Purpose: To develop the 2025 update to the Korean colorectal cancer (CRC) screening guidelines by systematically evaluating recent evidence, integrating domestic data, and addressing changes since the 2015 guideline revision, thereby providing an evidence-based standard for clinicians and policymakers. Methods: A multidisciplinary committee developed the guidelines using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology. The process included formulation of three key questions addressing screening efficacy, diagnostic accuracy, and optimal screening age and interval. A systematic review of international guidelines and primary literature was conducted, yielding 327 eligible studies. In addition, a utility-based analysis using a Markov model was performed to determine optimal screening ages and intervals. Results: The evidence synthesis identified high-certainty evidence supporting the use of the fecal immunochemical test (FIT) for reducing CRC mortality and moderate-certainty evidence for colonoscopy. Evidence for computed tomographic colonography (CTC) and stool DNA testing was rated as very low certainty. Based on the evidence review and cost-utility analysis, the committee conditionally recommends CRC screening for asymptomatic, average-risk adults aged 45–74 years using either colonoscopy every 10 years or FIT every 1–2 years. CTC and stool DNA testing were not recommended owing to insufficient evidence. Conclusion The 2025 Korean Guidelines for Colorectal Cancer Screening present updated, evidence-based recommendations tailored to the domestic healthcare context. By conditionally endorsing both colonoscopy and FIT for individuals aged 45–74 years, these guidelines aim to improve population-level screening effectiveness and reduce the burden of CRC in South Korea.

Recent studies for the diabetic polyneuropathy have quantified as well as compared the clinical and the electrophysiological findings. Thirty-one diabetic patients were examined with a conventional nerve conduction study, a late response, a somatosensory evoked potential (SEP), a sympathetic skin response (SSR), a R-R interval, and a needle electromyography (EMG) after the clinical examination. The purposes of this study were to evaluate the correlation of clinical features and electrophysiological findings and to provide reliable criteria for the diagnosis of diabetic polyneuropathy. Diabetic polyneuropathy was diagnosed when a nerve conduction study revealed abnormal findings in two or more peripheral nerves. The following parameters were highly correlated with a diabetic polyneuropathy; ankle jerks (Spearman's r=0.92), H reflexes (Spearman's r=0.92), F waves by the tibial nerve stimulation (Spearman's r=0.88), F waves by the peroneal nerve stimulations (Spearman's r=0.84), and amplitudes of a sensory nerve action potential (SNAP) in the sural nerve (Spearman's r=0.79), SEPs by the tibial nerve stimulation (Spearman's r=0.79). Motor nerve conduction of the upper limbs, R-R interval ratios, and blood pressure changes had no significant correlations with a diabetic polyneuropathy. We concluded that these clinical and electrophysiological findings with significantly high correlation values would be good parameters for the diagnosis of diabetic polyneuropathy.
Action Potentials ; Ankle ; Blood Pressure ; Diabetic Neuropathies* ; Diagnosis ; Electromyography ; Evoked Potentials, Somatosensory ; H-Reflex ; Humans ; Needles ; Neural Conduction ; Peripheral Nerves ; Peroneal Nerve ; Polyneuropathies ; Skin ; Sural Nerve ; Tibial Nerve ; Upper Extremity