Purpose: This study evaluated the postoperative quality of life (QoL) after various types of gastrectomy for gastric cancer. Materials and Methods: A multicenter prospective observational study was conducted in Korea using the Korean Quality of Life in Stomach Cancer Patients Study (KOQUSS)-40, a new QoL assessment tool focusing on postgastrectomy syndrome. Overall, 496 patients with gastric cancer were enrolled, and QoL was assessed at 5 time points: preoperatively and at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery. Results: Distal gastrectomy (DG) and pylorus-preserving gastrectomy (PPG) showed significantly better outcomes than total gastrectomy (TG) and proximal gastrectomy (PG) with regard to total score, indigestion, and dysphagia. DG, PPG, and TG also showed significantly better outcomes than PG in terms of dumping syndrome and worry about cancer. Postoperative QoL did not differ significantly according to anastomosis type in DG, except for Billroth I anastomosis, which achieved better bowel habit change scores than the others. No domains differed significantly when comparing double tract reconstruction and esophagogastrostomy after PG. The total QoL score correlated significantly with postoperative body weight loss (more than 10%) and extent of resection (P<0.05 for both).Reflux as assessed by KOQUSS-40 did not correlate significantly with reflux observed on gastroscopy 1 year postoperatively (P=0.064). Conclusions Our prospective observation using KOQUSS-40 revealed that DG and PPG lead to better QoL than TG and PG. Further study is needed to compare postoperative QoL according to anastomosis type in DG and PG.

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: This study evaluated the postoperative quality of life (QoL) after various types of gastrectomy for gastric cancer. Materials and Methods: A multicenter prospective observational study was conducted in Korea using the Korean Quality of Life in Stomach Cancer Patients Study (KOQUSS)-40, a new QoL assessment tool focusing on postgastrectomy syndrome. Overall, 496 patients with gastric cancer were enrolled, and QoL was assessed at 5 time points: preoperatively and at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery. Results: Distal gastrectomy (DG) and pylorus-preserving gastrectomy (PPG) showed significantly better outcomes than total gastrectomy (TG) and proximal gastrectomy (PG) with regard to total score, indigestion, and dysphagia. DG, PPG, and TG also showed significantly better outcomes than PG in terms of dumping syndrome and worry about cancer. Postoperative QoL did not differ significantly according to anastomosis type in DG, except for Billroth I anastomosis, which achieved better bowel habit change scores than the others. No domains differed significantly when comparing double tract reconstruction and esophagogastrostomy after PG. The total QoL score correlated significantly with postoperative body weight loss (more than 10%) and extent of resection (P<0.05 for both).Reflux as assessed by KOQUSS-40 did not correlate significantly with reflux observed on gastroscopy 1 year postoperatively (P=0.064). Conclusions Our prospective observation using KOQUSS-40 revealed that DG and PPG lead to better QoL than TG and PG. Further study is needed to compare postoperative QoL according to anastomosis type in DG and PG.

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: This study evaluated the postoperative quality of life (QoL) after various types of gastrectomy for gastric cancer. Materials and Methods: A multicenter prospective observational study was conducted in Korea using the Korean Quality of Life in Stomach Cancer Patients Study (KOQUSS)-40, a new QoL assessment tool focusing on postgastrectomy syndrome. Overall, 496 patients with gastric cancer were enrolled, and QoL was assessed at 5 time points: preoperatively and at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery. Results: Distal gastrectomy (DG) and pylorus-preserving gastrectomy (PPG) showed significantly better outcomes than total gastrectomy (TG) and proximal gastrectomy (PG) with regard to total score, indigestion, and dysphagia. DG, PPG, and TG also showed significantly better outcomes than PG in terms of dumping syndrome and worry about cancer. Postoperative QoL did not differ significantly according to anastomosis type in DG, except for Billroth I anastomosis, which achieved better bowel habit change scores than the others. No domains differed significantly when comparing double tract reconstruction and esophagogastrostomy after PG. The total QoL score correlated significantly with postoperative body weight loss (more than 10%) and extent of resection (P<0.05 for both).Reflux as assessed by KOQUSS-40 did not correlate significantly with reflux observed on gastroscopy 1 year postoperatively (P=0.064). Conclusions Our prospective observation using KOQUSS-40 revealed that DG and PPG lead to better QoL than TG and PG. Further study is needed to compare postoperative QoL according to anastomosis type in DG and PG.

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: The early detection and management of dyslexia are crucial for preventing irreversible educational gaps and various negative consequences for affected students. However, diagnosing dyslexia is challenging because it requires a comprehensive assessment. Dyslexia screening tests that utilize fast, automated, computer-based technology can be useful for early identification and management. In this paper, we introduce a tablet computer-based dyslexia screening application that uses an eye-tracking system and verify its reliability. Methods: The study included 200 participants between 8 and 13 years of age from an elementary school, all of whom underwent dyslexia screening tests twice. The screening was conducted using the VisualCamp SeeSo eye-tracking Android Software Development Kit v3.0.0, implemented on Samsung Galaxy Tab S5e tablets. The eye-tracking system measured reading speed by gaze, mean gaze fixation time, gaze fixation frequency, saccadic length, and regression ratio. To assess the reliability of the two sets of measurements, the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was employed. Results: Excellent reliability was found for measurements of gaze fixation frequency (ICC=0.83), gaze fixation mean time (ICC=0.82), and reading speed by gaze (ICC=0.76), and good reliability for measurements of regression ratio (ICC=0.75) and saccadic length (ICC=0.72). Conclusion This study demonstrated that the tablet computer-based dyslexia screening application reliably measured eye movements in subjects with dyslexia. Furthermore, the application proved to be highly reliable and potentially suitable for use in clinical or school settings, eliminating the need for a laboratory environment and extensive equipment.

Purpose: This study aims to investigate the diagnostic significance of positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) in assessing bone marrow (BM) involvement through a comparison of PET/CT findings with BM biopsy in extranodal natural killer/T-cell lymphoma. Materials and Methods: The medical records of 193 patients were retrospectively reviewed. Patients were categorized as having early-stage (PET-ES) or advanced-stage (PET-AS) disease based on PET/CT results. The BM involvement was classified into three groups according to BM biopsy: gross BM involvement, minimal BM involvement (defined as the presence of a limited number of Epstein-Barr virus–positive cells in BM), and no involvement. Calculations of the accuracy of PET/CT in detecting BM involvement and analysis of the clinical outcomes (progression-free survival [PFS] and overall survival [OS]) according to the BM biopsy status were performed. Results: PET/CT exhibited a sensitivity of 64.7% and a specificity of 96.0% in detecting gross BM involvement. For detecting any (both gross and minimal) BM involvement, the sensitivity was 30.4%, while the specificity was 99.0%. Only one patient (0.7%) demonstrated gross BM involvement among the PET-ES group. Survival outcomes of the PET-ES group with minimal BM involvement (3-year PFS, 55.6%; OS, 77.0%) were closer to those of the PET-ES group with no BM involvement (3-year PFS, 62.2%; OS, 80.6%) than to those of the PET-AS group (3-year PFS, 20.1%; OS, 29.9%). Conclusion PET/CT exhibits high specificity, but moderate and low sensitivity in detecting gross and minimal BM involvement, respectively. The clinical significance of minimal BM involvement for patients in the PET-ES group may be limited.

Background/Aims: Shifts in the gut microbiota and metabolites are interrelated with liver cirrhosis progression and complications. However, causal relationships have not been evaluated comprehensively. Here, we identified complication-dependent gut microbiota and metabolic signatures in patients with liver cirrhosis. Methods: Microbiome taxonomic profiling was performed on 194 stool samples (52 controls and 142 cirrhosis patients) via V3-V4 16S rRNA sequencing. Next, 51 samples (17 controls and 34 cirrhosis patients) were selected for fecal metabolite profiling via gas chromatography mass spectrometry and liquid chromatography coupled to timeof-flight mass spectrometry. Correlation analyses were performed targeting the gut-microbiota, metabolites, clinical parameters, and presence of complications (varices, ascites, peritonitis, encephalopathy, hepatorenal syndrome, hepatocellular carcinoma, and deceased). Results: Veillonella bacteria, Ruminococcus gnavus, and Streptococcus pneumoniae are cirrhosis-related microbiotas compared with control group. Bacteroides ovatus, Clostridium symbiosum, Emergencia timonensis, Fusobacterium varium, and Hungatella_uc were associated with complications in the cirrhosis group. The areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROCs) for the diagnosis of cirrhosis, encephalopathy, hepatorenal syndrome, and deceased were 0.863, 0.733, 0.71, and 0.69, respectively. The AUROCs of mixed microbial species for the diagnosis of cirrhosis and complication were 0.808 and 0.847, respectively. According to the metabolic profile, 5 increased fecal metabolites in patients with cirrhosis were biomarkers (AUROC >0.880) for the diagnosis of cirrhosis and complications. Clinical markers were significantly correlated with the gut microbiota and metabolites. Conclusions Cirrhosis-dependent gut microbiota and metabolites present unique signatures that can be used as noninvasive biomarkers for the diagnosis of cirrhosis and its complications.

Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is one of the most common neurodevelopmental disorders found in children and adolescents. The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) first published a clinical practice guideline on ADHD in 2000, which was revised in 2011 and republished together with an accompanying process-of-care algorithm. More recently, the 2019 clinical practice guideline revision was published. Since the 2011 guideline, the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, fifth edition (DSM-5), was released. In addition, the Society of Developmental and Behavioral Pediatrics (SDBP) recently released another clinical practice guideline for complex ADHD. Although there are nonessential changes reflected in these updates, a number of changes have still been made; for example, the DSM-5 criteria lowered the diagnostic threshold for ADHD in older teens and adults. Additionally, the criteria were revised to facilitate application to older teens and adults, and a comorbid diagnosis with autism spectrum disorder is now allowed. Meanwhile, the 2019 AAP guideline added the recommendation related to comorbid conditions with ADHD. Lastly, SDBP developed a complex ADHD guideline, covering areas such as comorbid conditions, moderate-to-severe impairment, treatment failure, and diagnostic uncertainty. In addition, other national ADHD guidelines have been published, as have European guidelines for managing ADHD during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. To facilitate ADHD management in a primary care, it is important to provide and review clinical guidelines and recent updates. In this article, we will review and summarize the recent clinical guidelines and their updates.