1.Performance of C. Diff Quik Chek Complete and RIDASCREEN immunoassays and lack of Ct value concordance between Allplex GI– Bacteria(I) and Xpert Clostridioides difficile assays: a diagnostic accuracy study
Kibum JEON ; Nuri LEE ; Hyun Soo KIM ; Han-Sung KIM ; Wonkeun SONG ; Jae-Seok KIM
Annals of Clinical Microbiology 2026;29(1):1-
Background:
Enzyme immunoassays (EIAs), which detect glutamate dehydrogenase (GDH) and toxin A/B, are widely used to screen for Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI); however, their sensitivity is lower than that of molecular assays. This study aimed to evaluate the performance of two EIAs, C. Diff Quik Chek Complete (QCC) and RIDASCREEN (RIDA), and investigate the cycle threshold (Ct) values from two real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assays (Allplex GI–Bacteria(I) and Xpert C. difficile) in EIA-discordant samples.
Methods:
A total of 180 clinical stool samples were tested using QCC, RIDA, and Allplex GI– Bacteria(I) PCR assays. The Xpert C. difficile assay was used to analyze discordant results.
Results:
QCC and RIDA showed high sensitivities for GDH detection, 100.0% and 94.4%, respectively. QCC was significantly more sensitive than RIDA for toxin detection (51.4% vs. 28.6%, p = 0.007). In 25 EIA-discordant, Xpert positive samples, the Ct values of the toxin B gene ranged from 31.5 to 44.8 (mean, 38.1) for Allplex PCR and from 23.7 to 36.3 (mean, 30.4) for Xpert PCR. The Ct values of the two PCR assays were not significantly correlated (r = 0.201, p = 0.324).
Conclusion
QCC is a suitable initial immunological test for diagnosing CDI. The lack of correlation in the Ct values between the two real-time PCR assays suggests that assay-specific validation is necessary for cutoff level interpretation.
2.Prospective Evaluation of Irreversible Electroporation With Clustered Electrodes as a Novel Palliative Approach for Locally Advanced Pancreatic Cancer
Joon Ho KWON ; Man-Deuk KIM ; Maher Salamah ALANAZI ; Jiwon SUK ; Seung JEONG ; Seungmin BANG ; Moon Jae CHUNG ; Ho Kyoung HWANG ; Seung Soo HONG ; Kichang HAN ; Gyoung Min KIM ; Jong Yun WON ; Juil PARK ; Jaesung CHO ; Seok Min JEONG ; Tae Yang CHOI
Korean Journal of Radiology 2026;27(2):152-160
Objective:
This study aimed to evaluate the feasibility, safety, and oncologic outcomes of irreversible electroporation (IRE) using a clustered electrode in patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC).
Materials and Methods:
In this single-center prospective cohort study, 13 patients with LAPC (median age, 60 years; range, 48–78 years) underwent clustered electrode IRE between September 2022 and September 2024. Patient characteristics, procedural details, and clinical outcomes were recorded. Endpoints included technical success, procedure-related complications, overall survival (OS), and progression-free survival (PFS).
Results:
Tumors were located in the pancreatic head in four patients (30.8%) and in the body/tail in nine (69.2%). The median tumor size was 2.4 cm (1.5–4.0 cm), and vascular invasion was present in all patients. Technical success was achieved in all patients. Intraoperative IRE was performed in 11 (84.6%) patients, and 2 (15.4%) patients underwent percutaneous IRE. Gastrointestinal bleeding events as major complications occurred in two patients (15.4%) and, both were successfully controlled by embolization. No 60-day mortality was observed. At a median follow-up of 24.5 months (range, 9.9–33.4 months) after IRE, median OS and PFS from IRE were 20.1 and 14.5 months, respectively.
Conclusion
IRE using clustered electrodes for LAPC appears to be a feasible therapeutic approach, offering reliable technical success and acceptable safety. Survival outcomes are encouraging; however, larger, controlled studies are required.
3.The Functional Study of Prostaglandin E2 via EP Receptor on Pacemaker Activity in Interstitial Cells of Cajal from Murine Colon
Hongyang GONG ; Han Yi JIAO ; Yuan CHANG ; Seok CHOI ; Chan Sik HONG ; Jae Yeoul JUN
Chonnam Medical Journal 2026;62(2):79-87
The interstitial cells of Cajal (ICC) generate spontaneous pacemaker activities responsible for producing slow waves in the gut smooth muscles. Prostaglandin E2 (PGE2 ) is one of the most important prostanoids in the gut, playing a crucial role in multiple physiological and pathological processes. Because information regarding the effects of PGE2 on colonic ICC is limited, we investigated the effects of PGE2 and its underlying signaling pathways in murine colonic ICC. Whole-cell patch-clamp recordings and reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) analyses were performed to evaluate the effects of PGE2 on mouse colonic ICC. PGE2 had a dual effect on pacemaker potential in the current-clamp mode. RT-PCR data suggested the expression of EP3 and EP4 receptors in colonic ICC. Low PGE2 concentrations induced membrane depolarization and generation of pacemaker activities. And this effect is mimicked by sulprostone (an EP3 agonist). The low PGE2 concentration-induced effect was inhibited by anoctamin-1 (ANO1) or a T-type Ca2+ channel blocker. Conversely, high PGE2 concentrations induced membrane hyperpolarization and blocked pacemaker potential generation. However, this inhibitory effect was blocked by an ATP-sensitive potassium (K ATP) channel blocker but not by other K+ channel blockers. Low concentrations of PGE2 activated EP3 receptors, leading to excitation of pacemaker activity through regulation of ANO1 and T-type Ca2+ channels in colonic ICC. In contrast, higher concentrations of PGE2 activated EP4 receptors and opened ATP-sensitive K+ channels, resulting in inhibition of pacemaker activity in colonic ICC.
4.Clinical Guideline for the Use of Biodegradable Rectal Spacers During Radiotherapy for Prostate Cancer
Hyun Ho HAN ; Jong Kyou KWON ; Do Kyung KIM ; Jin Hyung JEON ; Chan Woo WEE ; Jae Ho CHO ; Ji Hee JUNG ; A Young YOO ; Jae Young JOUNG ; Gee Hyun SONG ; Seung Ju LEE ; Won PARK ; Chan Kyo KIM ; Young Seok KIM ; Yeon Joo KIM ; Ah Ram CHANG ; Jae Sik KIM ; Sung Hwan BAE ; Byoung Kyu HAN ; Kang Su CHO
Journal of Urologic Oncology 2026;24(1):3-12
Purpose:
Radiotherapy (RT) remains a cornerstone of curative treatment for localized and locally advanced prostate cancer. However, dose escalation to improve tumor control is often constrained by the proximity of the rectum, which increases the risk of gastrointestinal (GI) and genitourinary toxicities. Biodegradable rectal spacers inserted between the prostate and rectum have emerged as an effective approach to reduce rectal radiation exposure. This guideline provides evidence-based recommendations on indications, contraindications, procedural standards, and clinical management for biodegradable rectal spacer insertion during prostate cancer RT.
Materials and Methods:
This guideline was developed by a multidisciplinary expert panel through a systematic review of the literature, analysis of international guidelines (National Comprehensive Cancer Network, European Association of Urology, American Society for Radiation Oncology), and expert consensus among radiation oncologists, radiologists, and urologists with clinical experience in spacer insertion. The strength of each recommendation and the level of evidence were classified according to the modified GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) system.
Results:
Spacer insertion is conditionally recommended (Grade C, Level I) for patients receiving definitive external-beam RT without rectal invasion. It reduces the high-dose rectal irradiation volume (V70–75) by >50%, decreases acute GI toxicity, and helps maintain bowel-related quality of life. However, the benefit for late severe toxicity (grade 2 or higher) remains debated in recent meta-analyses. Contraindications include rectal invasion, anatomical inaccessibility, infection, and material hypersensitivity. Procedures should be performed under local anesthesia in a sterile environment by trained physicians. Short-course antibiotics and simulator-based training, including completion of multiple supervised cases, are advised.
Conclusion
Biodegradable rectal spacer insertion is clinically validated and effective in reducing acute rectal toxicity. Although pivotal trials demonstrated a favorable procedural safety profile, real-world postmarket data include reports of rare but severe procedural complications. This guideline provides standardized recommendations tailored to Korean clinical practice while remaining consistent with international standards, emphasizing the importance of operator training and careful patient selection.
5.Acute Heart Failure Across the Ejection Fraction Spectrum: Phenotypes, Management, and Outcomes From Nationwide KorHF III Registry
Huijin LEE ; Eung Ju KIM ; Seong Woo HAN ; Seong-Mi PARK ; Hyung-Seop KIM ; Myung-Chan CHO ; Hyo-Suk AHN ; Mi-Seung SHIN ; Seok-Jae HWANG ; Jin-Ok JEONG ; Dong Heon YANG ; Junho HYUN ; Jin Oh CHOI ; Hae-Young LEE ; Byung-Su YOO ; Seok-Min KANG ; Dong-Ju CHOI ; Hyun-Jai CHO ;
International Journal of Heart Failure 2026;8(1):43-55
Background and Objectives:
Clinical characteristics and outcomes in acute heart failure (AHF) vary by phenotype. We assessed phenotype-specific features, treatment patterns, and outcomes in a nationwide Korean cohort.
Methods:
The Korean Heart Failure III registry prospectively enrolled 7,351 AHF admissions at 47 hospitals. Among 6,777 patients with available left ventricular ejection fraction (EF), phenotypes were defined as heart failure with reduced EF (HFrEF, ≤40%), mildly reduced EF (HFmrEF,41–49%), or preserved EF (HFpEF, ≥50%). The primary endpoint was a 12-month composite of all-cause death or heart transplantation, evaluated from index admission and, among hospital survivors, from discharge. We used inverse probability weighting (multinomial generalized boosted models with stabilized, trimmed weights) and weighted Cox proportional-hazards models to estimate hazard ratios (HRs).
Results:
Phenotype distribution was 58.9% HFrEF, 13.6% HFmrEF, and 27.5% HFpEF. Crude 12-month composite rates from index admission were 13.4% (HFrEF), 12.7% (HFmrEF), and 16.8% (HFpEF). After weighting, from index admission, HFmrEF (HR, 0.892; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.731–1.088) and HFpEF (HR, 1.101; 95% CI, 0.939–1.291) did not differ from HFrEF; from discharge, HFpEF had modestly higher risk (HR, 1.207; 95% CI, 1.008–1.445) whereas HFmrEF did not (HR, 1.039; 95% CI, 0.844–1.279). Hyponatremia and chronic kidney disease were consistent adverse markers, while angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/ angiotensin II receptor blocker use at discharge was protective.
Conclusions
Across the EF spectrum, phenotypes showed distinct profiles and risk. Postdischarge risk was modestly higher in HFpEF, supporting phenotype-tailored care and systematic discharge optimization in Korean patients with AHF.
6.Comparison of reference management software with new artificial intelligence-based tools
Jae Gyeong JIN ; Seung Gyu LEE ; Jea Hyeun PARK ; Jang Won HAN ; Jae Young KIM ; Jungirl SEOK ; Jeong-Ju YOO
Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions 2026;23(1):2-
Reference management software (RMS) represents a cornerstone of modern academic writing and publishing. For decades, programs such as EndNote, Zotero, and Mendeley have played central roles in facilitating citation organization, bibliography formatting, and collaborative scholarship. Although each platform has introduced unique innovations, persistent limitations remain, particularly with respect to usability, accessibility, and accuracy. In parallel, the rise of generative artificial intelligence has introduced an unprecedented challenge: the inadvertent inclusion of fabricated or incorrect references mistakenly incorporated into manuscripts. This phenomenon has exposed a critical limitation of traditional RMS platforms, namely their inability to verify reference authenticity. Against this backdrop, new solutions have emerged. One such example is CiteWell (https://citewell.org/), an artificial intelligence (AI)-era RMS that introduces several notable innovations, including PubMed-integrated verification, an intuitive interface for new users, customizable journal-specific styles, and multilingual accessibility. This review provides a comprehensive historical overview of RMS, evaluates the strengths and weaknesses of major platforms, and positions emerging AI-based tools as a new paradigm that combines traditional reference management with essential safeguards for contemporary academic challenges.
7.Effectiveness of the Loving Life TokTok 65+ Program for Suicide Prevention Education for the Elderly
Jae Sang LEE ; Eun Seok KIM ; Kkotdawoon HAN ; Su Kyong SONG ; Young-Eun JUNG
Journal of Korean Neuropsychiatric Association 2026;65(1):44-49
Objectives:
This study evaluated the educational effectiveness of the Loving Life TokTok 65+, a suicide prevention gatekeeper education program for the elderly developed by the Jeju Special Self-Governing Province Mental Health Welfare Center.
Methods:
Community-dwelling adults aged ≥65 years (n=125) were assigned randomly to an intervention group (n=61) or a control group (n=64). The intervention group received the Loving Life TokTok 65+ program, while the control group received no education during the study period. The outcomes were assessed immediately before and after the intervention using validated self-report measures of gatekeeper behavior, preparedness to help, suicide prevention literacy, and attitudes toward suicide.
Results:
Post-intervention, the intervention group showed significant improvement in overall gatekeeper behavior (all p<0.001), particularly in readiness and self-efficacy, compared with the baseline, whereas the control group showed no significant change.
Conclusion
The Loving Life TokTok 65+ program effectively enhanced suicide-prevention–related behavioral competencies among the elderly.
8.Erratum: Korean Gastric Cancer Association-Led Nationwide Survey on Surgically Treated Gastric Cancers in 2023
Dong Jin KIM ; Jeong Ho SONG ; Ji-Hyeon PARK ; Sojung KIM ; Sin Hye PARK ; Cheol Min SHIN ; Yoonjin KWAK ; Kyunghye BANG ; Chung-sik GONG ; Sung Eun OH ; Yoo Min KIM ; Young Suk PARK ; Jeesun KIM ; Ji Eun JUNG ; Mi Ran JUNG ; Bang Wool EOM ; Ki Bum PARK ; Jae Hun CHUNG ; Sang-Il LEE ; Young-Gil SON ; Dae Hoon KIM ; Sang Hyuk SEO ; Sejin LEE ; Won Jun SEO ; Dong Jin PARK ; Yoonhong KIM ; Jin-Jo KIM ; Ki Bum PARK ; In CHO ; Hye Seong AHN ; Sung Jin OH ; Ju-Hee LEE ; Hayemin LEE ; Seong Chan GONG ; Changin CHOI ; Ji-Ho PARK ; Eun Young KIM ; Chang Min LEE ; Jong Hyuk YUN ; Seung Jong OH ; Eunju LEE ; Seong-A JEONG ; Jung-Min BAE ; Jae-Seok MIN ; Hyun-dong CHAE ; Sung Gon KIM ; Daegeun PARK ; Dong Baek KANG ; Hogoon KIM ; Seung Soo LEE ; Sung Il CHOI ; Seong Ho HWANG ; Su-Mi KIM ; Moon Soo LEE ; Sang Hyun KIM ; Sang-Ho JEONG ; Yusung YANG ; Yonghae BAIK ; Sang Soo EOM ; Inho JEONG ; Yoon Ju JUNG ; Jong-Min PARK ; Jin Won LEE ; Jungjai PARK ; Ki Han KIM ; Kyung-Goo LEE ; Jeongyeon LEE ; Seongil OH ; Ji Hun PARK ; Jong Won KIM ;
Journal of Gastric Cancer 2025;25(2):400-402
9.Korean Gastric Cancer AssociationLed Nationwide Survey on Surgically Treated Gastric Cancers in 2023
Dong Jin KIM ; Jeong Ho SONG ; Ji-Hyeon PARK ; Sojung KIM ; Sin Hye PARK ; Cheol Min SHIN ; Yoonjin KWAK ; Kyunghye BANG ; Chung-sik GONG ; Sung Eun OH ; Yoo Min KIM ; Young Suk PARK ; Jeesun KIM ; Ji Eun JUNG ; Mi Ran JUNG ; Bang Wool EOM ; Ki Bum PARK ; Jae Hun CHUNG ; Sang-Il LEE ; Young-Gil SON ; Dae Hoon KIM ; Sang Hyuk SEO ; Sejin LEE ; Won Jun SEO ; Dong Jin PARK ; Yoonhong KIM ; Jin-Jo KIM ; Ki Bum PARK ; In CHO ; Hye Seong AHN ; Sung Jin OH ; Ju-Hee LEE ; Hayemin LEE ; Seong Chan GONG ; Changin CHOI ; Ji-Ho PARK ; Eun Young KIM ; Chang Min LEE ; Jong Hyuk YUN ; Seung Jong OH ; Eunju LEE ; Seong-A JEONG ; Jung-Min BAE ; Jae-Seok MIN ; Hyun-dong CHAE ; Sung Gon KIM ; Daegeun PARK ; Dong Baek KANG ; Hogoon KIM ; Seung Soo LEE ; Sung Il CHOI ; Seong Ho HWANG ; Su-Mi KIM ; Moon Soo LEE ; Sang Hyun KIM ; Sang-Ho JEONG ; Yusung YANG ; Yonghae BAIK ; Sang Soo EOM ; Inho JEONG ; Yoon Ju JUNG ; Jong-Min PARK ; Jin Won LEE ; Jungjai PARK ; Ki Han KIM ; Kyung-Goo LEE ; Jeongyeon LEE ; Seongil OH ; Ji Hun PARK ; Jong Won KIM ; The Information Committee of the Korean Gastric Cancer Association
Journal of Gastric Cancer 2025;25(1):115-132
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.
10.Korean Practice Guidelines for Gastric Cancer 2024: An Evidence-based, Multidisciplinary Approach (Update of 2022 Guideline)
In-Ho KIM ; Seung Joo KANG ; Wonyoung CHOI ; An Na SEO ; Bang Wool EOM ; Beodeul KANG ; Bum Jun KIM ; Byung-Hoon MIN ; Chung Hyun TAE ; Chang In CHOI ; Choong-kun LEE ; Ho Jung AN ; Hwa Kyung BYUN ; Hyeon-Su IM ; Hyung-Don KIM ; Jang Ho CHO ; Kyoungjune PAK ; Jae-Joon KIM ; Jae Seok BAE ; Jeong Il YU ; Jeong Won LEE ; Jungyoon CHOI ; Jwa Hoon KIM ; Miyoung CHOI ; Mi Ran JUNG ; Nieun SEO ; Sang Soo EOM ; Soomin AHN ; Soo Jin KIM ; Sung Hak LEE ; Sung Hee LIM ; Tae-Han KIM ; Hye Sook HAN ; On behalf of The Development Working Group for the Korean Practice Guideline for Gastric Cancer 2024
Journal of Gastric Cancer 2025;25(1):5-114
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.

Result Analysis
Print
Save
E-mail