Subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH) is a stroke subtype with high mortality and poor functional outcomes. Prompt occlusion of a ruptured aneurysm at an early stage is crucial to prevent rebleeding, which can result in even higher mortality and more severe disabilities. The most critical initial decision in SAH management is the choice of treatment method with surgical clipping or endovascular coiling. We aimed to develop an evidence-based clinical guideline to select the optimal initial treatment in patients with SAH. We developed this guideline based on evidence from systematic reviews and meta-analyses via a de novo process. A systematic literature review was conducted across four databases (MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane, and KoreaMed) to answer two population, intervention, comparison, outcome questions comparing clipping and coiling. The risk of bias was assessed using ROB 2.0 and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses flow diagrams and meta-analyses were generated for functional outcome and mortality. We included six randomized control trials (RCTs) and 58 observational studies. Meta-analysis of RCTs showed that coiling improved functional outcomes compared to clipping (odds ratio [OR], 0.91; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.86–0.97). No significant mortality difference was observed in RCTs (OR, 1.38; 95% CI, 0.91–2.09), but non-RCTs favored clipping for reduced mortality (OR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.69–0.86). However, it is difficult to generalize these findings to all clinical situations, as patients with SAH have a highly variable clinical course. Final treatment decision should be tailored to the individual patient’s status, including aneurysm location, morphology, and the expertise available at the treatment center. Such decisions are best made by specialists such as a board-certified physician and should be explained to the patient and their caregivers, along with the rationale for selecting the most appropriate treatment at the given hospital. Korea has many certified endovascular neurosurgeons, cerebrovascular surgeons, and certified cerebrovascular centers. Proper selection of the most suitable treatment method by certified physicians and centers would greatly benefit patient outcomes and healthcare professionals.

Accurate and early identification of stroke and large vessel occlusion (LVO) in emergency settings is essential for improving patient outcomes and ensuring the efficient allocation of medical resources. This clinical practice guideline systematically reviews domestic and international literature and conducts meta-analyses to evaluate the utility and diagnostic accuracy of stroke assessment tools used in prehospital emergency medical services (EMS). We developed a guideline based on evidence from systematic reviews and meta-analyses via a de novo process. A systematic literature review was conducted to evaluate the usefulness of diagnostic EMS assessment tools for diagnosing stroke and LVO. Overall, 70 non-randomized control studies were selected for this study. A meta-analysis was conducted with a subgroup analysis to distinguish between patients with stroke and those with LVO. EMS tools demonstrated high sensitivity but low specificity for diagnosing stroke. In the prehospital setting, using validated EMS stroke assessment tools is recommended for the early identification of stroke and LVO. Upon hospital arrival, stroke specialists should conduct further evaluation and triage to confirm the diagnosis and guide appropriate management. Delays in diagnosing LVO are frequently unacceptable. While experts advocate for the use of EMS assessment tools to facilitate early identification of LVO, these tools alone lack adequate sensitivity. Therefore, further diagnostic evaluations and consultation with stroke specialists upon hospital arrival are recommended.

The mothership (MS) model, where patients are directly transferred to a thrombectomy-capable center, and the drip-and-ship (DS) model, where thrombolysis is initiated at the nearest primary stroke center before transfer for thrombectomy, are the primary transport modes for patients with stroke. We aimed to establish guidelines for selecting the appropriate transfer strategy based on emergent large vessel occlusion (LVO). We developed this guideline based on evidence from systematic reviews and meta-analyses via a de novo process. A systematic literature review was conducted across four databases (MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane, and KoreaMed) to answer three Population, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcome questions comparing MS and DS models. The risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses flow diagrams and meta-analyses were generated for functional outcomes, mortality, and successful recanalization. Twenty-six non-randomized controlled studies showed that the MS model improved good functional outcomes by approximately 14% compared with the DS model (odds ratio [OR], 1.14; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.00–1.30). Fifteen studies reported that mortality in the MS and DS models showed no significant differences (OR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.84–1.11). Twenty-four studies revealed no significant difference in successful recanalization between the MS and DS models (OR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.68–1.10). The MS model should be considered first to improve the functional outcome of patients with LVO. However, if thrombectomy cannot be performed immediately after thrombolysis, or if a thrombectomy-enabled hospital is not nearby, the DS model should be considered by stroke specialists depending on transportation time and regional factors. We suggest a mixed approach with the DS model based on specific circumstances or regions to ensure the optimum treatment of patients with acute ischemic stroke (AIS). Appropriate transport for patients with LVO improves the prognosis of AIS.

Objectives: Presenteeism is known to be a much more economically damaging social cost than disease rest while going to work despite physical pain. Since COVID-19, social discussions on the sickness benefit have been taking place as a countermeasure against presenteeism, and in particular, farmers and fishermen do not have an institutional mechanism for livelihood support when a disease other than work occurs. This study attempted to examine the relationship between agricultural, fishing, and forestry workers and presenteeism using the 6th Korean Work Conditions Survey. Methods: From October 2020 to January 2021, data from the 6th working conditions survey conducted on 17 cities and provinces in Korea were used, and a total of 34,981 people were studied. Control variables were gender, age, self-health assessment, education level, night work, shift work, monthly income, occupation, working hours per week, and employment status. Results: As a result of the analysis, farmers and fishermen showed the characteristics of the self-employed and the elderly, and as a result of the regression analysis, when farmers and fishermen analyzed the relationship with presenteeism tendency compared to other industry workers, farmers and fishermen increased by 23% compared to other industry groups. Conclusion This study is significant in that it has representation by utilizing the 6th working conditions survey and objectively suggests the need for a sickness benefit for farmers and fishermen who may be overlooked in the sickness benefit.

Background: s/Aims: Reported incidence of extrahepatic bile duct cancer is higher in Asians than in Western populations. Korea, in particular, is one of the countries with the highest incidence rates of extrahepatic bile duct cancer in the world. Although research and innovative therapeutic modalities for extrahepatic bile duct cancer are emerging, clinical guidelines are currently unavailable in Korea. The Korean Society of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic Surgery in collaboration with related societies (Korean Pancreatic and Biliary Surgery Society, Korean Society of Abdominal Radiology, Korean Society of Medical Oncology, Korean Society of Radiation Oncology, Korean Society of Pathologists, and Korean Society of Nuclear Medicine) decided to establish clinical guideline for extrahepatic bile duct cancer in June 2021. Methods: Contents of the guidelines were developed through subgroup meetings for each key question and a preliminary draft was finalized through a Clinical Guidelines Committee workshop. Results: In November 2021, the finalized draft was presented for public scrutiny during a formal hearing. Conclusions The extrahepatic guideline committee believed that this guideline could be helpful in the treatment of patients.

Purpose: Since 2020, atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (Ate/Bev) has been the standard first-line therapy for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), but long-term treatment studies are limited. This study evaluated the clinical characteristics and effects of Ate/Bev for over 1 year. Materials and Methods: This study included patients with unresectable HCC treated with first-line Ate/Bev between May 2020 and April 2022. Those receiving Ate/Bev for 1 year or more were classified as the long-term treatment group. Results: Of 246 patients, 69 (28.0%) were in the long-term treatment group, which comprised more proportions of intrahepatic tumor burden < 25%, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group 0, and a lower proportion of portal vein tumor thrombosis than the short-term treatment group. The long-term treatment group had a higher incidence of atezolizumab-related thyroid dysfunction (31.9% vs. 10.7%, p < 0.001; median time to onset [mTTO], 2.8 months), dermatologic toxicity (29.0% vs. 14.7%, p=0.017; mTTO, 3.3 months), bevacizumab-related hypertension (44.9% vs. 22.0%, p=0.001; mTTO, 4.2 months), and proteinuria (69.6% vs. 38.4%, p < 0.001; mTTO, 6.8 months), compared to the short-term treatment group. Regarding liver function in the long-term treatment group, patients initially classified as Child-Pugh class A decreased from 87.0% to 75.4%, and albumin-bilirubin grade 1 decreased from 68.1% to 50.7% after 1 year of treatment. Conclusion The Ate/Bev long-term treatment group had a lower intrahepatic tumor burden, less portal vein tumor thrombosis, and better performance status and liver function at baseline. Atezolizumab-related immunological adverse events emerged relatively early in treatment compared to the bevacizumab-related. Additionally, some patients demonstrated liver function deterioration during long-term Ate/Bev treatment.

Background: Atherogenic dyslipidemia, which is frequently associated with type 2 diabetes (T2D) and insulin resistance, contributes to the development of vascular complications. Statin therapy is the primary approach to dyslipidemia management in T2D, however, the role of non-statin therapy remains unclear. Ezetimibe reduces cholesterol burden by inhibiting intestinal cholesterol absorption. Fibrates lower triglyceride levels and increase high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) levels via peroxisome proliferator- activated receptor alpha agonism. Therefore, when combined, these drugs effectively lower non-HDL-C levels. Despite this, few clinical trials have specifically targeted non-HDL-C, and the efficacy of triple combination therapies, including statins, ezetimibe, and fibrates, has yet to be determined. Methods: This is a multicenter, prospective, randomized, open-label, active-comparator controlled trial involving 3,958 eligible participants with T2D, cardiovascular risk factors, and elevated non-HDL-C (≥100 mg/dL). Participants, already on moderate-intensity statins, will be randomly assigned to either Ezefeno (ezetimibe/fenofibrate) addition or statin dose-escalation. The primary end point is the development of a composite of major adverse cardiovascular and diabetic microvascular events over 48 months. Conclusion This trial aims to assess whether combining statins, ezetimibe, and fenofibrate is as effective as, or possibly superior to, statin monotherapy intensification in lowering cardiovascular and microvascular disease risk for patients with T2D. This could propose a novel therapeutic approach for managing dyslipidemia in T2D.

Objectives: Presenteeism is known to be a much more economically damaging social cost than disease rest while going to work despite physical pain. Since COVID-19, social discussions on the sickness benefit have been taking place as a countermeasure against presenteeism, and in particular, farmers and fishermen do not have an institutional mechanism for livelihood support when a disease other than work occurs. This study attempted to examine the relationship between agricultural, fishing, and forestry workers and presenteeism using the 6th Korean Work Conditions Survey. Methods: From October 2020 to January 2021, data from the 6th working conditions survey conducted on 17 cities and provinces in Korea were used, and a total of 34,981 people were studied. Control variables were gender, age, self-health assessment, education level, night work, shift work, monthly income, occupation, working hours per week, and employment status. Results: As a result of the analysis, farmers and fishermen showed the characteristics of the self-employed and the elderly, and as a result of the regression analysis, when farmers and fishermen analyzed the relationship with presenteeism tendency compared to other industry workers, farmers and fishermen increased by 23% compared to other industry groups. Conclusion This study is significant in that it has representation by utilizing the 6th working conditions survey and objectively suggests the need for a sickness benefit for farmers and fishermen who may be overlooked in the sickness benefit.