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.

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.

Purpose: Medical artificial intelligence (AI) is rapidly being integrated into clinical practice and healthcare systems, raising concerns regarding safety, accountability, and governance. Despite its increasing importance, empirical comparative studies examining differences in perceptions of medical AI among key expert groups remain limited. This study aimed to compare and analyze perceptions of medical AI among medical and non-medical professionals and to systematically identify commonalities and differences across policy- and governance-relevant domains. Methods: Focus group interviews using open-ended questions were conducted with 30 experts (15 medical and 15 non-medical professionals) who had direct experience with medical AI. Data were analyzed using inductive thematic analysis combined with qualitative comparative analysis. Analytical rigor was strengthened through independent coding and consensus-based discussions. Results: Both groups recognized the potential of medical AI to bring meaningful changes to healthcare systems. However, medical professionals primarily evaluated medical AI in terms of clinical applicability, patient safety, explainability, and accountability. In contrast, non-medical professionals emphasized technological maturity, scalability, data infrastructure, standardization, and system-integration potential. Group-specific patterns also emerged regarding perceived limitations, autonomy, educational priorities, and classification frameworks, particularly in relation to clinical risk management versus system-level design and governance considerations. Conclusion: Differences in perceptions of medical AI are systematically associated with distinct interpretive frames shaped by professional roles and responsibility structures. Effective implementation and policy design for medical AI therefore require an integrated approach that accounts for these structural differences. This study provides empirical evidence and a conceptual foundation for future quantitative and mixed-methods research on medical AI governance.

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.

Ovarian cancer remains one of the most lethal gynecologic malignancies, with limited responsiveness to standard chemotherapy and poor long-term prognosis. Tumor-associated macrophages, particularly M2-polarized populations, play a crucial role in immune suppression and tumor progression. Human induced pluripotent stem cells (hiPSCs) can differentiate into functional immune cells, providing an unlimited and patient-specific source for cell-based immunotherapy.In this study, we investigated the therapeutic potential of hiPSC-derived macrophages (hiMACs), specifically M1-polarized hiMACs, against ovarian cancer. In a co-culture system, M1-hiMACs significantly reduced the viability of ovarian cancer cells, inducing apoptosis and necrosis, whereas M0 macrophages showed minimal effects. In vivo, intravenous administration of M1-hiMACs into nude mice bearing ovarian cancer cells resulted in a dose-dependent reduction in tumor volume. Furthermore, combination therapy with paclitaxel and M1-hiMACs led to greater tumor regression and enhanced histological necrosis compared to either treatment alone. These findings demonstrate the potent anti-tumor effects of M1-hiMACs and highlight their potential for cellular immunotherapy for ovarian cancer, particularly in combination with chemotherapy.

Background: Identifying the risks related to the complications of electrical cardioversion (ECV) can alert the determinaton of rhythm control in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 1,058 patients who underwent ECV for persistent or long-standing persistent AF/atrial flutter (AFL) from multiple centers. Patients were classified into the no-complication (1,023 patients) and complication (35 patients) groups based on the following major complications: stroke and/or systemic embolism (SSE), myocardial infarction, major bleeding, implantation of cardiac implantable electronic devices, ventricular tachycardia/fibrillation, and death at 1 year follow-up after ECV. Results: Compared with the no-complication group, the complication group exhibited a higher proportion of female patients (37% vs. 22%), as well as a higher proportion of patients with older age (67 ± 11 vs. 61 ± 10 years), diabetes mellitus (DM) (49% vs. 24%), heart failure (HF) (49% vs. 30%), SSE (23% vs. 9%), high CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc (CV) score (3.6 ± 1.8 vs.2.2 ± 1.4), low left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) (50 ± 16% vs. 58 ± 21%), and high left atrial volume index (LAVI) (51 ± 26 vs. 40 ± 20 mL/m 2 ). Class I and III antiarrhythmics were less prescribed in the complication group than in the no-complication group (57% vs.76%). Univariate analysis for complications revealed age (≥ 65 years), female sex, DM, HF, SSE, LVEF (< 50%), LAVI (≥ 40 mL/m 2 ), CV score (≥ 3), bradycardia on Holter (< 60/min), and no antiarrhythmics as risk factors. Among these, multivariate analysis revealed clinical significance of female sex and SSE. Conclusion Female sex and a history of SSE were the most important risk factors of complications in patients with persistent or long-standing persistent AF/AFL who underwent ECV.

Autoimmune gastritis (AIG) results in the loss of oxyntic glands, achlorhydria, and hypergastrinemia and frequently leads to the development of gastric hyperplastic polyps (GHPs). AIG is increasingly being recognized as a major contributor to corpus-dominant atrophy in East Asia. Despite its increasing prevalence, it is frequently underdiagnosed in clinical practice. Although GHPs are typically benign, AIG is associated with an elevated risk of gastric cancer, including neuroendocrine tumors. Herein, we report two cases in which GHPs detected during screening endoscopy led to AIG identification. Both of the patients were negative for Helicobacter pylori and tested positive for antiparietal cell antibodies. Histological examination confirmed oxyntic atrophy and hyperplastic polyps, without any evidence of dysplasia. These case reports have highlighted that GHPs may develop in the context of H. pylori-associated gastritis as well as from autoimmune causes, thus emphasizing the importance of recognizing and assessing AIG during endoscopic screening. The possibility of coexisting AIG should be considered in individuals with GHPs. Accordingly, clinicians are advised to evaluate AIG when GHPs are detected in a background of corpus-dominant atrophy, as delayed recognition may miss the opportunity to identify a precancerous risk.