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.

Background: The central line has been frequently used for drug and nutrition supply and regular blood sampling of patients with chronic diseases. However, this procedure is performed in a highly sensitive area and has several potential complications. Therefore, peripherally inserted central catheters (PICC), which have various advantages, are being extensively used. Although the number of PICC procedures is increasing, the anatomy for safe procedures has not yet been properly established. Therefore, we studied basic anatomical information for safe procedures. Methods: We used 20 fixed cadavers (40 arms) donated to the Korea University College of Medicine. The mean age was 76.75 years (range, 48–94 years). After dissection of each arm, the distribution pattern of the basilic vein and close structures was recorded, and some important parameters based on bony landmarks were measured. In addition, the number of vein branches (axillary region) and basilic vein diameter were also checked. Results: The mean length from the insertion site to the right atrium was 38.39 ± 2.63 cm (left) and 34.66 ± 3.60 cm (right), and the basilic vein diameter was 4.93 ± 1.18 mm (left) and 4.08 ± 1.49 mm (right). The data showed significant differences between the left and right arms (P < 0.05). The mean distance from the basilic vein to brachial artery was 8.29 ± 2.78 mm in men and 7.81 ± 2.78 mm in women, while the distance to the ulnar nerve was 5.41 ± 1.67 mm in men and 5.52 ± 2.06 mm in women. Conclusion According to these results, the right arm has a shorter distance from the insertion site to the right atrium, and the left arm has a wider vein diameter, which is advantageous for the procedure. In addition, the ulnar nerve and brachial artery were located close to or behind the insertion site. Therefore, special attention is required during the procedure to avoid damaging these important structures.

Gastric cancer is one of the most common cancers in Korea and the world. Since 2004, this is the 4th gastric cancer guideline published in Korea which is the revised version of previous evidence-based approach in 2018. Current guideline is a collaborative work of the interdisciplinary working group including experts in the field of gastric surgery, gastroenterology, endoscopy, medical oncology, abdominal radiology, pathology, nuclear medicine, radiation oncology and guideline development methodology. Total of 33 key questions were updated or proposed after a collaborative review by the working group and 40 statements were developed according to the systematic review using the MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library and KoreaMed database. The level of evidence and the grading of recommendations were categorized according to the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation proposition. Evidence level, benefit, harm, and clinical applicability was considered as the significant factors for recommendation. The working group reviewed recommendations and discussed for consensus. In the earlier part, general consideration discusses screening, diagnosis and staging of endoscopy, pathology, radiology, and nuclear medicine. Flowchart is depicted with statements which is supported by meta-analysis and references. Since clinical trial and systematic review was not suitable for postoperative oncologic and nutritional follow-up, working group agreed to conduct a nationwide survey investigating the clinical practice of all tertiary or general hospitals in Korea. The purpose of this survey was to provide baseline information on follow up. Herein we present a multidisciplinary-evidence based gastric cancer guideline.

C57BL/6N mice are inbred strains widely used in biomedical research. Hence, a large amount of basic data has been accumulated. However, in the field of histopathology, spontaneous data for relatively younger mice that are used more frequently are not yet abundant, in contrast to data for older mice and their neoplastic lesions. To acquire the essential background data required by various research and toxicological assessments, 120 mice of the C57BL/6N strain (10 and 13 weeks of age) were collected from two institutions (From Korea and Japan) and subjected to histopathological analyses of the major organs (liver, spleen, kidney, thymus, heart, testis, epididymis). The results showed significantly higher incidence of sperm granulomas in the epididymides (10-56%) of these mice, compared with that in other strains or species of lab animals. Upon closer inspection, oligospermia/clear cell hyperplasia, cellular debris, and tubular vacuolation were also observed in the epididymides with sperm granulomas. Moreover, diseased organs were significantly heavier than healthy ones. Immunohistochemical staining showed a significant increase in the chromatic figures of cysteine-dependent aspartate-directed proteases-3 (caspase-3) and cleaved-poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (c-PARP), and damages to the tubule due to spontaneous apoptosis, which may have led to the sperms leaking out of the tubule, causing the granuloma. To conclude, spontaneous sperm granuloma can occur in 10- and 13-week-old C57BL/6N mice and may thus affect the results of various studies using these mice. Therefore, sperm granuloma in epididymis needs to be carefully considered as an important factor when design the study using C57BL/6N.
Animals ; Apoptosis ; Epididymis* ; Granuloma* ; Heart ; Hyperplasia ; Incidence* ; Kidney ; Korea ; Male ; Mice* ; Spermatozoa* ; Spleen ; Testis ; Thymus Gland

OBJECTIVE: To identify the center of extensor indicis (EI) muscle through cadaver dissection and compare the accuracy of different techniques for needle electromyography (EMG) electrode insertion. METHODS: Eighteen upper limbs of 10 adult cadavers were dissected. The center of trigonal EI muscle was defined as the point where the three medians of the triangle intersect. Three different needle electrode insertion techniques were introduced: M1, 2.5 cm above the lower border of ulnar styloid process (USP), lateral aspect of the ulna; M2, 2 finger breadths (FB) proximal to USP, lateral aspect of the ulna; and M3, distal fourth of the forearm, lateral aspect of the ulna. The distance from USP to the center (X) parallel to the line between radial head to USP, and from medial border of ulna to the center (Y) were measured. The distances between 3 different points (M1– M3) and the center were measured (marked as D1, D2, and D3, respectively). RESULTS: The median value of X was 48.3 mm and that of Y was 7.2 mm. The median values of D1, D2 and D3 were 23.3 mm, 13.3 mm and 9.0 mm, respectively. CONCLUSION: The center of EI muscle is located approximately 4.8 cm proximal to USP level and 7.2 mm lateral to the medial border of the ulna. Among the three methods, the technique placing the needle electrode at distal fourth of the forearm and lateral to the radial side of the ulna bone (M3) is the most accurate and closest to the center of the EI muscle.
Adult ; Cadaver* ; Electrodes ; Electrodiagnosis ; Electromyography* ; Fingers ; Forearm ; Head ; Humans ; Needles* ; Ulna ; Upper Extremity

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Benign prostatic hypertrophy (BPH) is a major cause of abnormal overgrowth of the prostate mainly in the elderly. Corni Fructus has been reported to be effective in the prevention and treatment of various diseases because of its strong antioxidant effect, but its efficacy against BPH is not yet known. This study was designed to evaluate the therapeutic efficacy of Corni Fructus water extract (CF) in testosterone-induced BPH rats. MATERIALS/METHODS: To induce BPH, rats were intraperitoneal injected with testosterone propionate (TP). Rats in the treatment group were orally administered with CF with TP injection, and finasteride, which is a selective inhibitor of 5α-reductase type 2, was used as a positive control. RESULTS: Our results showed that the increased prostate weight and histopathological changes in BPH model rats were suppressed by CF treatment. CF, similar to the finasteride-treated group, decreased the levels of testosterone and dihydrotestosterone by TP treatment in the serum, and it also reduced 5α-reductase expression and concentration in prostate tissue and serum, respectively. In addition, CF significantly blocked the expression of the androgen receptor (AR), AR co-activators, and proliferating cell nuclear antigen in BPH rats, and this blocking was associated with a decrease in prostate-specific antigen levels in serum and prostate tissue. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that CF may weaken the BPH status through the inactivation of at least 5α-reductase and AR activity and may be useful for the clinical treatment of BPH.
Aged ; Animals ; Antioxidants ; Cornus* ; Dihydrotestosterone ; Finasteride ; Humans ; Proliferating Cell Nuclear Antigen ; Prostate ; Prostate-Specific Antigen ; Prostatic Hyperplasia* ; Rats* ; Receptors, Androgen* ; Testosterone ; Testosterone Propionate ; Water

OBJECTIVE: Head injury is a leading cause of death and disability in subjects who suffer a traumatic accident. Contralateral hematomas after surgery for traumatic brain injury are rare. However, an unrecognized, these hematomas can cause devastating results. We presented our experience of these patients and discussed diagnosis and management. METHODS: This study included 12 traumatic patients with acute traumatic brain injury who developed delayed contralateral hematoma after evacuation of an acute hematoma. Clinical and radiographic data was obtained through review of medical records and radiographs retrospectively. RESULTS: Ten males and two females were included in the study. Ten (83.3%) patients had severe head injury (Glasgow Coma Scale [GCS] score <8). Intraoperative brain swelling during removal of the traumatic subdural hematoma was noted in 10 (83.3%) patients. A skull fracture on the side contralateral to the acute hematoma was noted on computed tomography (CT) scans of nine (75%) patients. Three (33.3%) patients with severe head injury (GCS <8) died. Only (10%) one patient with a severe head injury had less severe disability. CONCLUSION: A postoperative CT scan is essential in patients with acute traumatic brain injury and a contralateral skull fracture or a low GCS score. Our results indicated that it is very important to evaluate this rare but potentially devastating complication.
Brain Edema ; Brain Injuries* ; Cause of Death ; Coma ; Craniocerebral Trauma ; Craniotomy ; Decompressive Craniectomy ; Diagnosis ; Female ; Hematoma* ; Hematoma, Subdural ; Humans ; Male ; Medical Records ; Postoperative Hemorrhage ; Retrospective Studies ; Skull Fractures ; Tomography, X-Ray Computed