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.

Purpose: To evaluate the effectiveness of an instrument devised for slit-lamp examination of donor corneas suspended in preservation medium. Methods: The study examined two donor corneas received at Yeouido St. Mary's Hospital in February 2023 and March 2023. The instrument has three main components: a plastic holder to hold the preservation medium bottle, a cube with a mirror for reflecting the slit beam, and a stand to attach the device to the slit-lamp. Using the instrument, the donor corneas were examined via slit-lamp: microscopy with the endothelium facing upward and downward. Specular microscopy and anterior segment optical coherence tomography (OCT) were also performed on the preserved donor corneas. Results: Slit-lamp examination of donor corneas in preservation medium using the instrument showed overall corneal buttoning and optical sections of the donor cornea. Using specular reflection and retroillumination, the endothelial layer was partially visible. However, specular microscopy and anterior segment OCT could not examine the donor cornea in preservation medium using the instrument. Conclusions The devised instrument facilitates slit-lamp examination of donor corneas in preservation medium, enabling a qualitative assessment of donor corneas before corneal transplantation surgery.

Purpose: In the present study, we determined the prevalence of obstructive meibomian gland dysfunction (MGD), hyposecretory MGD, grossly normal MG, and hypersecretory MGD in patients with dry eye syndrome using lipid layer thickness (LLT) and MG dropout. Methods: Eighty-eight patients with dry eye syndrome were included in the study. Patients were categorized into four groups according to the LLT and weighted total meiboscore. The proportion of patients in each group was calculated. The age, sex, Ocular Surface Disease Index, LLT, Schirmer, tear film breakup time, cornea stain, weighted total meiboscore, expressibility, and quality of meibum were compared between the four groups. Results: Fifteen eyes (17.0%) had obstructive MGD, two eyes (2.3%) had hyposecretory MGD, 40 eyes (45.5%) had grossly normal MG, and 17 eyes (19.3%) had hypersecretory MGD. The obstructive MGD group was younger than the grossly normal MG group. In obstructive MGD, the ratio of men to women was higher than that of the other groups. However, Ocular Surface Disease Index, Schirmer, tear film breakup time, and corneal stain did not show statistically significant differences between the four groups. The meibum expressibility of the hyposecretoy MGD group was worse than those of the other groups. The meibum expressibility of the hyposecretoy MGD group was poor than those of the obstructive and hypersecretory MGD group. Conclusions This categorization was expected to help determine the best treatment method for dry eye syndrome, according to the MG status.

Purpose: In the present study, we introduce human lacrimal gland imaging using an ultrasound biomicroscopy (UBM) with a soft cover and show their findings Methods: The representative UBM findings of palpebral lobes in seven subjects (four with non-Sjögren dry eye syndrome, one with Sjögren syndrome, and two healthy subjects) were described in this study. To prolapse the palpebral lobe, the examiner pulled the temporal part of the upper eyelid in the superotemporal direction and directed the subject to look in the inferonasal direction. We scanned the palpebral lobes longitudinally and transversely using UBM. We used an Aviso UBM with a 50 MHz linear probe and ClearScan. Results: In UBM of two healthy subjects, the echogenicity of the lacrimal gland was lower than that of the sclera and homogeneous. But the parenchyma of a patient with Sjögren dry eye syndrome was quite inhomogeneous compared to the healthy subjects. In two patients with dry eye syndrome, we were able to observe some lobules in the parenchyma. We could find excretory ducts running parallel at the surface of the longitudinal section in some subjects. In the longitudinal UBM scan of a subject, we observed a tubular structure at a depth of 1,500 μm that was considered a blood vessel. It ran from the superonasal to the inferotemporal direction. In a subject, we observed a large cyst beneath the conjunctiva. Conclusions Lacrimal gland imaging using UBM has both advantages of optical coherence tomography and sonography, and could be useful for evaluating dry eye syndrome.

Purpose: To introduce an intuitive method for measuring conjunctival microvascular blood flow velocity by imaging bulbar conjunctival microvessels using a slit-lamp biomicroscope equipped with a zoom lens and an ultra-high-speed camera. Methods: After obtaining consent from 10 patients (1 male, 9 females) who visited Yeouido St. Mary’s Hospital from August 21, 2020, to June 12, 2021, the patients were examined under a slit lamp microscope equipped with an ultra-high-speed camera and zoom lens. The blood flow in the conjunctival microvessels was photographed. The captured images were analyzed with ImageJ software to measure the blood flow velocity in the conjunctival microvessels, and we investigated whether the blood flow velocity correlated with the vessel diameter and age. Results: The median age of the subjects was 49.0 years. The mean conjunctival blood flow velocity in 53 microvessels was 0.786 ± 0.468 mm/s. The median conjunctival microvascular diameter was 7.06 μm (interquartile range 5.84 to 9.23 μm). The conjunctival microvascular diameter and blood flow velocity were not significantly correlated (Spearman’s p = 0.177), and the subjects’ age and conjunctival microvascular blood flow velocity were also not correlated (Spearman’s p = 0.669). Conclusions In this study, the blood flow velocity in the bulbar conjunctival microvessels could be measured easily by means of image analysis using a slit-lamp microscope equipped with an ultra-high-speed camera with a zoom lens.

Purpose: To analyze trends in corneal transplantation surgery and determine the number of domestic and imported corneal grafts used in South Korea.Method: The total number of keratoplasties and number of each individual surgical procedure conducted in 2010 and 2020 were identified using Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service data. The number of keratoplasties using domestic corneas in 2010 and 2020 was determined from the annual report of the Korean Network for Organ Sharing (KONOS). The number of keratoplasties using imported corneas was calculated by subtracting the number of keratoplasties using domestic corneas from the total number of keratoplasties. Results: In 2010, 802 keratoplasties were performed in Korea, of which 299 (37.3%) used imported corneas; 715 (89.2%) were penetrating keratoplasties and 87 (10.8%) were anterior lamellar keratoplasties. In 2020, 911 keratoplasties were done in Korea and 564 (61.9%) used imported corneas; 541 (59.4%) were penetrating keratoplasties, 60 (6.6%) were anterior lamellar keratoplasties, and 310 (34.0%) were endothelial keratoplasties. From 2010 to 2020, the number of penetrating keratoplasties in Korea decreased, while the numbers of endothelial keratoplasties and keratoplasties using imported corneas increased. Conclusions There was a 30% decrease in the number of penetrating keratoplasties from 2010 to 2020, and a 30% increase in the numbers of endothelial keratoplasties and keratoplasties using imported corneas. The proportions of endothelial keratoplasties and imported corneas have increased steadily in Korea over the last 10 years.

Purpose: To compare the clinical outcomes of penetrating keratoplasty (PKP) and Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty (DSAEK) in eyes with Glaucoma Ahmed Valve implants. Methods: The charts of 11 patients who underwent PKP and 11 who underwent DSAEK between February 2016 and June 2018 were retrospectively reviewed; all patients previously underwent Ahmed valve implant surgery. The best corrected visual acuity, intraocular pressure, and endothelial cell count were compared 1, 3, and 6 months after surgery. Graft rejection and graft failure were also evaluated during follow-up. The survival rates were compared using Kaplan–Meier survival analysis. Results: The difference in graft survival rates of the PKP and DSAEK groups was not significant (p = 0.295); however, graft failure occurred earlier in the PKP group (12.9 ± 10.1 vs. 18.8 ± 5.3 months). The postoperative best corrected visual acuity of the PKP group had improved at 1 (p = 0.027) and 3 (p = 0.017) months, while the DSAEK group showed significant improvement at 1, 3, and 6 months (all p = 0.005). Intergroup analysis showed better visual prognosis of the DSAEK group at 1, 3, and 6 months after surgery (p = 0.023, p = 0.007, and p = 0.004, respectively). Conclusions In our study, the two corneal transplantation methods did not have significantly different graft survival rates; however, graft failure occured later in the DSAEK group and the postoperative visual acuity was better than in the PKP group. Although further study is needed, performing DSAEK in patients with an Ahmed valve implant seems to be a good alternative to PKP.

Purpose: To derive the optimized intraocular lens (IOL) constants from automated and manifest refraction after cataract surgery in Korean patients, and to evaluate whether there is a difference in optimized IOL constants according to the refraction method. Methods: This retrospective multicenter cohort study enrolled 4,103 eyes of 4,103 patients who underwent phacoemulsification and in-the-bag IOL implantation at 18 institutes. Optimized IOL constants for the SRK/T, Holladay, Hoffer Q, and Haigis formulas were calculated via autorefraction or manifest refraction of samples using the same biometry and IOL. The IOL constants derived from autorefraction and manifest refraction were compared. Results: Of the 4,103 eyes, the majority (62.9%) were measured with an IOLMaster 500 followed by an IOLMaster 700 (15.2%). A total of 33 types of IOLs were used, and the Tecnis ZCB00 was the most frequently used (53.0%). There was no statistically significant difference in IOL constants derived from autorefraction and manifest refraction when IOL constants were optimized with a large number of study subjects. On the other hand, optimized IOL constants derived from autorefraction were significantly smaller than those from manifest refraction when the number of subjects was small. Conclusions It became possible to use the IOL constants optimized from Koreans to calculate the IOL power. However, if the IOL constant is optimized using autorefraction in a small sample group, the IOL constant tends to be small, which may lead to refractive error after surgery.