Objectives: This study aimed to investigate the current status of periodontal disease programs implemented by public health centers in the Republic of Korea. Methods: An explanatory survey was conducted by the Ministry of Health and Welfare from October to November 2023. The survey focused on the periodontal programs and the implementation status across different stages. Distributed and collected via Google Forms, the survey targeted 196 oral health teams within public health centers in Korea. A total of 109 public health centers responded to the study questionnaire, yielding a participation rate of 55.6%. Data were analyzed using IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, version 26. Results: A majority of periodontal disease programs were implemented exclusively by oral health teams, with a rate of 33.0%. The implementation rate of collaboration with home-visiting health teams was 17.4% and with other teams was 10.1%. The implementation rates of periodontal management across stages were as follows: 11.9% for periodontal examination, 18.3% for periodontal treatment, and 11.9% for sustainable periodontal care. Conclusions Periodontal disease programs are predominantly conducted by oral health teams with limited collaboration across other health teams. Additionally, periodontal management activities, such as examinations and treatments, remain insufficient. Integration between oral health teams and other health teams within public health centers or private dental clinics should be improved.

Objectives: This study aimed to investigate the current status of periodontal disease programs implemented by public health centers in the Republic of Korea. Methods: An explanatory survey was conducted by the Ministry of Health and Welfare from October to November 2023. The survey focused on the periodontal programs and the implementation status across different stages. Distributed and collected via Google Forms, the survey targeted 196 oral health teams within public health centers in Korea. A total of 109 public health centers responded to the study questionnaire, yielding a participation rate of 55.6%. Data were analyzed using IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, version 26. Results: A majority of periodontal disease programs were implemented exclusively by oral health teams, with a rate of 33.0%. The implementation rate of collaboration with home-visiting health teams was 17.4% and with other teams was 10.1%. The implementation rates of periodontal management across stages were as follows: 11.9% for periodontal examination, 18.3% for periodontal treatment, and 11.9% for sustainable periodontal care. Conclusions Periodontal disease programs are predominantly conducted by oral health teams with limited collaboration across other health teams. Additionally, periodontal management activities, such as examinations and treatments, remain insufficient. Integration between oral health teams and other health teams within public health centers or private dental clinics should be improved.

This fifth revised version of the Korean Society of Gynecologic Oncology practice guidelines for the management of cervical cancer incorporates recent research findings and changes in treatment strategies based on version 4.0 released in 2020. Each key question was developed by focusing on recent notable insights and crucial contemporary issues in the field of cervical cancer. These questions were evaluated for their significance and impact on the current treatment and were finalized through voting by the development committee. The selected key questions were as follows: the efficacy and safety of immune checkpoint inhibitors as firstor second-line treatment for recurrent or metastatic cervical cancer; the oncologic safety of minimally invasive radical hysterectomy in early stage cervical cancer; the efficacy and safety of adjuvant systemic treatment after concurrent chemoradiotherapy in locally advanced cervical cancer; and the oncologic safety of sentinel lymph node mapping compared to pelvic lymph node dissection. The recommendations, directions, and strengths of this guideline were based on systematic reviews and meta-analyses, and were finally confirmed through public hearings and external reviews. In this study, we describe the revised practice guidelines for the management of cervical cancer.

Stent-assisted coil embolization (SAC) is used for complex wide-necked aneurysms but can expose stent struts to the arterial lumen, leading to thrombosis. Herein, we report two cases of delayed thromboembolic stroke post-SAC. Case 1: A 71-year-old woman had an acute ischemic stroke 2 months after Y-stent SAC for a basilar artery aneurysm, and aspirin was prescribed post-procedure. Diffusion-weighted imaging revealed multiple scattered infarcts of various sizes in the posterior circulation. Case 2: A 72-year-old woman experienced an acute ischemic stroke 3 years post-SAC for a right posterior communicating artery aneurysm. The stroke occurred after discontinuation of antiplatelet therapy. Diffusion-weighted imaging revealed scattered acute infarctions in the right middle and anterior cerebral artery territories. These two cases of delayed thromboembolic stroke after SAC might have been due to stent strut exposure in the arterial lumen and concurrent thrombosis.

This fifth revised version of the Korean Society of Gynecologic Oncology practice guidelines for the management of cervical cancer incorporates recent research findings and changes in treatment strategies based on version 4.0 released in 2020. Each key question was developed by focusing on recent notable insights and crucial contemporary issues in the field of cervical cancer. These questions were evaluated for their significance and impact on the current treatment and were finalized through voting by the development committee. The selected key questions were as follows: the efficacy and safety of immune checkpoint inhibitors as firstor second-line treatment for recurrent or metastatic cervical cancer; the oncologic safety of minimally invasive radical hysterectomy in early stage cervical cancer; the efficacy and safety of adjuvant systemic treatment after concurrent chemoradiotherapy in locally advanced cervical cancer; and the oncologic safety of sentinel lymph node mapping compared to pelvic lymph node dissection. The recommendations, directions, and strengths of this guideline were based on systematic reviews and meta-analyses, and were finally confirmed through public hearings and external reviews. In this study, we describe the revised practice guidelines for the management of cervical cancer.

Objectives: This study aimed to investigate the current status of periodontal disease programs implemented by public health centers in the Republic of Korea. Methods: An explanatory survey was conducted by the Ministry of Health and Welfare from October to November 2023. The survey focused on the periodontal programs and the implementation status across different stages. Distributed and collected via Google Forms, the survey targeted 196 oral health teams within public health centers in Korea. A total of 109 public health centers responded to the study questionnaire, yielding a participation rate of 55.6%. Data were analyzed using IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, version 26. Results: A majority of periodontal disease programs were implemented exclusively by oral health teams, with a rate of 33.0%. The implementation rate of collaboration with home-visiting health teams was 17.4% and with other teams was 10.1%. The implementation rates of periodontal management across stages were as follows: 11.9% for periodontal examination, 18.3% for periodontal treatment, and 11.9% for sustainable periodontal care. Conclusions Periodontal disease programs are predominantly conducted by oral health teams with limited collaboration across other health teams. Additionally, periodontal management activities, such as examinations and treatments, remain insufficient. Integration between oral health teams and other health teams within public health centers or private dental clinics should be improved.

This fifth revised version of the Korean Society of Gynecologic Oncology practice guidelines for the management of cervical cancer incorporates recent research findings and changes in treatment strategies based on version 4.0 released in 2020. Each key question was developed by focusing on recent notable insights and crucial contemporary issues in the field of cervical cancer. These questions were evaluated for their significance and impact on the current treatment and were finalized through voting by the development committee. The selected key questions were as follows: the efficacy and safety of immune checkpoint inhibitors as firstor second-line treatment for recurrent or metastatic cervical cancer; the oncologic safety of minimally invasive radical hysterectomy in early stage cervical cancer; the efficacy and safety of adjuvant systemic treatment after concurrent chemoradiotherapy in locally advanced cervical cancer; and the oncologic safety of sentinel lymph node mapping compared to pelvic lymph node dissection. The recommendations, directions, and strengths of this guideline were based on systematic reviews and meta-analyses, and were finally confirmed through public hearings and external reviews. In this study, we describe the revised practice guidelines for the management of cervical cancer.