Purpose: We conducted a randomized prospective trial (KLASS-07 trial) to compare laparoscopy-assisted distal gastrectomy (LADG) and totally laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (TLDG) for gastric cancer. In this interim report, we describe short-term results in terms of morbidity and mortality. Methods: and Methods: The sample size was 442 participants. At the time of the interim analysis, 314 patients were enrolled and randomized. After excluding patients who did not undergo planned surgeries, we performed a modified per-protocol analysis of 151 and 145 patients in the LADG and TLDG groups, respectively. Results: The baseline characteristics, including comorbidity status, did not differ between the LADG and TLDG groups. Blood loss was somewhat higher in the LADG group, but statistical significance was not attained (76.76±72.63 vs. 62.91±65.68 mL; P=0.087). Neither the required transfusion level nor the operation or reconstruction time differed between the 2 groups. The mini-laparotomy incision in the LADG group was significantly longer than the extended umbilical incision required for specimen removal in the TLDG group (4.79±0.82 vs. 3.89±0.83 cm; P<0.001). There were no between-group differences in the time to solid food intake, hospital stay, pain score, or complications within 30 days postoperatively. No mortality was observed in either group. Conclusions Short-term morbidity and mortality rates did not differ between the LADG and TLDG groups. The KLASS-07 trial is currently underway.

Objective: We aimed to identify the expectations and preferences for medication and medical decision-making in patients with major psychiatric disorders. Methods: A survey was conducted among patients with major psychiatric disorders who visited psychiatric outpatient clinics at 15 hospitals between 2016 and 2018 in Korea. The survey consisted of 12 questions about demographic variables and opinions on their expectations for medication, important medical decision-makers, and preferred drug type. The most preferred value in each category in the total population was identified, and differences in the preference ratio of each item among the disease groups were compared. Results: A total of 707 participants were surveyed. In the total population, patients reported high efficacy (44.01%±21.44%) as the main wish for medication, themselves (37.39%±22.57%) and a doctor (35.27%±22.88%) as the main decision makers, and tablet/capsule (36.16%±30.69%) as the preferred type of drug. In the depressive disorders group, the preference ratio of high efficacy was significantly lower, and the preference ratio of a small amount was significantly higher than that of the psychotic disorder and bipolar disorder groups. The preference ratio of a doctor as an important decision maker in the bipolar disorder group was higher compared to the other groups. Conclusion This study revealed the preference for medications and showed differences among patients with psychiatric disorders. Providing personalized medicine that considers a patient’s preference for the drug may contribute to the improvement of drug compliance and outcomes.

Objective: This study was performed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of lurasidone (160 mg/day) compared to quetiapine XR (QXR; 600 mg/day) in the treatment of acutely psychotic patients with schizophrenia. Methods: Patients were randomly assigned to 6 weeks of double-blind treatment with lurasidone 160 mg/day (n=105) or QXR 600 mg/day (n=105). Primary efficacy measure was the change from baseline to week 6 in Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) total score and Clinical Global Impressions severity (CGI-S) score. Adverse events, body measurements, and laboratory parameters were assessed. Results: Lurasidone demonstrated non-inferiority to QXR on the PANSS total score. Adjusted mean±standard error change at week 6 on the PANSS total score was -26.42±2.02 and -27.33±2.01 in the lurasidone and QXR group, respectively. The mean difference score was -0.91 (95% confidence interval -6.35–4.53). The lurasidone group showed a greater reduction in PANSS total and negative subscale on week 1 and a greater reduction in end-point CGI-S score compared to the QXR group. Body weight, body mass index, and waist circumference in the lurasidone group were reduced, with significantly lower mean change compared to QXR. Endpoint changes in glucose, cholesterol, triglycerides, and low-density lipoprotein levels were also significantly lower. The most common adverse drug reactions with lurasidone were akathisia and nausea. Conclusion Lurasidone 160 mg/day was found to be non-inferior to QXR 600 mg/day in the treatment of schizophrenia with comparable efficacy and tolerability. Adverse effects of lurasidone were generally tolerable, and beneficial effects on metabolic parameters can be expected.

Objective: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of middle meningeal artery embolization (MMAE) in elderly high-risk patients with symptomatic chronic subdural hematoma (CSDH) in terms of reduction in hematoma volume and recurrence rate. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed data prospectively collected from nine patients who underwent 13 MMAE for CSDH between June 2017 and May 2022. The volume of the subdural hematoma was measured using a computer-aided volumetric analysis program. Hematoma volume changes during the follow-up period were analyzed and clinical outcomes were evaluated. Results: The mean follow-up period was 160 days (range, 46−311 days). All procedures were technically successful and there were no procedure-related complications. Of the 13 MMAE, 84% (11 out of 13 hemispheres) showed mean 88% of reduction on follow-up volumetric study with eight cases of complete resolution. There was one refractory case with MMAE which had been performed multiple burr-hole trephinations, for which treatment was completed by craniotomy and meticulous resection of multiple pseudomembranes. There was no recurrent case during the follow-up period, except for refractory case. Conclusions MMAE for CSDH in selected high-risk elderly patients and relapsed patients might be effective. Despite the small cohort, our findings showed a high rate of complete resolution with no complications. Further prospective randomized trials are warranted to evaluate its usefulness as a primary treatment option for CSDH.

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.

Purpose: Outcome analysis of urachal cancer (UraC) is limited due to the scarcity of cases and different staging methods compared to urothelial bladder cancer (UroBC). We attempted to assess survival outcomes of UraC and compare to UroBC after stage-matched analyses. Materials and Methods: Total 203 UraC patients from a multicenter database and 373 UroBC patients in single institution from 2000 to 2018 were enrolled (median follow-up, 32 months). Sheldon stage conversion to corresponding TNM staging for UraC was conducted for head-to-head comparison to UroBC. Perioperative clinical variables and pathological results were recorded. Stage-matched analyses for survival by stage were conducted. Results: UraC patients were younger (mean age, 54 vs. 67 years; p < 0.001), with 163 patients (80.3%) receiving partial cystectomy and 23 patients (11.3%) radical cystectomy. UraC was more likely to harbor ≥ pT3a tumors (78.8% vs. 41.8%). While 5-year recurrence-free survival, cancer-specific survival (CSS) and overall survival were comparable between two groups (63.4%, 67%, and 62.1% in UraC and 61.5%, 75.9%, and 67.8% in UroBC, respectively), generally favorable prognosis for UraC in lower stages (pT1-2) but unfavorable outcomes in higher stages (pT4) compared to UroBC was observed, although only 5-year CSS in ≥ pT4 showed statistical significance (p=0.028). Body mass index (hazard ratio [HR], 0.929), diabetes mellitus (HR, 1.921), pathologic T category (HR, 3.846), and lymphovascular invasion (HR, 1.993) were predictors of CSS for all patients. Conclusion Despite differing histology, UraC has comparable prognosis to UroBC with relatively favorable outcome in low stages but worse prognosis in higher stages. The presented system may be useful for future grading and risk stratification of UraC.