1.Nationwide Survey on Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection for Early Gastric Cancer in Korea: Results From the Korean College of Helicobacter and Upper Gastrointestinal Research (KCHUGR) 2023 Survey
Jae Yong PARK ; Jeong Hoon LEE ; Tae-Se KIM ; Da Hyun JUNG ; Bong Eun LEE ; Yonghoon CHOI ; Wan-Sik LEE ; Young-Il KIM ; Sun Hyung KANG ; Hyunsoo CHUNG ; Su Jin KIM ; Joon Sung KIM ; Donghoon KANG ; Su Youn NAM ; Seung Han KIM ; Hyo-Joon YANG ; Hyun LIM ; Jin LEE ; Seon-Young PARK ; Seung-Woo LEE ; Sun Moon KIM ; Sam Ryong JEE ; Dae Young CHEUNG ; Chung Hyun TAE ; Seokin KANG ; Sung Chul PARK ; Seung In SEO ; Cheol Min SHIN ; Kee Don CHOI ; Jong Yeul LEE ;
Journal of Gastric Cancer 2026;26(2):169-183
Purpose:
Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) has become a standard minimally invasive treatment for selected patients with early gastric cancer (EGC). This study presents the first nationwide survey of patients with EGC treated with ESD in 2023, conducted by the Korean College of Helicobacter and Upper Gastrointestinal Research.
Materials and Methods:
Data were retrospectively collected from participating referral centers across Korea using a standardized case report form covering patient characteristics, tumor features, procedural details, histopathological findings, and clinical outcomes.Descriptive and comparative analyses were conducted to summarize nationwide ESD practice patterns and outcomes.
Results:
Data from 5,460 ESD cases from 5,250 patients across 27 institutions were analyzed. The mean age was 67.4 years, with 74.1% males. Multiple synchronous lesions were identified in 3.7%. Most lesions were located in the lower third of the stomach (64.0%), and differentiated-type adenocarcinomas accounted for 87.8%. The en bloc and complete resection rates were 99.2% and 91.4%, respectively. Curative resection was achieved in 80.5%, whereas local non-curative resection (L-NCR) and surgical non-curative resection (S-NCR) were identified in 2.8% and 16.7%, respectively. Additional surgery was performed more frequently in patients with S-NCR than in those with L-NCR (59.3% vs. 24.7%). The bleeding and perforation rates were 3.6% and 0.9%, respectively, and were mostly managed conservatively or endoscopically. The median length of hospitalization was 4.0 days.
Conclusions
This first nationwide survey provides a comprehensive overview of the current practice of EGC treatment using ESD in Korea, demonstrating high technical success and safety, and establishing a baseline dataset for future longitudinal research.
2.Reduced port robotic cholecystectomy using the Revo-i single-site plus ONE port approach: a case series with video
Su Hyung PARK ; Chang Moo KANG
Journal of Minimally Invasive Surgery 2026;29(1):54-58
This study evaluated the initial feasibility and safety of reduced-port robotic cholecystectomy using the Revo-i robotic system (meerecompany Inc.) in nine patients diagnosed with symptomatic gallstones and chronic cholecystitis. All surgeries were successfully completed without complications or conversion to conventional methods. Postoperative outcomes were excellent, with minimal pain immediately after surgery, significantly reduced by the next day.Most patients were discharged on postoperative day one. Cosmetic outcomes were outstanding, with barely noticeable scars at the umbilical and flank port sites. These findings demonstrate that Revo-i robotic cholecystectomy is technically feasible, safe, and patientfriendly, suggesting potential for broader application in hepatobiliary and pancreatic surgeries.
3.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.
4.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.
5.Development and Evaluation of an Antimicrobial Stewardship Education Program for Physician Assistant Nurses: A One-Group Pretest-Posttest Design
Eun Young SI ; Tae Hyung KIM ; Mi Hee CHOI ; Hyo Bin PARK ; So Yeon KIM ; Hye Won KANG ; Hyun Hee KIM ; Ji Hye PARK ; Hye Ran KIM ; Hae Ju KIM ; Ga Hee KIM ; Su Rin PARK ; Jeong Hwa LEE ; Eun Ji PARK ; Ji Seon KIM ; Young Eun KIM
Journal of Korean Clinical Nursing Research 2026;32(1):94-106
Purpose:
This study aimed to develop and implement an antimicrobial stewardship education program for physician assistant nurses and to evaluate its effects on their knowledge and clinical performance.
Methods:
A quasi-experimental, single-group pre-post design was conducted with 50 physician assistant nurses at a university hospital in Seoul, Republic of Korea. The antimicrobial stewardship education program, developed using the ADDIE model, consisted of 12 sessions including lectures and case-based learning (CBL)-based discussions.Knowledge was measured before and immediately after the intervention, while performance was assessed pre-intervention and four weeks post-program. Data were analyzed using paired t-tests, Wilcoxon signed-rank tests, and analysis of covariance (ANCOVA).
Results:
Knowledge scores significantly improved from 44.65±7.45 to 58.50±10.11 (p<.001), and all subdomains showed significant increases (p<.001). Performance scores increased from 3.68±0.77 to 4.28±0.68 (p<.001). Knowledge gain did not differ significantly between the medical and surgical departments (p=.710). Likewise, after adjusting for pre-test scores, no significant difference in performance improvement was observed between the two departments (ANCOVA, p=.170). These results indicate that the program was effective across both departments regardless of their characteristics.
Conclusion
The antimicrobial stewardship education program improved both knowledge and performance among physician assistant nurses. This program may contribute to the standardization of antimicrobial stewardship education and to appropriate antimicrobial use and the reduction of antimicrobial resistance.
6.Nationwide Survey on Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection for Early Gastric Cancer in Korea: Results From the Korean College of Helicobacter and Upper Gastrointestinal Research (KCHUGR) 2023 Survey
Jae Yong PARK ; Jeong Hoon LEE ; Tae-Se KIM ; Da Hyun JUNG ; Bong Eun LEE ; Yonghoon CHOI ; Wan-Sik LEE ; Young-Il KIM ; Sun Hyung KANG ; Hyunsoo CHUNG ; Su Jin KIM ; Joon Sung KIM ; Donghoon KANG ; Su Youn NAM ; Seung Han KIM ; Hyo-Joon YANG ; Hyun LIM ; Jin LEE ; Seon-Young PARK ; Seung-Woo LEE ; Sun Moon KIM ; Sam Ryong JEE ; Dae Young CHEUNG ; Chung Hyun TAE ; Seokin KANG ; Sung Chul PARK ; Seung In SEO ; Cheol Min SHIN ; Kee Don CHOI ; Jong Yeul LEE ;
The Korean Journal of Helicobacter and Upper Gastrointestinal Research 2026;26(1):50-59
Objectives:
Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) has become a standard minimally invasive treatment for selected patients with early gastric cancer (EGC). This study presents the first nationwide survey of patients with EGC treated with ESD in 2023, conducted by the Korean College of Helicobacter and Upper Gastrointestinal Research.
Methods:
Data were retrospectively collected from participating referral centers across Korea using a standardized case report form covering patient characteristics, tumor features, procedural details, histopathological findings, and clinical outcomes. Descriptive and comparative analyses were conducted to summarize nationwide ESD practice patterns and outcomes.
Results:
Data from 5460 ESD cases from 5250 patients across 27 institutions were analyzed. The mean age was 67.4 years, with 74.1% males. Multiple synchronous lesions were identified in 3.7%. Most lesions were located in the lower third of the stomach (64.0%), and differentiated-type adenocarcinomas accounted for 87.8%. The en bloc and complete resection rates were 99.2% and 91.4%, respectively. Curative resection was achieved in 80.5%, whereas local non-curative resection (L-NCR) and surgical non-curative resection (S-NCR) were identified in 2.8% and 16.7%, respectively. Additional surgery was performed more frequently in patients with S-NCR than in those with L-NCR (59.3% vs. 24.7%). The bleeding and perforation rates were 3.6% and 0.9%, respectively, and were mostly managed conservatively or endoscopically. The median length of hospitalization was 4.0 days.
Conclusions
This first nationwide survey provides a comprehensive overview of the current practice of EGC treatment using ESD in Korea, demonstrating high technical success and safety, and establishing a baseline dataset for future longitudinal research.
7.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.
8.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.
9.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.
10.Robotic single-port plus one assist port splenectomy in an adult: a case report with video
Su Hyung PARK ; Sung Hyun KIM ; Chang Moo KANG
Journal of Minimally Invasive Surgery 2025;28(4):209-212
Minimally invasive techniques are increasingly used in hepatobiliary and pancreatic surgeries, but robotic single-port (SP) splenectomy remains uncommon due to the rarity of splenic diseases. We present a case of a 57-year-old woman with left upper quadrant pain and a 4.3-cm splenic mass suggestive of hamartoma. Due to persistent symptoms and cosmetic concerns, robotic SP splenectomy was performed using the da Vinci SP system (Intuitive Surgical, Inc.) via a transumbilical incision, with an additional assist port in the left abdomen.The procedure lasted 264 minutes with minimal blood loss, and the patient was discharged without complications on postoperative day 9. Histopathology confirmed a splenic hamartoma.This case highlights the feasibility and safety of robotic SP splenectomy in adults, suggesting potential for wider application with further experience and refinement.

Result Analysis
Print
Save
E-mail