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.

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.

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.

Serological tests for Helicobacter pylori needs local validation as the diagnostic accuracy may vary depending on the prevalence of H.pylori. This study examined the diagnostic performance of two ELISA, GastroPanel® (GastroPanel ELISA; Biohit Oyj) and GENE-DIA® (GENEDIA® H. pylori ELISA, Green Cross Co.) in Korean population. One thousand seventy seven patients who visited for esophagogastroduodenoscopy between 2013 and 2023 were prospectively enrolled, and serum samples from the subjects were tested using both GastroPanel® and GENEDIA® . The two tests were compared for their diagnostic accuracy in detecting atrophic gastritis (AG), intestinal metaplasia (IM), gastric adenoma (GA), and gastric cancer (GC), and the positivity rates by age and sexwere observed. There was substantial correlation (Pearson coefficient [r] = 0.512, P < 0.001) and agreement (Cohen’s Kappa coefficient [κ] = 0.723, P < 0.001) between the results obtained using GastroPanel® and GENEDIA® . The test results from the two kits did not match perfectly with a discrepancy observed in approximately 16% of cases, that 67 subjects were positive only on GENE-DIA® while 75 subjects were positive only on GastroPanel® . The area under receiver operating characteristic curve for AG, IM, GA,and GC using GastroPanel® were 0.666, 0.635, 0.540, and 0.575, while the results tested using GENEDIA® were 0.649, 0.604, 0.553, and 0.555, respectively, without significant difference between the two results. GastroPanel® and GENEDIA® showed similar performance in terms of diagnostic accuracy; but the test results did not match perfectly. A large-scale validation study in Koreansis needed.

Serological tests for Helicobacter pylori needs local validation as the diagnostic accuracy may vary depending on the prevalence of H.pylori. This study examined the diagnostic performance of two ELISA, GastroPanel® (GastroPanel ELISA; Biohit Oyj) and GENE-DIA® (GENEDIA® H. pylori ELISA, Green Cross Co.) in Korean population. One thousand seventy seven patients who visited for esophagogastroduodenoscopy between 2013 and 2023 were prospectively enrolled, and serum samples from the subjects were tested using both GastroPanel® and GENEDIA® . The two tests were compared for their diagnostic accuracy in detecting atrophic gastritis (AG), intestinal metaplasia (IM), gastric adenoma (GA), and gastric cancer (GC), and the positivity rates by age and sexwere observed. There was substantial correlation (Pearson coefficient [r] = 0.512, P < 0.001) and agreement (Cohen’s Kappa coefficient [κ] = 0.723, P < 0.001) between the results obtained using GastroPanel® and GENEDIA® . The test results from the two kits did not match perfectly with a discrepancy observed in approximately 16% of cases, that 67 subjects were positive only on GENE-DIA® while 75 subjects were positive only on GastroPanel® . The area under receiver operating characteristic curve for AG, IM, GA,and GC using GastroPanel® were 0.666, 0.635, 0.540, and 0.575, while the results tested using GENEDIA® were 0.649, 0.604, 0.553, and 0.555, respectively, without significant difference between the two results. GastroPanel® and GENEDIA® showed similar performance in terms of diagnostic accuracy; but the test results did not match perfectly. A large-scale validation study in Koreansis needed.