Background: To assess the quality of life (QoL) and treatment satisfaction with intermittently-scanned continuous glucose monitoring (isCGM) in women with gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM). Methods: This prospective observational study included 189 women with GDM who completed the Korean version of the Audit of Diabetes-Dependent Quality of Life Questionnaire (K-ADDQoL). Among them, 25 women who utilized isCGM between gestational weeks 30 and 34 completed the Korean version of the Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire change version (K-DTSQc) to evaluate their satisfaction with isCGM during pregnancy. Results: GDM had a negative impact on the perceived QoL in 89.4% of the women. All 19 domains of the K-ADDQoL were adversely influenced by GDM, with the most significant impact on the freedom to eat (weighted impact score, −6.98 ± 2.49, P < 0.001) and the least impact on the sex life (−0.25 ± 0.80, P = 0.008). Younger women and those treated with insulin perceived themselves as being more affected in their QoL due to GDM. Women perceived to have less effect on their QoL attributed to GDM exhibited higher ΔHbA1c one year after delivery (ΔHbA1c, 0.3 ± 0.4% vs. 0.0 ± 0.4% in less affected vs. more affected women). The utilization of isCGM improved treatment satisfaction (overall satisfaction score, 10.36 ± 9.21, P < 0.001), independent of glycemic control during pregnancy. Conclusion Although GDM negatively affects the perceived QoL during pregnancy, attentiveness to GDM management may have a positive impact on long-term glycemic control.Moreover, employing isCGM can enhance treatment satisfaction in women with GDM.

Background: To assess the quality of life (QoL) and treatment satisfaction with intermittently-scanned continuous glucose monitoring (isCGM) in women with gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM). Methods: This prospective observational study included 189 women with GDM who completed the Korean version of the Audit of Diabetes-Dependent Quality of Life Questionnaire (K-ADDQoL). Among them, 25 women who utilized isCGM between gestational weeks 30 and 34 completed the Korean version of the Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire change version (K-DTSQc) to evaluate their satisfaction with isCGM during pregnancy. Results: GDM had a negative impact on the perceived QoL in 89.4% of the women. All 19 domains of the K-ADDQoL were adversely influenced by GDM, with the most significant impact on the freedom to eat (weighted impact score, −6.98 ± 2.49, P < 0.001) and the least impact on the sex life (−0.25 ± 0.80, P = 0.008). Younger women and those treated with insulin perceived themselves as being more affected in their QoL due to GDM. Women perceived to have less effect on their QoL attributed to GDM exhibited higher ΔHbA1c one year after delivery (ΔHbA1c, 0.3 ± 0.4% vs. 0.0 ± 0.4% in less affected vs. more affected women). The utilization of isCGM improved treatment satisfaction (overall satisfaction score, 10.36 ± 9.21, P < 0.001), independent of glycemic control during pregnancy. Conclusion Although GDM negatively affects the perceived QoL during pregnancy, attentiveness to GDM management may have a positive impact on long-term glycemic control.Moreover, employing isCGM can enhance treatment satisfaction in women with GDM.

Background: To assess the quality of life (QoL) and treatment satisfaction with intermittently-scanned continuous glucose monitoring (isCGM) in women with gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM). Methods: This prospective observational study included 189 women with GDM who completed the Korean version of the Audit of Diabetes-Dependent Quality of Life Questionnaire (K-ADDQoL). Among them, 25 women who utilized isCGM between gestational weeks 30 and 34 completed the Korean version of the Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire change version (K-DTSQc) to evaluate their satisfaction with isCGM during pregnancy. Results: GDM had a negative impact on the perceived QoL in 89.4% of the women. All 19 domains of the K-ADDQoL were adversely influenced by GDM, with the most significant impact on the freedom to eat (weighted impact score, −6.98 ± 2.49, P < 0.001) and the least impact on the sex life (−0.25 ± 0.80, P = 0.008). Younger women and those treated with insulin perceived themselves as being more affected in their QoL due to GDM. Women perceived to have less effect on their QoL attributed to GDM exhibited higher ΔHbA1c one year after delivery (ΔHbA1c, 0.3 ± 0.4% vs. 0.0 ± 0.4% in less affected vs. more affected women). The utilization of isCGM improved treatment satisfaction (overall satisfaction score, 10.36 ± 9.21, P < 0.001), independent of glycemic control during pregnancy. Conclusion Although GDM negatively affects the perceived QoL during pregnancy, attentiveness to GDM management may have a positive impact on long-term glycemic control.Moreover, employing isCGM can enhance treatment satisfaction in women with GDM.

Background: To assess the quality of life (QoL) and treatment satisfaction with intermittently-scanned continuous glucose monitoring (isCGM) in women with gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM). Methods: This prospective observational study included 189 women with GDM who completed the Korean version of the Audit of Diabetes-Dependent Quality of Life Questionnaire (K-ADDQoL). Among them, 25 women who utilized isCGM between gestational weeks 30 and 34 completed the Korean version of the Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire change version (K-DTSQc) to evaluate their satisfaction with isCGM during pregnancy. Results: GDM had a negative impact on the perceived QoL in 89.4% of the women. All 19 domains of the K-ADDQoL were adversely influenced by GDM, with the most significant impact on the freedom to eat (weighted impact score, −6.98 ± 2.49, P < 0.001) and the least impact on the sex life (−0.25 ± 0.80, P = 0.008). Younger women and those treated with insulin perceived themselves as being more affected in their QoL due to GDM. Women perceived to have less effect on their QoL attributed to GDM exhibited higher ΔHbA1c one year after delivery (ΔHbA1c, 0.3 ± 0.4% vs. 0.0 ± 0.4% in less affected vs. more affected women). The utilization of isCGM improved treatment satisfaction (overall satisfaction score, 10.36 ± 9.21, P < 0.001), independent of glycemic control during pregnancy. Conclusion Although GDM negatively affects the perceived QoL during pregnancy, attentiveness to GDM management may have a positive impact on long-term glycemic control.Moreover, employing isCGM can enhance treatment satisfaction in women with GDM.

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.

Successful liberation from mechanical ventilation is one of the most crucial processes in critical care because it is the first step by which a respiratory failure patient begins to transition out of the intensive care unit and return to their own life. Therefore, when devising appropriate strategies for removing mechanical ventilation, it is essential to consider not only the individual experiences of healthcare professionals, but also scientific and systematic approaches. Recently, numerous studies have investigated methods and tools for identifying when mechanically ventilated patients are ready to breathe on their own. The Korean Society of Critical Care Medicine therefore provides these recommendations to clinicians about liberation from the ventilator. Methods: Meta-analyses and comprehensive syntheses were used to thoroughly review, compile, and summarize the complete body of relevant evidence. All studies were meticulously assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) method, and the outcomes were presented succinctly as evidence profiles. Those evidence syntheses were discussed by a multidisciplinary committee of experts in mechanical ventilation, who then developed and approved recommendations. Results: Recommendations for nine PICO (population, intervention, comparator, and outcome) questions about ventilator liberation are presented in this document. This guideline includes seven conditional recommendations, one expert consensus recommendation, and one conditional deferred recommendation. Conclusions: We developed these clinical guidelines for mechanical ventilation liberation to provide meaningful recommendations. These guidelines reflect the best treatment for patients seeking liberation from mechanical ventilation.

Successful liberation from mechanical ventilation is one of the most crucial processes in critical care because it is the first step by which a respiratory failure patient begins to transition out of the intensive care unit and return to their own life. Therefore, when devising appropriate strategies for removing mechanical ventilation, it is essential to consider not only the individual experiences of healthcare professionals, but also scientific and systematic approaches. Recently, numerous studies have investigated methods and tools for identifying when mechanically ventilated patients are ready to breathe on their own. The Korean Society of Critical Care Medicine therefore provides these recommendations to clinicians about liberation from the ventilator. Methods: Meta-analyses and comprehensive syntheses were used to thoroughly review, compile, and summarize the complete body of relevant evidence. All studies were meticulously assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) method, and the outcomes were presented succinctly as evidence profiles. Those evidence syntheses were discussed by a multidisciplinary committee of experts in mechanical ventilation, who then developed and approved recommendations. Results: Recommendations for nine PICO (population, intervention, comparator, and outcome) questions about ventilator liberation are presented in this document. This guideline includes seven conditional recommendations, one expert consensus recommendation, and one conditional deferred recommendation. Conclusions: We developed these clinical guidelines for mechanical ventilation liberation to provide meaningful recommendations. These guidelines reflect the best treatment for patients seeking liberation from mechanical ventilation.

Successful liberation from mechanical ventilation is one of the most crucial processes in critical care because it is the first step by which a respiratory failure patient begins to transition out of the intensive care unit and return to their own life. Therefore, when devising appropriate strategies for removing mechanical ventilation, it is essential to consider not only the individual experiences of healthcare professionals, but also scientific and systematic approaches. Recently, numerous studies have investigated methods and tools for identifying when mechanically ventilated patients are ready to breathe on their own. The Korean Society of Critical Care Medicine therefore provides these recommendations to clinicians about liberation from the ventilator. Methods: Meta-analyses and comprehensive syntheses were used to thoroughly review, compile, and summarize the complete body of relevant evidence. All studies were meticulously assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) method, and the outcomes were presented succinctly as evidence profiles. Those evidence syntheses were discussed by a multidisciplinary committee of experts in mechanical ventilation, who then developed and approved recommendations. Results: Recommendations for nine PICO (population, intervention, comparator, and outcome) questions about ventilator liberation are presented in this document. This guideline includes seven conditional recommendations, one expert consensus recommendation, and one conditional deferred recommendation. Conclusions: We developed these clinical guidelines for mechanical ventilation liberation to provide meaningful recommendations. These guidelines reflect the best treatment for patients seeking liberation from mechanical ventilation.

Successful liberation from mechanical ventilation is one of the most crucial processes in critical care because it is the first step by which a respiratory failure patient begins to transition out of the intensive care unit and return to their own life. Therefore, when devising appropriate strategies for removing mechanical ventilation, it is essential to consider not only the individual experiences of healthcare professionals, but also scientific and systematic approaches. Recently, numerous studies have investigated methods and tools for identifying when mechanically ventilated patients are ready to breathe on their own. The Korean Society of Critical Care Medicine therefore provides these recommendations to clinicians about liberation from the ventilator. Methods: Meta-analyses and comprehensive syntheses were used to thoroughly review, compile, and summarize the complete body of relevant evidence. All studies were meticulously assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) method, and the outcomes were presented succinctly as evidence profiles. Those evidence syntheses were discussed by a multidisciplinary committee of experts in mechanical ventilation, who then developed and approved recommendations. Results: Recommendations for nine PICO (population, intervention, comparator, and outcome) questions about ventilator liberation are presented in this document. This guideline includes seven conditional recommendations, one expert consensus recommendation, and one conditional deferred recommendation. Conclusions: We developed these clinical guidelines for mechanical ventilation liberation to provide meaningful recommendations. These guidelines reflect the best treatment for patients seeking liberation from mechanical ventilation.