Objective: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of coil embolization of venous segments in patients with Type IIa pelvic arteriovenous malformations (AVMs). Materials and Methods: A retrospective study was performed on 13 patients (median age, 43 years, range 20–62 years, 7 males) who underwent transvenous coil embolization for Type IIa pelvic AVM (characterized by multiple arterioles shunting to focal venous segments of a single draining vein) without the use of additional liquid embolic agents from March 2017 to February 2023. Treatment outcomes were analyzed based on clinical evaluations, post angiography findings, and follow-up CT. Results: Fourteen procedures were performed on 13 patients. Except in one patient, all treatments were completed in a single session. Transvenous access was employed in 10 procedures, whereas direct puncture was used in four sessions. The embolization procedures used an average of 55.7 ± 58.5 coils (range, 7–238) and lasted an average of 127.3 ± 39.5 minutes.The technical success rate was 92.9% (of 13/14). All patients reported symptom improvement. Follow-up CT scans showed complete occlusion of the AVM without recurrence in ten of the 13 patients. There was one minor adverse event: a small retroperitoneal hemorrhage, likely related to direct puncture, which resolved spontaneously. No other adverse events were observed. Conclusion Coil embolization of the draining vein segment, without the use of additional liquid embolic agents is a safe and effective method for managing Type IIa pelvic AVM.

Purpose: Finasteride and dutasteride are used to treat benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) and reduce the risk of developing prostate cancer. Finasteride blocks only the type 2 form of 5-alpha-reductase, whereas dutasteride blocks both type 1 and 2 forms of the enzyme. Previous studies suggest the possibility that dutasteride may be superior to finasteride in preventing prostate cancer. We directly compared the effects of finasteride and dutasteride on the risk of prostate cancer in patients with BPH using a pooled analysis of 15 real-world databases. Materials and Methods: We conducted a multicenter, cohort study of new-users of finasteride and dutasteride. We include patients who were prescribed 5 mg finasteride or dutasteride for the first time to treat BPH and had at least 180 days of prescription. We excluded patients with a history of prostate cancer or a prostate-specific antigen level ≥ 4 ng/mL before the study drug prescription. Cox regression analysis was performed to examine the hazard ratio (HR) for prostate cancer after propensity score (PS) matching. Results: A total of 8,284 patients of new-users of finasteride and 8,670 patients of new-users of dutasteride were included across the 15 databases. In the overall population, compared to dutasteride, finasteride was associated with a lower risk of prostate cancer in both on-treatment and intent-to-treat time-at-risk periods. After 1:1 PS matching, 4,897 patients using finasteride and 4,897 patients using dutasteride were enrolled in the present study. No significant differences were observed for risk of prostate cancer between finasteride and dutasteride both on-treatment (HR=0.66, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.44–1.00; p=0.051) and intent-to-treat time-at-risk periods (HR=0.87, 95% CI: 0.67–1.14; p=0.310). Conclusions Using real-world databases, the present study demonstrated that dutasteride was not associated with a lower risk of prostate cancer than finasteride in patients with BPH.

This article presents two cases of extrahepatic portal vein anomalies that can be challenging during lymph node (LN) dissection in gastric cancer surgery. The first case was a participant for a clinical trial assessing the completeness of D2 LN dissection. The trial utilized near-infrared (NIR) lymphangiography with indocyanine green only after completing dissection of a certain topological LN station to detect any residual lymphatic tissue. However, the patient was excluded from the trial due to an unexpected extrahepatic portal vein confluence anomaly and aberrant common hepatic artery. Consequently, continuous lymphatic navigation with NIR imaging was utilized for remaining surgery. The second case featured a patient with an anteriorly positioned splenic vein, hindering LN dissection along the left gastric artery. Preoperative identification of great vessel anomalies around the stomach is critical to prevent life-threatening complications during LN dissection in gastric cancer surgery. Augmented imaging technology can be a valuable tool in ensuring oncologic safety and precision.

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 evaluate the safety and efficacy of coil embolization of venous segments in patients with Type IIa pelvic arteriovenous malformations (AVMs). Materials and Methods: A retrospective study was performed on 13 patients (median age, 43 years, range 20–62 years, 7 males) who underwent transvenous coil embolization for Type IIa pelvic AVM (characterized by multiple arterioles shunting to focal venous segments of a single draining vein) without the use of additional liquid embolic agents from March 2017 to February 2023. Treatment outcomes were analyzed based on clinical evaluations, post angiography findings, and follow-up CT. Results: Fourteen procedures were performed on 13 patients. Except in one patient, all treatments were completed in a single session. Transvenous access was employed in 10 procedures, whereas direct puncture was used in four sessions. The embolization procedures used an average of 55.7 ± 58.5 coils (range, 7–238) and lasted an average of 127.3 ± 39.5 minutes.The technical success rate was 92.9% (of 13/14). All patients reported symptom improvement. Follow-up CT scans showed complete occlusion of the AVM without recurrence in ten of the 13 patients. There was one minor adverse event: a small retroperitoneal hemorrhage, likely related to direct puncture, which resolved spontaneously. No other adverse events were observed. Conclusion Coil embolization of the draining vein segment, without the use of additional liquid embolic agents is a safe and effective method for managing Type IIa pelvic AVM.

Purpose: Finasteride and dutasteride are used to treat benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) and reduce the risk of developing prostate cancer. Finasteride blocks only the type 2 form of 5-alpha-reductase, whereas dutasteride blocks both type 1 and 2 forms of the enzyme. Previous studies suggest the possibility that dutasteride may be superior to finasteride in preventing prostate cancer. We directly compared the effects of finasteride and dutasteride on the risk of prostate cancer in patients with BPH using a pooled analysis of 15 real-world databases. Materials and Methods: We conducted a multicenter, cohort study of new-users of finasteride and dutasteride. We include patients who were prescribed 5 mg finasteride or dutasteride for the first time to treat BPH and had at least 180 days of prescription. We excluded patients with a history of prostate cancer or a prostate-specific antigen level ≥ 4 ng/mL before the study drug prescription. Cox regression analysis was performed to examine the hazard ratio (HR) for prostate cancer after propensity score (PS) matching. Results: A total of 8,284 patients of new-users of finasteride and 8,670 patients of new-users of dutasteride were included across the 15 databases. In the overall population, compared to dutasteride, finasteride was associated with a lower risk of prostate cancer in both on-treatment and intent-to-treat time-at-risk periods. After 1:1 PS matching, 4,897 patients using finasteride and 4,897 patients using dutasteride were enrolled in the present study. No significant differences were observed for risk of prostate cancer between finasteride and dutasteride both on-treatment (HR=0.66, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.44–1.00; p=0.051) and intent-to-treat time-at-risk periods (HR=0.87, 95% CI: 0.67–1.14; p=0.310). Conclusions Using real-world databases, the present study demonstrated that dutasteride was not associated with a lower risk of prostate cancer than finasteride in patients with BPH.

Objective: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of coil embolization of venous segments in patients with Type IIa pelvic arteriovenous malformations (AVMs). Materials and Methods: A retrospective study was performed on 13 patients (median age, 43 years, range 20–62 years, 7 males) who underwent transvenous coil embolization for Type IIa pelvic AVM (characterized by multiple arterioles shunting to focal venous segments of a single draining vein) without the use of additional liquid embolic agents from March 2017 to February 2023. Treatment outcomes were analyzed based on clinical evaluations, post angiography findings, and follow-up CT. Results: Fourteen procedures were performed on 13 patients. Except in one patient, all treatments were completed in a single session. Transvenous access was employed in 10 procedures, whereas direct puncture was used in four sessions. The embolization procedures used an average of 55.7 ± 58.5 coils (range, 7–238) and lasted an average of 127.3 ± 39.5 minutes.The technical success rate was 92.9% (of 13/14). All patients reported symptom improvement. Follow-up CT scans showed complete occlusion of the AVM without recurrence in ten of the 13 patients. There was one minor adverse event: a small retroperitoneal hemorrhage, likely related to direct puncture, which resolved spontaneously. No other adverse events were observed. Conclusion Coil embolization of the draining vein segment, without the use of additional liquid embolic agents is a safe and effective method for managing Type IIa pelvic AVM.

Purpose: Finasteride and dutasteride are used to treat benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) and reduce the risk of developing prostate cancer. Finasteride blocks only the type 2 form of 5-alpha-reductase, whereas dutasteride blocks both type 1 and 2 forms of the enzyme. Previous studies suggest the possibility that dutasteride may be superior to finasteride in preventing prostate cancer. We directly compared the effects of finasteride and dutasteride on the risk of prostate cancer in patients with BPH using a pooled analysis of 15 real-world databases. Materials and Methods: We conducted a multicenter, cohort study of new-users of finasteride and dutasteride. We include patients who were prescribed 5 mg finasteride or dutasteride for the first time to treat BPH and had at least 180 days of prescription. We excluded patients with a history of prostate cancer or a prostate-specific antigen level ≥ 4 ng/mL before the study drug prescription. Cox regression analysis was performed to examine the hazard ratio (HR) for prostate cancer after propensity score (PS) matching. Results: A total of 8,284 patients of new-users of finasteride and 8,670 patients of new-users of dutasteride were included across the 15 databases. In the overall population, compared to dutasteride, finasteride was associated with a lower risk of prostate cancer in both on-treatment and intent-to-treat time-at-risk periods. After 1:1 PS matching, 4,897 patients using finasteride and 4,897 patients using dutasteride were enrolled in the present study. No significant differences were observed for risk of prostate cancer between finasteride and dutasteride both on-treatment (HR=0.66, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.44–1.00; p=0.051) and intent-to-treat time-at-risk periods (HR=0.87, 95% CI: 0.67–1.14; p=0.310). Conclusions Using real-world databases, the present study demonstrated that dutasteride was not associated with a lower risk of prostate cancer than finasteride in patients with BPH.

This article presents two cases of extrahepatic portal vein anomalies that can be challenging during lymph node (LN) dissection in gastric cancer surgery. The first case was a participant for a clinical trial assessing the completeness of D2 LN dissection. The trial utilized near-infrared (NIR) lymphangiography with indocyanine green only after completing dissection of a certain topological LN station to detect any residual lymphatic tissue. However, the patient was excluded from the trial due to an unexpected extrahepatic portal vein confluence anomaly and aberrant common hepatic artery. Consequently, continuous lymphatic navigation with NIR imaging was utilized for remaining surgery. The second case featured a patient with an anteriorly positioned splenic vein, hindering LN dissection along the left gastric artery. Preoperative identification of great vessel anomalies around the stomach is critical to prevent life-threatening complications during LN dissection in gastric cancer surgery. Augmented imaging technology can be a valuable tool in ensuring oncologic safety and precision.

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.