Purpose: We compared short-term clinical outcomes after cataract surgery with implantation of a novel refractive extended depth-of-focus TECNIS PureSee intraocular lens (IOL) between patients with stage 1 epiretinal membrane (ERM)—characterized by a thin membrane over the macula with preserved foveal depression―and those with a normal retina. Methods: This retrospective study included 60 eyes of 60 patients who underwent cataract surgery with implantation of the TECNIS PureSee IOL between January 2024 and January 2025: 30 eyes with stage 1 ERM and 30 eyes with a normal retina. Preoperative characteristics, including age, sex distribution, cataract severity, corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), and higher-order aberrations, were compared between groups, as were IOL power and target refraction. Postoperative outcomes at 1 month―including CDVA, uncorrected distance, intermediate, and near visual acuity, ocular aberrations, and contrast sensitivity―were evaluated. Results: There were no significant differences in preoperative characteristics, such as age, sex distribution, cataract grade, CDVA, higher-order aberrations, IOL power, or target refraction between the two groups. At 1 month postoperatively, CDVA, uncorrected distance, intermediate, and near visual acuity, higher-order aberrations, and contrast sensitivity exhibited no significant differences between groups. Conclusions In this short-term analysis, the PureSee IOL demonstrated comparable efficacy and safety in cataract patients with stage 1 ERM to those with a normal retina.

Background/Aims: The International Anorectal Physiology Working Group (IAPWG) has proposed a standardized protocol and the London classification to enhance the consistency and diagnostic accuracy of anorectal manometry (ARM). However, real-world adoption in Asian countries has not been systematically assessed. This study aims to evaluate current ARM practices and adherence to the IAPWG protocol across Asian centers. Methods: A cross-sectional, 50-item web-based survey was distributed to gastroenterologists and motility specialists practicing in Asian countries. Results: Thirty-one centers from 8 countries responded (20 in Korea, 3 in Japan, 2 in Taiwan, 1 in China, and 7 in other countries). High-resolution ARM was used in 80.6% of centers, primarily with solid-state catheters. While all centers performed rest and short squeeze maneuvers, only 58.1% conducted all maneuvers recommended by the IAPWG protocol.Considerable variation was observed in test methodology and interpretation, including definitions of resting pressure, squeeze duration, push maneuver repetition, and rectal balloon volume for rectoanal inhibitory reflex. For balloon expulsion and rectal sensory testing, centers differed in patient positioning, balloon type, inflation methods, and threshold definitions. Only 38.7% of centers reported having institutional normative values for test interpretation, and 64.5% applied the London classification. Conclusions Across Asian centers, ARM practice shows marked regional variation and incomplete implementation of the IAPWG standardized protocol and London classification, highlighting persistent gaps in standardization. Strengthening procedural guidance, regionally appropriate normative data, and interpretation criteria through coordinated education and international collaboration is needed to support more consistent and clinically meaningful use of ARM in routine practice.

Background/Aims: Endoscopic anti-reflux therapy is a therapeutic option for gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), providing durable effects. However, clinical data from Korea remain limited. This study evaluates the clinical outcomes of endoscopic radiofrequency Stretta therapy in Korean patients. Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted on 71 patients with GERD who underwent Stretta therapy at 2 tertiary hospitals in Korea between November 2015 and July 2021. Clinical outcomes, including patient satisfaction, medication cessation or reduction, and complications, were evaluated. Pre- and post-procedural esophageal manometry and 24-hour pH monitoring test results were also analyzed. Results: Patient satisfaction rates at 1, 6, and 12 months post-procedure were 54.7% (35/64), 70.0% (28/40), and 75.0% (21/28), respectively. Medication cessation or reduction was achieved in 31.2% (20/64) at 1 month, 70.0% (28/40) at 6 months, and 67.9% (19/28) at 12 months. Esophageal manometry (n = 21) showed no significant changes in mean lower esophageal sphincter pressure (18.7 mmHg [2.5-52.9] vs 17.4 mmHg [0.0-43.0], P = 0.702) or mean integrated relaxation pressure (8.2 mmHg [0.0-28.0] vs 10.1 mmHg [0.0-31.0], P = 0.840). The 24-hour pH monitoring (n = 18) demonstrated a nonsignificant decrease in acid exposure time (pH < 4) from 2.3% (0.0-8.4) to 1.6% (0.0-7.3) (P = 0.182). Similarly, the DeMeester score decreased non-significantly from 8.4 (0.8-27.7) to 6.6 (0.8-21.8) (P = 0.352). No procedure-related complications occurred. Conclusion Endoscopic radiofrequency Stretta therapy appears to be a safe treatment option for GERD and may provide favorable patient satisfaction and medication reduction.

Background: Tinnitus is a multifactorial condition with no universally accepted assessment guidelines. The Korean Tinnitus Study Group previously established consensus statements on the definition, classification, and diagnostic tests for tinnitus. As a continuation of this effort, this study aims to establish expert consensus on tinnitus assessment and treatment outcome evaluation, specifically tailored to the Korean clinical context. Methods: A modified Delphi method involving 26 otology experts from across Korea was used. A two-round Delphi survey was conducted to evaluate statements related to tinnitus assessment before and after treatment. Statements were rated on a scale of 1 to 9 for the level of agreement. Consensus was defined as ≥ 70% agreement (score of 7–9) and ≤ 15% disagreement (score of 1–3). Statistical measures such as content validity ratio and Kendall’s coefficient of concordance (W) were calculated to assess agreement levels. Results: Of the 46 assessment-related statements, 17 (37%) reached consensus, though overall pre-treatment assessments showed weak agreement (Kendall’s W = 0.319). Key areas of agreement included the use of the visual analogue scale, numeric rating scale, and validated questionnaires for pre-treatment evaluation. Five statements, such as the use of computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, and angiography for diagnosing pulsatile tinnitus, achieved over 90% agreement. For treatment outcome measurements, 8 of 12 statements (67%) reached a consensus, with moderate agreement (Kendall’s W = 0.513). Validated questionnaires and psychoacoustic tests were recommended for evaluating treatment effects within 12 weeks. While standardized imaging for pulsatile tinnitus and additional clinical tests were strongly recommended, full consensus was not achieved across all imaging modalities. Conclusion This study provides actionable recommendations for tinnitus assessment and treatment evaluation, emphasizing the use of standardized tools and individualized approaches based on patient needs. These findings offer a practical framework to enhance consistency and effectiveness in tinnitus management within Korean clinical settings.

Background: Tinnitus is a multifactorial condition with no universally accepted assessment guidelines. The Korean Tinnitus Study Group previously established consensus statements on the definition, classification, and diagnostic tests for tinnitus. As a continuation of this effort, this study aims to establish expert consensus on tinnitus assessment and treatment outcome evaluation, specifically tailored to the Korean clinical context. Methods: A modified Delphi method involving 26 otology experts from across Korea was used. A two-round Delphi survey was conducted to evaluate statements related to tinnitus assessment before and after treatment. Statements were rated on a scale of 1 to 9 for the level of agreement. Consensus was defined as ≥ 70% agreement (score of 7–9) and ≤ 15% disagreement (score of 1–3). Statistical measures such as content validity ratio and Kendall’s coefficient of concordance (W) were calculated to assess agreement levels. Results: Of the 46 assessment-related statements, 17 (37%) reached consensus, though overall pre-treatment assessments showed weak agreement (Kendall’s W = 0.319). Key areas of agreement included the use of the visual analogue scale, numeric rating scale, and validated questionnaires for pre-treatment evaluation. Five statements, such as the use of computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, and angiography for diagnosing pulsatile tinnitus, achieved over 90% agreement. For treatment outcome measurements, 8 of 12 statements (67%) reached a consensus, with moderate agreement (Kendall’s W = 0.513). Validated questionnaires and psychoacoustic tests were recommended for evaluating treatment effects within 12 weeks. While standardized imaging for pulsatile tinnitus and additional clinical tests were strongly recommended, full consensus was not achieved across all imaging modalities. Conclusion This study provides actionable recommendations for tinnitus assessment and treatment evaluation, emphasizing the use of standardized tools and individualized approaches based on patient needs. These findings offer a practical framework to enhance consistency and effectiveness in tinnitus management within Korean clinical settings.

Background: Tinnitus is a multifactorial condition with no universally accepted assessment guidelines. The Korean Tinnitus Study Group previously established consensus statements on the definition, classification, and diagnostic tests for tinnitus. As a continuation of this effort, this study aims to establish expert consensus on tinnitus assessment and treatment outcome evaluation, specifically tailored to the Korean clinical context. Methods: A modified Delphi method involving 26 otology experts from across Korea was used. A two-round Delphi survey was conducted to evaluate statements related to tinnitus assessment before and after treatment. Statements were rated on a scale of 1 to 9 for the level of agreement. Consensus was defined as ≥ 70% agreement (score of 7–9) and ≤ 15% disagreement (score of 1–3). Statistical measures such as content validity ratio and Kendall’s coefficient of concordance (W) were calculated to assess agreement levels. Results: Of the 46 assessment-related statements, 17 (37%) reached consensus, though overall pre-treatment assessments showed weak agreement (Kendall’s W = 0.319). Key areas of agreement included the use of the visual analogue scale, numeric rating scale, and validated questionnaires for pre-treatment evaluation. Five statements, such as the use of computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, and angiography for diagnosing pulsatile tinnitus, achieved over 90% agreement. For treatment outcome measurements, 8 of 12 statements (67%) reached a consensus, with moderate agreement (Kendall’s W = 0.513). Validated questionnaires and psychoacoustic tests were recommended for evaluating treatment effects within 12 weeks. While standardized imaging for pulsatile tinnitus and additional clinical tests were strongly recommended, full consensus was not achieved across all imaging modalities. Conclusion This study provides actionable recommendations for tinnitus assessment and treatment evaluation, emphasizing the use of standardized tools and individualized approaches based on patient needs. These findings offer a practical framework to enhance consistency and effectiveness in tinnitus management within Korean clinical settings.

Background: Tinnitus is a multifactorial condition with no universally accepted assessment guidelines. The Korean Tinnitus Study Group previously established consensus statements on the definition, classification, and diagnostic tests for tinnitus. As a continuation of this effort, this study aims to establish expert consensus on tinnitus assessment and treatment outcome evaluation, specifically tailored to the Korean clinical context. Methods: A modified Delphi method involving 26 otology experts from across Korea was used. A two-round Delphi survey was conducted to evaluate statements related to tinnitus assessment before and after treatment. Statements were rated on a scale of 1 to 9 for the level of agreement. Consensus was defined as ≥ 70% agreement (score of 7–9) and ≤ 15% disagreement (score of 1–3). Statistical measures such as content validity ratio and Kendall’s coefficient of concordance (W) were calculated to assess agreement levels. Results: Of the 46 assessment-related statements, 17 (37%) reached consensus, though overall pre-treatment assessments showed weak agreement (Kendall’s W = 0.319). Key areas of agreement included the use of the visual analogue scale, numeric rating scale, and validated questionnaires for pre-treatment evaluation. Five statements, such as the use of computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, and angiography for diagnosing pulsatile tinnitus, achieved over 90% agreement. For treatment outcome measurements, 8 of 12 statements (67%) reached a consensus, with moderate agreement (Kendall’s W = 0.513). Validated questionnaires and psychoacoustic tests were recommended for evaluating treatment effects within 12 weeks. While standardized imaging for pulsatile tinnitus and additional clinical tests were strongly recommended, full consensus was not achieved across all imaging modalities. Conclusion This study provides actionable recommendations for tinnitus assessment and treatment evaluation, emphasizing the use of standardized tools and individualized approaches based on patient needs. These findings offer a practical framework to enhance consistency and effectiveness in tinnitus management within Korean clinical settings.

Objectives: . Balloon dilation of the Eustachian tube (BDET) is widely recognized as a minimally invasive treatment for obstructive Eustachian tube dysfunction (ETD). We employed a Delphi consensus methodology to develop recommendations for the clinical management of BDET in cases of obstructive ETD. Methods: . A Delphi panel consisting of 26 expert physicians specializing in otology participated in two rounds of anonymous, iterative questionnaires. Consensus was defined as agreement from ≥70% of the panelists on a recommendation, while disagreement was defined as <70% agreement. The responses from the Delphi study were analyzed using both the content validity ratio and Kendall’s coefficient of concordance. Results: . The panel finally evaluated 26 topics, reaching agreement on 9 and failing to reach consensus on 17 after two rounds. While consensus was not achieved regarding the postoperative follow-up period, a duration of 12 months was most commonly adopted. The Valsalva maneuver and questionnaire responses were identified as the most agreed-upon postoperative assessment tools following BDET. Conclusion . Consensus was reached on several recommendations for managing BEDT in obstructive ETD. This agreement will guide future research aimed at defining standard postoperative management for BEDT.

Background/Aims: Little is known about the practical clinical application of neuromodulators and psychiatric treatments in patients with functional gastrointestinal disorders (FGIDs). We investigate the knowledge, attitudes, and practices of Korean clinicians regarding the use of neuromodulators and psychiatric treatments for FGIDs. Methods: This prospective, online, cross-sectional study was conducted between May and August 2022. A questionnaire regarding the knowledge, attitude, and practice of neuromodulators and psychiatric treatments for FGIDs was developed and administered to primary care clinicians and gastroenterologists in university hospitals in Korea. Results: Overall, 451 clinicians from primary (n = 179, 39.7%), secondary (n = 113, 25.1%), and tertiary (n = 159, 35.3%) hospitals participated in the survey. Most of them considered that neuromodulators (98.7%) and psychiatric treatment (86.5%) were required for patients with FGIDs. However, approximately one-third of them did not prescribe neuromodulators, mainly due to unfamiliarity with the drugs, and only one-quarter considered psychiatric referral. Compared to gastroenterologists at university hospitals, primary care clinicians’ prescriptions had a lower rate (87.2% vs 64.2%, P < 0.001) and shorter duration of neuromodulator. The psychiatric referral rate was lower for primary care clinicians than for gastroenterologists at university hospitals (19.0% vs 34.2%, P < 0.001). Conclusions Knowledge, attitude, and practice levels regarding neuromodulators and psychiatric treatment among clinicians are inhomogeneous, and a knowledge gap exists between primary care clinicians and gastroenterologists at university hospitals. Encouraging ongoing education for Korean clinicians regarding the appropriate use of neuromodulators and psychiatric treatments in patients with FGIDs is suggested.

Background/Aims: Little is known about the practical clinical application of neuromodulators and psychiatric treatments in patients with functional gastrointestinal disorders (FGIDs). We investigate the knowledge, attitudes, and practices of Korean clinicians regarding the use of neuromodulators and psychiatric treatments for FGIDs. Methods: This prospective, online, cross-sectional study was conducted between May and August 2022. A questionnaire regarding the knowledge, attitude, and practice of neuromodulators and psychiatric treatments for FGIDs was developed and administered to primary care clinicians and gastroenterologists in university hospitals in Korea. Results: Overall, 451 clinicians from primary (n = 179, 39.7%), secondary (n = 113, 25.1%), and tertiary (n = 159, 35.3%) hospitals participated in the survey. Most of them considered that neuromodulators (98.7%) and psychiatric treatment (86.5%) were required for patients with FGIDs. However, approximately one-third of them did not prescribe neuromodulators, mainly due to unfamiliarity with the drugs, and only one-quarter considered psychiatric referral. Compared to gastroenterologists at university hospitals, primary care clinicians’ prescriptions had a lower rate (87.2% vs 64.2%, P < 0.001) and shorter duration of neuromodulator. The psychiatric referral rate was lower for primary care clinicians than for gastroenterologists at university hospitals (19.0% vs 34.2%, P < 0.001). Conclusions Knowledge, attitude, and practice levels regarding neuromodulators and psychiatric treatment among clinicians are inhomogeneous, and a knowledge gap exists between primary care clinicians and gastroenterologists at university hospitals. Encouraging ongoing education for Korean clinicians regarding the appropriate use of neuromodulators and psychiatric treatments in patients with FGIDs is suggested.