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 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.

Purpose: While colonoscopy is the standard surveillance tool for stage I colorectal cancer according to National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines, its effectiveness in detecting recurrence is debated. This study evaluates recurrence risk factors and patterns in stage I colorectal cancer to inform comprehensive surveillance strategies. Materials and Methods: A retrospective analysis of 2,248 stage I colorectal cancer patients who underwent radical surgery at Samsung Medical Center (2007-2018) was conducted. Exclusions were based on familial history, prior recurrences, preoperative treatments, and inadequate data. Surveillance included colonoscopy, laboratory tests, and computed tomography (CT) scans. Results: Stage I colorectal cancer patients showed favorable 5-year disease-free survival (98.3% colon, 94.6% rectum). Among a total of 1,467 colon cancer patients, 26 (1.76%) experienced recurrence. Of the 781 rectal cancer patients, 47 (6.02%) experienced recurrence. Elevated preoperative carcinoembryonic antigen levels and perineural invasion were significant recurrence risk factors in colon cancer, while tumor budding was significant in rectal cancer. Distant metastasis was the main recurrence pattern in colon cancer (92.3%), while rectal cancer showed predominantly local recurrence (50%). Colonoscopy alone detected recurrences in a small fraction of cases (3.7% in colon, 14.9% in rectum). Conclusion Although recurrence in stage I colorectal cancer is rare, relying solely on colonoscopy for surveillance may miss distant metastases or locoregional recurrence outside the colorectum. For high-risk patients, we recommend considering regular CT scans alongside colonoscopy. This targeted approach may enable earlier recurrence detection and improve outcomes in this subset while avoiding unnecessary scans for the low-risk majority.

Purpose: While colonoscopy is the standard surveillance tool for stage I colorectal cancer according to National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines, its effectiveness in detecting recurrence is debated. This study evaluates recurrence risk factors and patterns in stage I colorectal cancer to inform comprehensive surveillance strategies. Materials and Methods: A retrospective analysis of 2,248 stage I colorectal cancer patients who underwent radical surgery at Samsung Medical Center (2007-2018) was conducted. Exclusions were based on familial history, prior recurrences, preoperative treatments, and inadequate data. Surveillance included colonoscopy, laboratory tests, and computed tomography (CT) scans. Results: Stage I colorectal cancer patients showed favorable 5-year disease-free survival (98.3% colon, 94.6% rectum). Among a total of 1,467 colon cancer patients, 26 (1.76%) experienced recurrence. Of the 781 rectal cancer patients, 47 (6.02%) experienced recurrence. Elevated preoperative carcinoembryonic antigen levels and perineural invasion were significant recurrence risk factors in colon cancer, while tumor budding was significant in rectal cancer. Distant metastasis was the main recurrence pattern in colon cancer (92.3%), while rectal cancer showed predominantly local recurrence (50%). Colonoscopy alone detected recurrences in a small fraction of cases (3.7% in colon, 14.9% in rectum). Conclusion Although recurrence in stage I colorectal cancer is rare, relying solely on colonoscopy for surveillance may miss distant metastases or locoregional recurrence outside the colorectum. For high-risk patients, we recommend considering regular CT scans alongside colonoscopy. This targeted approach may enable earlier recurrence detection and improve outcomes in this subset while avoiding unnecessary scans for the low-risk majority.

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.

Purpose: While colonoscopy is the standard surveillance tool for stage I colorectal cancer according to National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines, its effectiveness in detecting recurrence is debated. This study evaluates recurrence risk factors and patterns in stage I colorectal cancer to inform comprehensive surveillance strategies. Materials and Methods: A retrospective analysis of 2,248 stage I colorectal cancer patients who underwent radical surgery at Samsung Medical Center (2007-2018) was conducted. Exclusions were based on familial history, prior recurrences, preoperative treatments, and inadequate data. Surveillance included colonoscopy, laboratory tests, and computed tomography (CT) scans. Results: Stage I colorectal cancer patients showed favorable 5-year disease-free survival (98.3% colon, 94.6% rectum). Among a total of 1,467 colon cancer patients, 26 (1.76%) experienced recurrence. Of the 781 rectal cancer patients, 47 (6.02%) experienced recurrence. Elevated preoperative carcinoembryonic antigen levels and perineural invasion were significant recurrence risk factors in colon cancer, while tumor budding was significant in rectal cancer. Distant metastasis was the main recurrence pattern in colon cancer (92.3%), while rectal cancer showed predominantly local recurrence (50%). Colonoscopy alone detected recurrences in a small fraction of cases (3.7% in colon, 14.9% in rectum). Conclusion Although recurrence in stage I colorectal cancer is rare, relying solely on colonoscopy for surveillance may miss distant metastases or locoregional recurrence outside the colorectum. For high-risk patients, we recommend considering regular CT scans alongside colonoscopy. This targeted approach may enable earlier recurrence detection and improve outcomes in this subset while avoiding unnecessary scans for the low-risk majority.

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.

Many countries have published clinical practice guidelines for appropriate clinical decisions, optimal treatment, and improved clinical outcomes in patients with acute coronary syndrome. Developing guidelines that are specifically tailored to the Korean environment is crucial, considering the treatment system, available medications and medical devices, racial differences, and level of language communication. In 2017, the Korean Society of Myocardial Infarction established a guideline development committee. However, at that time, it was not feasible to develop guidelines, owing to the lack of knowledge and experience in guideline development and the absence of methodology experts. In 2022, the National EvidenceBased Healthcare Collaborating Agency collaborated with a relevant academic association to develop internationally reliable guidelines, with strict adherence to the methodology for evidence-based guideline development. The first Korean acute coronary syndrome guideline starts from the 9 key questions for pharmacotherapy.