1.Eligibility and causes of disqualification among living liver donor candidates: A single-center analysis of 991 candidates
Eun-Ju NAM ; Jong-Hyun KIM ; Hae-In SHIN ; Young-In YOON ; Deok-Bog MOON ; Ki-Hun KIM ; Tae-Yong HA ; Gi-Won SONG ; Dong-Hwan JUNG ; Gil-Chun PARK ; Shin HWANG ; Sung-Gyu LEE
Annals of Liver Transplantation 2026;6(1):17-24
Background:
A systematic evaluation of potential living liver donors is essential to ensure donor safety and optimize recipient outcomes in living donor liver transplantation (LDLT). This study aimed to assess donor acceptance rates and reasons for disqualification among individuals evaluated for LDLT at a high-volume transplant center over a one-year period.
Methods:
We retrospectively reviewed 1,087 potential living liver donors who presented for LDLT evaluation in 2023. Of these, 991 candidates advanced beyond the initial screening (Stage 1) and underwent comprehensive clinical, imaging, and pathological assessments (Stages 2 and 3). Candidates who discontinued after Stage 1 were excluded due to the absence of documented reasons for non-progression.
Results:
Among the 991 candidates who proceeded beyond initial screening, 473 (47.7%) completed the full donor evaluation, of whom 466 were judged to be suitable donors. Among suitable donors, 384 (82.4%) proceeded to donor hepatectomy, whereas 82 did not, primarily due to recipient-related factors such as clinical deterioration or withdrawal of consent. Donor ineligibility was determined in 422 candidates (42.6%), most commonly due to inadequate remnant liver volume (52.8%), hepatic steatosis (20.6%), and insufficient graft size (10.2%). Among candidates undergoing Stage 2 evaluation, 162 (16.3%) failed to meet steatosis criteria; 126 were excluded solely for steatosis and advised weight reduction, and 39 subsequently became eligible and successfully donated.
Conclusion
In this high-volume LDLT center, donor disqualification was primarily driven by remnant liver volume and hepatic steatosis. Targeted interventions such as weight reduction enabled successful donation in a subset of initially ineligible candidates, underscoring the importance of individualized donor evaluation and pre-donation optimization.
2.Analysis of experiences on telemedicine pilot projects from the perspectives of doctors, pharmacists, and patients
Yeryeon JUNG ; Hyunah KIM ; Jeong-Yeon KIM ; Seongwoo SEO ; Youseok KIM ; Min Jung KO ; Hun-Sung KIM
The Korean Journal of Internal Medicine 2026;41(1):131-142
Background/Aims:
This study is the first to analyze telemedicine pilot project experiences from doctors, pharmacists, and patients with different roles to support sustainable commercialization.
Methods:
An online survey targeted individuals (patients, doctors, and pharmacists) who participated in the telemedicine pilot project at least once between June 1, 2023, and July 17, 2024. The survey assessed satisfaction and usage conditions. The online survey conducted between May 2024 and July 2024 included 1,500 patients, 300 doctors, and 100 pharmacists.
Results:
Doctors, pharmacists, and patients all expressed their intention to participate actively in telemedicine in the future; however, pharmacists showed lower participation rates than doctors (84.7% vs. 67.0% vs. 91.7%, p < 0.001). The most common reason among doctors was “increasing demands from patients” (44.3%), while for pharmacists, it was “easy management of patients with chronic diseases” (67.0%). This showed a statistically significant difference between groups (p < 0.001). Among patients, 65.0% cited “lack of time and convenience.” Notably, both doctors and patients agreed that telemedicine requires more time than current practices, although their perceptions differed significantly (all p < 0.001). Additionally, 24.0% of patients who used telemedicine for "hair loss/beauty" purposes reported treatment times of “≤ 3 minutes” shorter than for other purposes. Regarding telemedicine platforms, 75.0% of doctors and 84.0% of pharmacists reported no prior experience using them.
Conclusions
Appropriate telemedicine systems require collaboration among doctors, pharmacists, and patients. While most groups expressed positive attitudes and future intentions, significant gaps in experience and understanding must be addressed to ensure successful implementation.
3.The Korean Rectal Cancer Multidisciplinary Committee Clinical Practice Guidelines for Rectal Cancer version 2.0
Hyo Seon RYU ; Hyun Jung KIM ; Dong Hyun KANG ; Yoo-Kang KWAK ; Han Deok KWAK ; Yoon-Hye KWON ; Dalyon KIM ; Baek-Hui KIM ; Jae Hyun KIM ; Ji Hun KIM ; Jin Won KIM ; Tae Hyung KIM ; Hae Young KIM ; Soo Min NAM ; Gyoung Tae NOH ; Jun Woo BONG ; Nak Song SUNG ; Seon Hui SHIN ; Kil-Yong LEE ; Sung Chul LEE ; Sea-Won LEE ; Jung Won LEE ; Jong Min LEE ; Myung Hoon IHN ; Joo Han LIM ; Woong Bae JI ; Dae Hee PYO ; Young Ki HONG ; Jung-Myun KWAK ;
Annals of Coloproctology 2026;42(1):4-33
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.
4.Assessing Laser Safety in Dermatology:Eye Protection and Infection Control Practices Among Board-Certified Korean Dermatologists
Sejin OH ; Yeong Ho KIM ; Bo Ri KIM ; Hyun-Min SEO ; Soon-Hyo KWON ; Hoon CHOI ; Hae Woong LEE ; Jung-Im NA ; Chun Pill CHOI ; Joo Yeon KO ; Hwa Jung RYU ; Suk Bae SEO ; Jong Hee LEE ; Chang-Hun HUH ; Hei Sung KIM
Annals of Dermatology 2026;38(1):69-74
Background:
Laser procedures are integral to dermatologic practice, yet safety measures- particularly regarding ocular protection and plume control- are poorly studied in real-world settings.
Objective:
To evaluate current practices in eye protection, infection control, and occupational risk awareness among Korean dermatologists performing laser treatments.
Methods:
A cross-sectional survey was conducted among board-certified dermatologists at the 2024 Korean Society for Dermatologic Laser Surgery meeting. The questionnaire covered demographics, laser frequency, use of goggles and masks, infection control strategies, ophthalmologic monitoring, and history of warts or cancer.
Results:
Seventy-nine respondents completed the survey. All reported using protective goggles, but only 26.6% and 22.8% did so for CO 2 and erbium-doped yttrium aluminium garnet lasers, respectively. Only 24.1% underwent regular eye exams, and 13.9% reported eye conditions after starting laser practice. While 89.9% used masks, 40.8% used dental masks, which are inadequate for plume protection. Suction devices were used by 94.9%, though performance specifications were unclear. Warts were reported by 46.8% of respondents; two reported cancer diagnoses after initiating laser work.
Conclusion
Despite high overall adherence to basic safety practices, critical gaps remain. Our findings highlight the need for standardized guidelines and long-term occupational health monitoring to ensure safe laser practice.
5.Current Clinical Perspectives on Rosacea Management: Insights From a Korean Multicenter Expert Opinion Survey
Bo Ri KIM ; Sejin OH ; Ju Hee HAN ; Jimyung SEO ; Hyun-Min SEO ; Soon-Hyo KWON ; Hoon CHOI ; Jung U SHIN ; Jae We CHO ; Boncheol Leo GOO ; Jung-Im NA ; Dong Hun LEE ; Chun Pill CHOI ; HaeWoong LEE ; Joo Yeon KO ; Hwa Jung RYU ; Nark-Kyoung RHO ; Hyunjo KIM ; Ga-Young LEE ; Jong Hee LEE ; Nala SHIN ; Sang Ju LEE ; Suk Bae SEO ; Geun Soo LEE ; Hei Sung KIM ; Chang-Hun HUH
Annals of Dermatology 2026;38(1):42-50
Background:
Rosacea is a chronic inflammatory skin disorder characterized by erythema, papules, ocular symptoms, and heightened sensitivity. Patients with neurogenic symptoms such as burning or stinging remain particularly difficult to manage. Current guidelines often underrepresent energy-based devices (EBDs), pigmentary sequelae, psychosocial burden, and ocular comorbidities.
Objective:
To examine Korean dermatologists’ expert perspectives on rosacea management, focusing on skin sensitivity, neurogenic symptoms, pigmentary changes, psychosocial impact, ocular involvement, and EBD use.
Methods:
A web-based, 29-item survey was administered to 25 board-certified Korean dermatologists (May–June 2025). Quantitative and qualitative responses were analyzed.
Results:
Erythematotelangiectatic and papulopustular phenotypes with sensitivity skin predominated. EBDs (pulsed dye laser, intense pulsed light) were frequently used but limited by cost and sensitivity issues. Neurogenic symptoms were recognized but rarely treated with neuromodulators. Post-inflammatory hyperpigmentation was infrequent, yet monitoring was inconsistent.Psychosocial and ocular aspects were acknowledged but seldomly systematically addressed.Respondents expressed interest in emerging adjunctive treatments such as cold plasma, skin boosters, and holistic care approaches.
Conclusion
Korean dermatologists adopt individualized strategies for rosacea, yet practice gaps remain regarding neurogenic symptoms, pigmentary complications, and psychosocial and ocular comorbidities. Findings support the need for updated multidisciplinary, phenotype-driven guidelines aligned with real-world practice.
6.Incidence of active tuberculosis in Korean patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a comparison between tumor necrosis factor inhibitors and tofacitinib
Jeong-Yeon KIM ; Seung-Hun YOU ; Yoon-Kyoung SUNG ; Sun-Young JUNG ; Soo-Kyung CHO
Journal of Rheumatic Diseases 2026;33(2):95-101
Objective:
This study aims to compare the incidence of active tuberculosis (TB) among Korean patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) initiating treatment with tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) or tofacitinib.
Methods:
Using the Korean National Health Insurance database, we conducted a nationwide, retrospective cohort study of RA patients who started TNFi or tofacitinib therapy between 2015 and 2018. We calculated the incidence rates of active TB based on the treatment type and results from latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI) screening tests. A multivariable Cox proportional hazards model was employed to evaluate the risk of active TB in RA patients beginning TNFi or tofacitinib treatment.
Results:
Among 3,382 RA patients (596 on tofacitinib and 2,786 on TNFi), LTBI screening was predominantly conducted using the IGRA (interferon-gamma release assays) test. Of these patients, 624 (18.5%) with a positive LTBI test received prophylactic treatment. No cases of active TB occurred in tofacitinib users, while 32 cases were observed in TNFi users. The adjusted hazard ratio for active TB in LTBI-positive patients was 5.47 (95% confidence interval 2.74 to 10.92) compared to LTBI-negative patients.In subgroup analyses, TB incidence was significantly higher among individuals aged over 65 years.
Conclusion
Despite LTBI treatment, active TB remains prevalent among RA patients on TNFi therapy and in those with positive LTBI tests.
7.Bowel preparation for colonoscopy in special populations: a practical and risk-stratified approach
Myung-Hun LEE ; Won MOON ; Kyoungwon JUNG ; Jae Hyun KIM ; Sung Eun KIM ; Moo In PARK ; Seun Ja PARK
Kosin Medical Journal 2026;41(1):9-18
Bowel preparation is a key determinant of colonoscopy quality; however, inadequate cleansing remains common among patients with overlapping clinical and logistical barriers. In routine practice, preparation failure may prolong procedures, reduce diagnostic confidence, and necessitate early repeat colonoscopy. We review major society guidelines and selected studies addressing bowel preparation in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), chronic kidney disease (CKD), older adults, chronic constipation, and hospitalized patients. Across these settings, the most consistently supported measures include split-dose administration, completion of the final dose close to the time of colonoscopy in accordance with local fasting and sedation policies, and structured patient instructions reinforced through follow-up communication. A standardized assessment of preparation quality is recommended to support quality improvement and appropriate follow-up. Risk stratification can help identify patients who may benefit from intensified preparation pathways, including those with prior inadequate preparation, severe constipation, frailty, or inpatient status. Safety considerations are particularly important in CKD, in which oral sodium phosphate should be avoided and magnesium-containing agents used cautiously; polyethylene glycol-based solutions are generally preferred. In IBD, regimen selection should also consider endoscopic interpretability because sodium phosphate preparations have been associated with preparation-related mucosal abnormalities that may confound the assessment of subtle inflammatory findings. Among hospitalized patients, system-level barriers often predominate, and protocolized pathways may improve workflow and patient comfort while maintaining cleansing effectiveness. We propose a practical, risk-stratified approach to regimen selection, timing, rescue strategies, and safety monitoring that can be implemented in high-volume clinical practice.
8.Clinical Practice Guideline for the Prehospital Stage of Acute Stroke : III. Initial Decision for Primary Treatment in Subarachnoid Hemorrhage
Jae Sang OH ; Jong Min LEE ; Hong Suk AHN ; Jung-Jae KIM ; Kyoung Min JANG ; Gi-Yong YUN ; Jang Hun KIM ; Dongwook SEO ; Hyeong Jin LEE ; Yuna JO ; Jinwoo JEONG ; Kyoung-Chul CHA ; Yong Soo CHO ; Su Jin KIM ; Jongkyu PARK ; Won-Sang CHO ; Hoon KIM ; Young Woo KIM ; Seung Hun SHEEN ; Sang Weon LEE ; Jae Whan LEE ; Tae Gon KIM ; Sung-kon HA ; Sukh Que PARK ; Dae-Won KIM ; Soon Chan KWON
Journal of Korean Neurosurgical Society 2026;69(1):35-50
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.
9.Clinical Practice Guideline for the Prehospital Stage in Acute Stroke : I. Use of Emergency Medical Services Assessment Tools
Jae Sang OH ; Dongwook SEO ; Jinwoo JEONG ; Kyoung-Chul CHA ; Yong Soo CHO ; Su Jin KIM ; Jongkyu PARK ; Won-Sang CHO ; Se Won OH ; Jang Hun KIM ; Hyeong Jin LEE ; Hong Suk AHN ; Yuna JO ; Jung-Jae KIM ; Kyoung Min JANG ; Gi-Yong YUN ; Jong Min LEE ; Hoon KIM ; Young Woo KIM ; Tae Gon KIM ; Sung-kon HA ; Sukh Que PARK ; Soon Chan KWON
Journal of Korean Neurosurgical Society 2026;69(1):7-22
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.
10.Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Prehospital Stage of Acute Stroke in Korea II : Transport Decisions for Patients with Acute Ischemic Stroke
Jae Sang OH ; Yuna JO ; Jong Min LEE ; Hong Suk AHN ; Jung-Jae KIM ; Kyoung Min JANG ; Gi-Yong YUN ; Jang Hun KIM ; Dongwook SEO ; Hyeong Jin LEE ; Jinwoo JEONG ; Kyoung-Chul CHA ; Yong Soo CHO ; Su Jin KIM ; Jongkyu PARK ; Won-Sang CHO ; Hoon KIM ; Young Woo KIM ; Seung Hun SHEEN ; Sang Weon LEE ; Jae Whan LEE ; Tae Gon KIM ; Sung-kon HA ; Sukh Que PARK ; Soon Chan KWON
Journal of Korean Neurosurgical Society 2026;69(1):23-34
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.

Result Analysis
Print
Save
E-mail