology, radiology, and nuclear medicine. Flowchart is depicted with statements which is supported by meta-analysis and references. Since clinical trial and systematic review was not suitable for postoperative oncologic and nutritional follow-up, working group agreed to conduct a nationwide survey investigating the clinical practice of all tertiary or general hospitals in Korea. The purpose of this survey was to provide baseline information on follow up. Herein we present a multidisciplinary-evidence based gastric cancer guideline.

Background: The aims of this study are to review data on 4-months age National Health Screening Program for Infants and Children (NHSPIC) using a National Health Insurance Service (NHIS) database, and to analyze the newborn hearing screening (NHS) results and related characteristics of the 4-months NHSPIC for 7 years in South Korea. Methods: We analyzed a NHIS database of infants who had participated in the 4-month age NHSPIC from 2010 to 2016. According to the results of hearing questionnaires and physical examination, we analyzed the outcomes of NHS and related infantile and socioeconomic factors. Results: Among 3,128,924 of total eligible infants in Korea between the year 2010 and 2016, 69.2% (2,164,621 infants) conducted 4-months age NHSPIC, and 94.4% (2,042,577 infants) of which performed hearing questionnaires regarding NHS. Among the total hearing examinees, premature infants accounted for 3.6%, infants who were hospitalized in the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) for more than 5 days accounted for 5.6%, and infants with head and neck abnormalities were 0.6%. The NHS performing rate was 79.1% for total hearing examinees in 2010, but gradually increased to 88.9% in 2016. The NHS performing rate in 2016 was 93.4% for premature infants, 91.7% for NICU hospitalized babies. The mean referral rate was 0.6% for total hearing examinees, 1.4% for premature infants, and 2.3% for NICU hospitalized babies. When we analyzed the NHS performing rate and the referral rate according to the household income level, the NHS performing rate of infants in Medical Aid programs was the lowest as 65.6%, and the NHS performing rates in other five levels of NHIS was higher ranging between 85.1% to 86.0%. The referral rate of infants in the Medical Aid program (3.8%) was significantly higher than those of infants in other classes (1.10–1.25%). Conclusion The estimated overall NHS performing rate in Korea gradually increased and was 88.9% in 2016. The overall referral rate was low as 0.6%, and it was significantly different depending on the infant’s health condition and household income levels. We assume that our finding would help to establish policies managing hearing impaired children, and to develop the customized hearing care service programs considering the household economic levels.