Background and Objectives: Outcomes of deferring percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) without invasive physiologic assessment for intermediate coronary lesions is uncertain.We sought to compare long-term outcomes between medical treatment and PCI of intermediate lesions without invasive physiologic assessment. Methods: A total of 899 patients with intermediate coronary lesions between 50% and 70% diameter-stenosis were randomized to the conservative group (n=449) or the aggressive group (n=450). For intermediate lesions, PCI was performed in the aggressive group, but was deferred in the conservative group. The primary endpoint was major adverse cardiac events (MACE, a composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction [MI], or ischemia-driven any revascularization) at 3 years. Results: The number of treated lesions per patient was 0.8±0.9 in the conservative group and 1.7±0.9 in the aggressive group (p=0.001). At 3 years, the conservative group had a significantly higher incidence of MACE than the aggressive group (13.8% vs. 9.3%; hazard ratio [HR], 1.49; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.00–2.21; p=0.049), mainly driven by revascularization of target intermediate lesion (6.5% vs. 1.1%; HR, 5.69; 95% CI, 2.20–14.73;p<0.001). Between 1 and 3 years after the index procedure, compared to the aggressive group, the conservative group had significantly higher incidence of cardiac death or MI (3.2% vs.0.7%; HR, 4.34; 95% CI, 1.24–15.22; p=0.022) and ischemia-driven any revascularization. Conclusions For intermediate lesions, medical therapy alone, guided only by angiography, was associated with a higher risk of MACE at 3 years compared with performing PCI, mainly due to increased revascularization.

Objective: To assess the performance of novel qualitative diagnostic criteria using dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to identify the pathologic complete response (pCR) of primary tumors in esophageal cancer after neoadjuvant chemoradiation (nCRT). Materials and Methods: Patients who underwent nCRT, subsequent MRI, positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT), endoscopy, or esophagectomy for esophageal cancer between October 2021 and October 2023 were retrospectively analyzed. The DCE-MRI response of primary tumors was interpreted using five grades by thoracic radiologists as follows: G1 (compatible with CR), G2 (probable CR), G3 (probable partial response [PR]), G4 (compatible with PR), and G5 (stable or progressive disease). The performances of MRI, PET/CT, endoscopy, and their combinations in diagnosing pCR in primary tumors were calculated. Results: A total of 52 patients (male:female, 46:6; age, 61.2 ± 8.0 years) were included. Surgical specimens revealed pCR (ypT0) in 34 patients. G1 as the MRI criterion for pCR of primary tumors yielded a positive predictive value (PPV), specificity of 100% (18/18), and low sensitivity (23.5% [8/34]). Combining G1 and G2 as the MRI criteria increased the sensitivity to 73.5% (25/34), with a specificity of 88.9% (16/18), accuracy of 78.8% (41/52), and PPV of 92.6% (25/27). Adding the DCEMRI results (G1-2) significantly improved accuracy for both PET/CT (from 65.4% [34/52] to 80.8% [42/52], P = 0.03) and endoscopy (from 55.8% [29/52] to 76.9% [40/52], P = 0.005), with increase in sensitivity (from 55.9% [19/34] to 82.4% [28/34] for PET/CT-based evaluation [P = 0.008] and from 47.1% [16/34] to 82.4% [28/34] for endoscopy-based evaluation [P = 0.001]). Conclusion DCE-MRI-based grading shows high diagnostic performance for identifying pCR in primary tumors, particularly in terms of PPV and specificity, and enhances response evaluation when combined with PET/CT and endoscopy.

The Korean Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Committee within the Korean Society of Surgical Metabolism and Nutrition was established to develop ERAS guidelines tailored to the Korean context. This guideline focuses on creating the most current evidence-based practice guidelines for ERAS purposes, based on systematic reviews. All key questions targeted randomized controlled trials exclusively, and if fewer than 2 were available, studies employing propensity score matching were also included. Recommendations for each key question were marked with strength of recommendation and level of evidence following internal and external review processes by the committee.

The Korean Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Committee within the Korean Society of Surgical Metabolism and Nutrition was established to develop ERAS guidelines tailored to the Korean context. This guideline focuses on creating the most current evidence-based practice guidelines for ERAS purposes, based on systematic reviews. All key questions targeted randomized controlled trials exclusively, and if fewer than 2 were available, studies employing propensity score matching were also included. Recommendations for each key question were marked with strength of recommendation and level of evidence following internal and external review processes by the committee.

Objective: To assess the performance of novel qualitative diagnostic criteria using dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to identify the pathologic complete response (pCR) of primary tumors in esophageal cancer after neoadjuvant chemoradiation (nCRT). Materials and Methods: Patients who underwent nCRT, subsequent MRI, positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT), endoscopy, or esophagectomy for esophageal cancer between October 2021 and October 2023 were retrospectively analyzed. The DCE-MRI response of primary tumors was interpreted using five grades by thoracic radiologists as follows: G1 (compatible with CR), G2 (probable CR), G3 (probable partial response [PR]), G4 (compatible with PR), and G5 (stable or progressive disease). The performances of MRI, PET/CT, endoscopy, and their combinations in diagnosing pCR in primary tumors were calculated. Results: A total of 52 patients (male:female, 46:6; age, 61.2 ± 8.0 years) were included. Surgical specimens revealed pCR (ypT0) in 34 patients. G1 as the MRI criterion for pCR of primary tumors yielded a positive predictive value (PPV), specificity of 100% (18/18), and low sensitivity (23.5% [8/34]). Combining G1 and G2 as the MRI criteria increased the sensitivity to 73.5% (25/34), with a specificity of 88.9% (16/18), accuracy of 78.8% (41/52), and PPV of 92.6% (25/27). Adding the DCEMRI results (G1-2) significantly improved accuracy for both PET/CT (from 65.4% [34/52] to 80.8% [42/52], P = 0.03) and endoscopy (from 55.8% [29/52] to 76.9% [40/52], P = 0.005), with increase in sensitivity (from 55.9% [19/34] to 82.4% [28/34] for PET/CT-based evaluation [P = 0.008] and from 47.1% [16/34] to 82.4% [28/34] for endoscopy-based evaluation [P = 0.001]). Conclusion DCE-MRI-based grading shows high diagnostic performance for identifying pCR in primary tumors, particularly in terms of PPV and specificity, and enhances response evaluation when combined with PET/CT and endoscopy.

Objective: To assess the performance of novel qualitative diagnostic criteria using dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to identify the pathologic complete response (pCR) of primary tumors in esophageal cancer after neoadjuvant chemoradiation (nCRT). Materials and Methods: Patients who underwent nCRT, subsequent MRI, positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT), endoscopy, or esophagectomy for esophageal cancer between October 2021 and October 2023 were retrospectively analyzed. The DCE-MRI response of primary tumors was interpreted using five grades by thoracic radiologists as follows: G1 (compatible with CR), G2 (probable CR), G3 (probable partial response [PR]), G4 (compatible with PR), and G5 (stable or progressive disease). The performances of MRI, PET/CT, endoscopy, and their combinations in diagnosing pCR in primary tumors were calculated. Results: A total of 52 patients (male:female, 46:6; age, 61.2 ± 8.0 years) were included. Surgical specimens revealed pCR (ypT0) in 34 patients. G1 as the MRI criterion for pCR of primary tumors yielded a positive predictive value (PPV), specificity of 100% (18/18), and low sensitivity (23.5% [8/34]). Combining G1 and G2 as the MRI criteria increased the sensitivity to 73.5% (25/34), with a specificity of 88.9% (16/18), accuracy of 78.8% (41/52), and PPV of 92.6% (25/27). Adding the DCEMRI results (G1-2) significantly improved accuracy for both PET/CT (from 65.4% [34/52] to 80.8% [42/52], P = 0.03) and endoscopy (from 55.8% [29/52] to 76.9% [40/52], P = 0.005), with increase in sensitivity (from 55.9% [19/34] to 82.4% [28/34] for PET/CT-based evaluation [P = 0.008] and from 47.1% [16/34] to 82.4% [28/34] for endoscopy-based evaluation [P = 0.001]). Conclusion DCE-MRI-based grading shows high diagnostic performance for identifying pCR in primary tumors, particularly in terms of PPV and specificity, and enhances response evaluation when combined with PET/CT and endoscopy.

Background and Objectives: Outcomes of deferring percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) without invasive physiologic assessment for intermediate coronary lesions is uncertain.We sought to compare long-term outcomes between medical treatment and PCI of intermediate lesions without invasive physiologic assessment. Methods: A total of 899 patients with intermediate coronary lesions between 50% and 70% diameter-stenosis were randomized to the conservative group (n=449) or the aggressive group (n=450). For intermediate lesions, PCI was performed in the aggressive group, but was deferred in the conservative group. The primary endpoint was major adverse cardiac events (MACE, a composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction [MI], or ischemia-driven any revascularization) at 3 years. Results: The number of treated lesions per patient was 0.8±0.9 in the conservative group and 1.7±0.9 in the aggressive group (p=0.001). At 3 years, the conservative group had a significantly higher incidence of MACE than the aggressive group (13.8% vs. 9.3%; hazard ratio [HR], 1.49; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.00–2.21; p=0.049), mainly driven by revascularization of target intermediate lesion (6.5% vs. 1.1%; HR, 5.69; 95% CI, 2.20–14.73;p<0.001). Between 1 and 3 years after the index procedure, compared to the aggressive group, the conservative group had significantly higher incidence of cardiac death or MI (3.2% vs.0.7%; HR, 4.34; 95% CI, 1.24–15.22; p=0.022) and ischemia-driven any revascularization. Conclusions For intermediate lesions, medical therapy alone, guided only by angiography, was associated with a higher risk of MACE at 3 years compared with performing PCI, mainly due to increased revascularization.

Objective: To assess the performance of novel qualitative diagnostic criteria using dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to identify the pathologic complete response (pCR) of primary tumors in esophageal cancer after neoadjuvant chemoradiation (nCRT). Materials and Methods: Patients who underwent nCRT, subsequent MRI, positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT), endoscopy, or esophagectomy for esophageal cancer between October 2021 and October 2023 were retrospectively analyzed. The DCE-MRI response of primary tumors was interpreted using five grades by thoracic radiologists as follows: G1 (compatible with CR), G2 (probable CR), G3 (probable partial response [PR]), G4 (compatible with PR), and G5 (stable or progressive disease). The performances of MRI, PET/CT, endoscopy, and their combinations in diagnosing pCR in primary tumors were calculated. Results: A total of 52 patients (male:female, 46:6; age, 61.2 ± 8.0 years) were included. Surgical specimens revealed pCR (ypT0) in 34 patients. G1 as the MRI criterion for pCR of primary tumors yielded a positive predictive value (PPV), specificity of 100% (18/18), and low sensitivity (23.5% [8/34]). Combining G1 and G2 as the MRI criteria increased the sensitivity to 73.5% (25/34), with a specificity of 88.9% (16/18), accuracy of 78.8% (41/52), and PPV of 92.6% (25/27). Adding the DCEMRI results (G1-2) significantly improved accuracy for both PET/CT (from 65.4% [34/52] to 80.8% [42/52], P = 0.03) and endoscopy (from 55.8% [29/52] to 76.9% [40/52], P = 0.005), with increase in sensitivity (from 55.9% [19/34] to 82.4% [28/34] for PET/CT-based evaluation [P = 0.008] and from 47.1% [16/34] to 82.4% [28/34] for endoscopy-based evaluation [P = 0.001]). Conclusion DCE-MRI-based grading shows high diagnostic performance for identifying pCR in primary tumors, particularly in terms of PPV and specificity, and enhances response evaluation when combined with PET/CT and endoscopy.

Background and Objectives: Outcomes of deferring percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) without invasive physiologic assessment for intermediate coronary lesions is uncertain.We sought to compare long-term outcomes between medical treatment and PCI of intermediate lesions without invasive physiologic assessment. Methods: A total of 899 patients with intermediate coronary lesions between 50% and 70% diameter-stenosis were randomized to the conservative group (n=449) or the aggressive group (n=450). For intermediate lesions, PCI was performed in the aggressive group, but was deferred in the conservative group. The primary endpoint was major adverse cardiac events (MACE, a composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction [MI], or ischemia-driven any revascularization) at 3 years. Results: The number of treated lesions per patient was 0.8±0.9 in the conservative group and 1.7±0.9 in the aggressive group (p=0.001). At 3 years, the conservative group had a significantly higher incidence of MACE than the aggressive group (13.8% vs. 9.3%; hazard ratio [HR], 1.49; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.00–2.21; p=0.049), mainly driven by revascularization of target intermediate lesion (6.5% vs. 1.1%; HR, 5.69; 95% CI, 2.20–14.73;p<0.001). Between 1 and 3 years after the index procedure, compared to the aggressive group, the conservative group had significantly higher incidence of cardiac death or MI (3.2% vs.0.7%; HR, 4.34; 95% CI, 1.24–15.22; p=0.022) and ischemia-driven any revascularization. Conclusions For intermediate lesions, medical therapy alone, guided only by angiography, was associated with a higher risk of MACE at 3 years compared with performing PCI, mainly due to increased revascularization.

Background: The World Health Organization has declared the end of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) public health emergency. However, this did not indicate the end of COVID-19. Several months after the infection, numerous patients complain of respiratory or nonspecific symptoms; this condition is called long COVID. Even patients with mild COVID-19 can experience long COVID, thus the burden of long COVID remains considerable. Therefore, we conducted this study to comprehensively analyze the effects of long COVID using multi-faceted assessments. Materials and Methods: We conducted a prospective cohort study involving patients diagnosed with COVID-19 between February 2020 and September 2021 in six tertiary hospitals in Korea. Patients were followed up at 1, 3, 6, 12, 18, and 24 months after discharge. Long COVID was defined as the persistence of three or more COVID-19-related symptoms. The primary outcome of this study was the prevalence of long COVID after the period of COVID-19. Results: During the study period, 290 patients were enrolled. Among them, 54.5 and 34.6% experienced long COVID within 6 months and after more than 18 months, respectively. Several patients showed abnormal results when tested for post-traumatic stress disorder (17.4%) and anxiety (31.9%) after 18 months. In patients who underwent follow-up chest computed tomography 18 months after COVID-19, abnormal findings remained at 51.9%. Males (odds ratio [OR], 0.17; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.05–0.53; P=0.004) and elderly (OR, 1.04; 95% CI, 1.00–1.09; P=0.04) showed a significant association with long COVID after 12–18 months in a multivariable logistic regression analysis. Conclusion Many patients still showed long COVID after 18 months post SARS-CoV-2 infection. When managing these patients, the assessment of multiple aspects is necessary.