Rectal cancer, which accounts for approximately 40% of colorectal cancers, remains a major clinical concern. Recent advances in diagnostic imaging, surgical techniques, radiotherapy, and systemic treatment have steadily improved rectal cancer outcomes. Considering this, the Korean Rectal Cancer Multidisciplinary (KRCM) Committee has aimed to provide clinicians and policymakers with up-to-date, evidence-based clinical practice guidelines to support optimal decision-making, reflecting current evidence, the Korean healthcare context, and patient values and preferences. The Clinical Practice Guidelines for Rectal Cancer version 2.0 were developed through multidisciplinary collaboration with related academic societies, building upon and updating the KRCM Clinical Practice Guidelines version 1.0 (titled “Multidisciplinary guidelines for the management of rectal cancer”). These consensus guidelines of the KRCM were established based on a comprehensive literature review, evidence synthesis, with recommendation development guided by the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) methodology, and consideration of applicability in real-world clinical practice under the national health insurance system. Each recommendation has been presented with its strength and level of evidence.

Objective: Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors are widely used to treat rheumatoid arthritis (RA); however, comparative analyses regarding their adverse events remain limited. This study aimed to compare the effects of different JAK inhibitors (tofacitinib, baricitinib, and upadacitinib) on hematological parameters in patients with RA in a real-world setting. Methods: This retrospective analysis included 552 patients with RA treated with JAK inhibitors between August 2015 and February 2024. Hematological parameters, including absolute neutrophil count (ANC) and platelet count, were assessed at baseline and after 6 months of treatment. Statistical analysis was performed to evaluate changes over time, and logistic regression analysis identified factors associated with hematologic alterations. Results: The 552 patients were divided into three groups: tofacitinib (n=264), baricitinib (n=143), and upadacitinib (n=145). No significant differences in baseline hematological parameters were observed across the groups. After 6 months, ANC decreased in all groups without significant differences among them (p=0.465). Patients receiving baricitinib had significantly higher platelet counts than those receiving tofacitinib (Pillai’s trace value of 0.063, p<0.001) or upadacitinib (Pillai’s trace value of 0.029, p<0.001).Multivariate analysis revealed that baricitinib was significantly associated with increased platelet counts (odds ratio, 2.009; 95% confidence interval, 1.212~3.331; p=0.007). Conclusion Although all three JAK inhibitors reduced ANC, baricitinib was associated with a substantial increase in platelet counts. These findings highlight the differences in adverse effect profiles among JAK inhibitors, emphasizing the importance of tailored monitoring in RA management.

Background/Aims: Recent advances in computer-aided diagnosis (CADx) systems have demonstrated expert-level accuracy in the optical diagnosis of colorectal polyps. High-confidence (HC) diagnoses have been defined as those made within 3 seconds without hesitation, and these systems have been shown to improve diagnostic accuracy. We aimed to evaluate the performance of endoscopists with varying levels of experience in diagnosing colorectal polyps with the assistance of a new CADx system applying the 3-second rule and without artificial intelligence assistance. Methods: In this multicenter ex vivo study, 35 endoscopists assessed 100 polyps (51 adenomas, 39 hyperplastic polyps, 10 sessile serrated lesions) using narrow-band imaging video clips on an online platform. Assessments consisted of individual endoscopist diagnosis and CADx-assisted diagnosis. HC assignments followed the 3-second rule in both phases. Performance metrics included HC accuracy, HC rate, and adherence to the Preservation and Incorporation of Valuable Endoscopic Innovations (PIVI) and Simple Optical Diagnosis Accuracy (SODA) thresholds. Results: HC diagnostic accuracy improved from 78.3% (95% confidence interval [CI], 76.6% to 80.0%) to 89.8% (95% CI, 88.6% to 90.9%) with CADx assistance (p<0.001). The proportion of HC predictions increased from 64.2% to 75.4% (p<0.001). Novice endoscopists showed marked improvement with CADx (74.1% vs 88.8%; p<0.001). CADx-assisted diagnoses nearly met SODA and PIVI thresholds under the 3-second rule. Additional analysis demonstrated that CADx assistance significantly improved interobserver agreement and ground truth, particularly for novices (κ=0.37 to κ=0.65; p<0.001). Conclusions Integrating CADx with the 3-second rule significantly enhances the performance of endoscopists in the optical diagnosis of colorectal polyps, with the greatest benefit observed among novice endoscopists.

Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) is a minimally invasive treatment modality used as an alternative to surgery in patients with benign thyroid nodules, recurrent thyroid cancers (RTCs), and primary thyroid microcarcinomas. The Korean Society of Thyroid Radiology (KSThR) initially developed recommendations for the optimal use of RFA for thyroid tumors in 2009 and revised them in 2012 and 2017. As new meaningful evidence has accumulated since 2017 and in response to a growing global interest in the use of RFA for treating malignant thyroid lesions, the task force committee members of the KSThR decided to update the guidelines on the use of RFA for the management of RTCs based on a comprehensive analysis of current literature and expert consensus.

Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) is a minimally invasive treatment modality used as an alternative to surgery in patients with benign thyroid nodules, recurrent thyroid cancers (RTCs), and primary thyroid microcarcinomas. The Korean Society of Thyroid Radiology (KSThR) initially developed recommendations for the optimal use of RFA for thyroid tumors in 2009 and revised them in 2012 and 2017. As new meaningful evidence has accumulated since 2017 and in response to a growing global interest in the use of RFA for treating malignant thyroid lesions, the task force committee members of the KSThR decided to update the guidelines on the use of RFA for the management of RTCs based on a comprehensive analysis of current literature and expert consensus.

Purpose: To compare the perioperative and postoperative outcomes between traditional trans-vesical robot-assisted simple prostatectomy (TV-RASP) and the newly introduced urethral-sparing (US) RASP. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 42 patients who underwent TV-RASP (n=22) or US-RASP (n=20) performed by two experienced surgeons at two tertiary centers. Perioperative outcomes including operation time, estimated blood loss, length of hospital stay, and catheterization time were assessed. Postoperative outcomes were evaluated using the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), quality of life (QoL), uroflowmetry parameters, Male Sexual Health Questionnaire-Ejaculation Dysfunction-Short Form (MSHQ-EjD-SF) scores, and maintenance of anterograde ejaculation. Results: This study analyzed 22 and 20 patients who underwent TV-RASP and US-RASP, respectively. Except for the TV-RASP group being older (70.0 years) than the US-RASP group (64.5 years) (p=0.028), no differences among other baseline characteristics existed. Perioperative outcomes indicated that hospital stay and catheterization time were significantly shorter in the US-RASP group than in the TV-RASP group (p<0.001). At postoperative month 1, the median IPSS and QoL scores were significantly better in the US-RASP group than in the TV-RASP group (p=0.001 and p=0.002, respectively). However, at months 6 and 12, no significant differences were noted in IPSS, QoL, maximum flow rate, and postvoid residual urine between the two groups. Sexually active patients in the US-RASP group maintained postoperative MSHQ-EjD functional and bother scores, whereas the TV-RASP group experienced a decline. Notably, 75.0% of patients in the US-RASP group preserved antegrade ejaculation, compared to only 20.0% in the TV-RASP group (p<0.001). Conclusions US-RASP is not inferior to TV-RASP in terms of functional outcomes. In addition, US-RASP yielded more rapid symptom improvements and preserved antegrade ejaculation than TV-RASP. However, larger prospective studies are required to confirm these findings and to further investigate the long-term efficacy and safety of US-RASP.

Purpose: To compare the perioperative and postoperative outcomes between traditional trans-vesical robot-assisted simple prostatectomy (TV-RASP) and the newly introduced urethral-sparing (US) RASP. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 42 patients who underwent TV-RASP (n=22) or US-RASP (n=20) performed by two experienced surgeons at two tertiary centers. Perioperative outcomes including operation time, estimated blood loss, length of hospital stay, and catheterization time were assessed. Postoperative outcomes were evaluated using the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), quality of life (QoL), uroflowmetry parameters, Male Sexual Health Questionnaire-Ejaculation Dysfunction-Short Form (MSHQ-EjD-SF) scores, and maintenance of anterograde ejaculation. Results: This study analyzed 22 and 20 patients who underwent TV-RASP and US-RASP, respectively. Except for the TV-RASP group being older (70.0 years) than the US-RASP group (64.5 years) (p=0.028), no differences among other baseline characteristics existed. Perioperative outcomes indicated that hospital stay and catheterization time were significantly shorter in the US-RASP group than in the TV-RASP group (p<0.001). At postoperative month 1, the median IPSS and QoL scores were significantly better in the US-RASP group than in the TV-RASP group (p=0.001 and p=0.002, respectively). However, at months 6 and 12, no significant differences were noted in IPSS, QoL, maximum flow rate, and postvoid residual urine between the two groups. Sexually active patients in the US-RASP group maintained postoperative MSHQ-EjD functional and bother scores, whereas the TV-RASP group experienced a decline. Notably, 75.0% of patients in the US-RASP group preserved antegrade ejaculation, compared to only 20.0% in the TV-RASP group (p<0.001). Conclusions US-RASP is not inferior to TV-RASP in terms of functional outcomes. In addition, US-RASP yielded more rapid symptom improvements and preserved antegrade ejaculation than TV-RASP. However, larger prospective studies are required to confirm these findings and to further investigate the long-term efficacy and safety of US-RASP.

Purpose: This study assessed the validity of the hospital standardized mortality ratio (HSMR) risk-adjusted model by comparing models that include clinical information and the current model based on administrative information in South Korea. Materials and Methods: The data of 53976 inpatients were analyzed. The current HSMR risk-adjusted model (Model 1) adjusts for sex, age, health coverage, emergency hospitalization status, main diagnosis, surgery status, and Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) using administrative data. As candidate variables, among clinical information, the American Society of Anesthesiologists score, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) II, Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS) 3, present on admission CCI, and cancer stage were collected. Surgery status, intensive care in the intensive care unit, and CCI were selected as proxy variables among administrative data. In-hospital death was defined as the dependent variable, and a logistic regression analysis was performed. The statistical performance of each model was compared using C-index values. Results: There was a strong correlation between variables in the administrative data and those in the medical records. The C-index of the existing model (Model 1) was 0.785; Model 2, which included all clinical data, had a higher C-index of 0.857. In Model 4, in which APACHE II and SAPS 3 were replaced with variables recorded in the administrative data from Model 2, the C-index further increased to 0.863. Conclusion The HSMR assessment model improved when clinical data were adjusted. Simultaneously, the validity of the evaluation method could be secured even if some of the clinical information was replaced with the information in the administrative data.