Purpose: Radical cystectomy (RC) is associated with substantial postoperative morbidity, and unplanned readmission remains common despite advances in perioperative management. However, the association between postoperative readmission due to complications and oncologic outcomes after RC for bladder cancer has not been clearly defined. We evaluated the impact of postoperative readmission on overall survival (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS) after RC for bladder cancer. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively analyzed 3,972 patients who underwent RC for bladder cancer in a multicenter cohort. Postoperative readmission was defined as unplanned hospitalization within 90 days postsurgery due to surgery-related complications. Survival outcomes were assessed using the Kaplan-Meier method and compared using the log-rank test. Univariable and multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression analyses were performed to identify independent predictors of OS and CSS. Results: Among the study population, 916 patients (23.1%) experienced postoperative readmission. Baseline and perioperative characteristics were generally comparable between patients with and without readmission. Kaplan-Meier analyses demonstrated significantly worse OS and CSS among patients who experienced postoperative readmission (both log-rank p<0.001). In multivariable analyses adjusting for clinicopathological factors, postoperative readmission remained independently associated with worse OS (hazard ratio [HR], 1.654; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.464–1.868; p<0.001) and CSS (HR, 1.761; 95% CI, 1.509–2.055; p<0.001). Conclusion Postoperative readmission within 90 days after RC was independently associated with inferior long-term oncologic outcomes. These findings suggest the importance of strategies aimed at preventing postoperative complications and subsequent readmission.

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.

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.

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.

Purpose: Biliary atresia (BA) is a rare but progressive cholangiopathy and the leading cause of pediatric liver transplantation worldwide. The Korean Association of Pediatric Surgeons (KAPS) has conducted three national surveys (2001, 2011, and 2023) to assess long-term trends in the diagnosis, treatment, and outcomes of BA. This study provides a comparative analysis of the 2nd and 3rd national surveys, with reference to selected findings from the 1st survey. Methods: This study included 453 patients from the 3rd national survey (2011–2021) and 435 patients from the 2nd survey (2001–2010), all of whom underwent Kasai portoenterostomy. Data were collected via electronic case report forms from pediatric surgical centers nationwide. Comparisons were made regarding demographics, clinical features, diagnostic patterns, operative details, follow-up outcomes, and survival. Kaplan–Meier analysis was used to evaluate long-term survival. Results: The mean number of BA patients per year remained stable between surveys (43.5 in the 2nd, 41.18 in the 3rd), though centralization of care increased, with 61.5% of cases managed by two major institutions in the 3rd survey. The median age at surgery decreased, and the use of preoperative imaging (especially magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography) increased. The 10-year native liver survival rate declined from 59.8% to 53.7%, while overall 10-year survival improved slightly (92.9% to 93.2%). Postoperative complications, such as cholangitis and liver failure, persisted but were better categorized. The 3rd survey also reported improved mortality (4.9%) and reduced follow-up loss (11.5%) compared to the 2nd survey. Conclusion While overall survival after Kasai operation has remained high and even improved, native liver survival has slightly declined. The findings reflect earlier diagnosis, more consistent diagnostic imaging, and increasing centralization of care. These trends underscore the importance of long-term nationwide data collection in guiding future strategies for BA management in Korea.

Objectives: The Ministry of Education in South Korea conducts an annual Student Emotional and Behavioral Characteristics Test to facilitate early identification and intervention for mental health issues among adolescents. Students who exceed the screening cut-off undergo a secondary in-depth evaluation. In response to the increasing use of remote services following the coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, this study aimed to compare satisfaction and perceived reliability of face-to-face and remote formats of the secondary evaluation as reported by school personnel responsible for conducting the assessments. Methods: A total of 94 school personnel who oversaw the 2023 secondary evaluations in a metropolitan area participated in an anonymous online survey. The survey assessed their satisfaction with the evaluation period, perceived reliability of the evaluation process, and perceived reliability of the written reports. Subgroup analyses were conducted based on their experience with and preference for each evaluation format. Mann-Whitney U tests were used to compare differences between groups. Results: No significant differences were found between the face-to-face and remote groups in satisfaction with the evaluation period or the reliability of the written results. However, the face-to-face format was perceived as significantly more reliable in terms of the evaluation process itself. Among participants who had experience with both formats, the face-to-face format continued to receive higher reliability ratings, particularly among those who preferred face-to-face assessments. In contrast, those who preferred remote assessments showed no significant differences regardless of the format used. Conclusions Although some counselors express concern about the reliability of remote assessments, the findings suggest that remote formats can yield comparable results to face-to-face evaluations in terms of satisfaction and outcome reliability. While remote assessments may not fully replace in-person interactions, they can serve as a valid and efficient alternative, particularly for large-scale mental health screenings in school settings. Expanding the use of structured remote evaluations may enhance accessibility and responsiveness in school-based mental health services.

Purpose: Although bladder cancer occurs three to 4 times more frequently in men than in women, the relative number of deaths compared to incidence is higher in women, suggesting that women have a worse prognosis than men. Emerging evidence indicates that the activity of the sex steroid hormone pathway may play a role in bladder cancer development, with demonstrations that both androgens and estrogens have biological effects on bladder cancer in vitro and in vivo. This study investigates the influence of sex and menopausal status on recurrence and cancer-specific death (CSD) in bladder cancer patients undergoing radical cystectomy (RC). Materials and Methods: This retrospective analysis included 3,913 patients from the Korean Bladder Cancer Study Group Database who underwent RC between 2010 and 2019. Patients were categorized based on gender and menopausal status (≤50 years: premenopausal; >50 years: postmenopausal). Pathological factors, neoadjuvant chemotherapy, recurrence, and CSD rates were analyzed using chi-square and Fisher exact tests. Results: Among the 3,913 patients, 400 (10.2%) were female. Premenopausal females exhibited significantly lower recurrence rates (28.6%) compared to postmenopausal females (45.7%). CSD rates were similarly reduced in premenopausal females (12.0% vs. 22.2% in postmenopausal females). No significant sex differences in recurrence or CSD were observed among premenopausal patients. Pathological T stage, nodal status, and lymphovascular invasion were significantly associated with recurrence in males, while nodal status alone was significant in females. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy was significantly more frequently administered to male patients under the age of 50, while no difference was observed in the administration of neoadjuvant chemotherapy among female patients based on menopausal status. Conclusion Hormonal changes associated with menopause significantly influence bladder cancer outcomes in women. Premenopausal hormonal environments seem protective, underscoring the need for further research into hormone-driven mechanisms in bladder cancer.