1.Endoscopic features of cytomegalovirus disease of the upper gastrointestinal tract between transplant and non-transplant patients
Yuri KIM ; Do Hoon KIM ; Myeongsook SEO ; Hee Kyong NA ; Kee Wook JUNG ; Ji Yong AHN ; Jeong Hoon LEE ; Kee Don CHOI ; Ho June SONG ; Gin Hyug LEE ; Hwoon-Yong JUNG
The Korean Journal of Internal Medicine 2025;40(3):394-403
Background/Aims:
Cytomegalovirus (CMV) disease in the upper gastrointestinal (UGI) tract frequently occurs in immunocompromised patients. However, data regarding UGI CMV disease in non-transplant patients compared with those in transplant recipients are limited. Therefore, we compared the clinical characteristics, endoscopic findings, and outcomes of UGI CMV disease in non-transplant patients with those in transplant recipients.
Methods:
We reviewed the medical records of patients diagnosed with UGI CMV disease between May 1999 and January 2022. UGI CMV disease was defined as symptoms or signs of gastrointestinal disease with typical findings of CMV inclusion body and positive immunochemistry stain or CMV polymerase chain reaction from the endoscopic biopsy specimen.
Results:
Among the 219 eligible patients, 132 (60.3%) were transplant patients. Age, male sex, and Charlson Comorbidity Index were significantly higher in the non-transplant group than in the transplant group. The most common symptoms were pain and odynophagia (43.8%). Transplant recipients more frequently experienced UGI CMV disease in the stomach than non-transplant patients, typically presenting as erosions or mucosal hyperemia. However, non-transplant patients more commonly experienced UGI CMV disease in the esophagus than transplant recipients, typically presenting as ulcers. The transplant group had a significantly higher clinical response than the non-transplant group.
Conclusions
UGI CMV disease in transplant patients can be present in the stomach in various forms, including ulcers or erosions. In transplant patients suspected of UGI CMV disease, conducting an esophagogastroduodenoscopy with tissue biopsy in any area where even the slightest mucosal abnormality is observed is essential to facilitate a prompt diagnosis.
2.Endoscopic features of cytomegalovirus disease of the upper gastrointestinal tract between transplant and non-transplant patients
Yuri KIM ; Do Hoon KIM ; Myeongsook SEO ; Hee Kyong NA ; Kee Wook JUNG ; Ji Yong AHN ; Jeong Hoon LEE ; Kee Don CHOI ; Ho June SONG ; Gin Hyug LEE ; Hwoon-Yong JUNG
The Korean Journal of Internal Medicine 2025;40(3):394-403
Background/Aims:
Cytomegalovirus (CMV) disease in the upper gastrointestinal (UGI) tract frequently occurs in immunocompromised patients. However, data regarding UGI CMV disease in non-transplant patients compared with those in transplant recipients are limited. Therefore, we compared the clinical characteristics, endoscopic findings, and outcomes of UGI CMV disease in non-transplant patients with those in transplant recipients.
Methods:
We reviewed the medical records of patients diagnosed with UGI CMV disease between May 1999 and January 2022. UGI CMV disease was defined as symptoms or signs of gastrointestinal disease with typical findings of CMV inclusion body and positive immunochemistry stain or CMV polymerase chain reaction from the endoscopic biopsy specimen.
Results:
Among the 219 eligible patients, 132 (60.3%) were transplant patients. Age, male sex, and Charlson Comorbidity Index were significantly higher in the non-transplant group than in the transplant group. The most common symptoms were pain and odynophagia (43.8%). Transplant recipients more frequently experienced UGI CMV disease in the stomach than non-transplant patients, typically presenting as erosions or mucosal hyperemia. However, non-transplant patients more commonly experienced UGI CMV disease in the esophagus than transplant recipients, typically presenting as ulcers. The transplant group had a significantly higher clinical response than the non-transplant group.
Conclusions
UGI CMV disease in transplant patients can be present in the stomach in various forms, including ulcers or erosions. In transplant patients suspected of UGI CMV disease, conducting an esophagogastroduodenoscopy with tissue biopsy in any area where even the slightest mucosal abnormality is observed is essential to facilitate a prompt diagnosis.
3.Endoscopic features of cytomegalovirus disease of the upper gastrointestinal tract between transplant and non-transplant patients
Yuri KIM ; Do Hoon KIM ; Myeongsook SEO ; Hee Kyong NA ; Kee Wook JUNG ; Ji Yong AHN ; Jeong Hoon LEE ; Kee Don CHOI ; Ho June SONG ; Gin Hyug LEE ; Hwoon-Yong JUNG
The Korean Journal of Internal Medicine 2025;40(3):394-403
Background/Aims:
Cytomegalovirus (CMV) disease in the upper gastrointestinal (UGI) tract frequently occurs in immunocompromised patients. However, data regarding UGI CMV disease in non-transplant patients compared with those in transplant recipients are limited. Therefore, we compared the clinical characteristics, endoscopic findings, and outcomes of UGI CMV disease in non-transplant patients with those in transplant recipients.
Methods:
We reviewed the medical records of patients diagnosed with UGI CMV disease between May 1999 and January 2022. UGI CMV disease was defined as symptoms or signs of gastrointestinal disease with typical findings of CMV inclusion body and positive immunochemistry stain or CMV polymerase chain reaction from the endoscopic biopsy specimen.
Results:
Among the 219 eligible patients, 132 (60.3%) were transplant patients. Age, male sex, and Charlson Comorbidity Index were significantly higher in the non-transplant group than in the transplant group. The most common symptoms were pain and odynophagia (43.8%). Transplant recipients more frequently experienced UGI CMV disease in the stomach than non-transplant patients, typically presenting as erosions or mucosal hyperemia. However, non-transplant patients more commonly experienced UGI CMV disease in the esophagus than transplant recipients, typically presenting as ulcers. The transplant group had a significantly higher clinical response than the non-transplant group.
Conclusions
UGI CMV disease in transplant patients can be present in the stomach in various forms, including ulcers or erosions. In transplant patients suspected of UGI CMV disease, conducting an esophagogastroduodenoscopy with tissue biopsy in any area where even the slightest mucosal abnormality is observed is essential to facilitate a prompt diagnosis.
4.Korean Practice Guidelines for Gastric Cancer 2024: An Evidence-based, Multidisciplinary Approach (Update of 2022 Guideline)
In-Ho KIM ; Seung Joo KANG ; Wonyoung CHOI ; An Na SEO ; Bang Wool EOM ; Beodeul KANG ; Bum Jun KIM ; Byung-Hoon MIN ; Chung Hyun TAE ; Chang In CHOI ; Choong-kun LEE ; Ho Jung AN ; Hwa Kyung BYUN ; Hyeon-Su IM ; Hyung-Don KIM ; Jang Ho CHO ; Kyoungjune PAK ; Jae-Joon KIM ; Jae Seok BAE ; Jeong Il YU ; Jeong Won LEE ; Jungyoon CHOI ; Jwa Hoon KIM ; Miyoung CHOI ; Mi Ran JUNG ; Nieun SEO ; Sang Soo EOM ; Soomin AHN ; Soo Jin KIM ; Sung Hak LEE ; Sung Hee LIM ; Tae-Han KIM ; Hye Sook HAN ; On behalf of The Development Working Group for the Korean Practice Guideline for Gastric Cancer 2024
Journal of Gastric Cancer 2025;25(1):5-114
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.
5.Korean Practice Guidelines for Gastric Cancer 2024: An Evidence-based, Multidisciplinary Approach (Update of 2022 Guideline)
In-Ho KIM ; Seung Joo KANG ; Wonyoung CHOI ; An Na SEO ; Bang Wool EOM ; Beodeul KANG ; Bum Jun KIM ; Byung-Hoon MIN ; Chung Hyun TAE ; Chang In CHOI ; Choong-kun LEE ; Ho Jung AN ; Hwa Kyung BYUN ; Hyeon-Su IM ; Hyung-Don KIM ; Jang Ho CHO ; Kyoungjune PAK ; Jae-Joon KIM ; Jae Seok BAE ; Jeong Il YU ; Jeong Won LEE ; Jungyoon CHOI ; Jwa Hoon KIM ; Miyoung CHOI ; Mi Ran JUNG ; Nieun SEO ; Sang Soo EOM ; Soomin AHN ; Soo Jin KIM ; Sung Hak LEE ; Sung Hee LIM ; Tae-Han KIM ; Hye Sook HAN ; On behalf of The Development Working Group for the Korean Practice Guideline for Gastric Cancer 2024
Journal of Gastric Cancer 2025;25(1):5-114
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.
6.Endoscopic features of cytomegalovirus disease of the upper gastrointestinal tract between transplant and non-transplant patients
Yuri KIM ; Do Hoon KIM ; Myeongsook SEO ; Hee Kyong NA ; Kee Wook JUNG ; Ji Yong AHN ; Jeong Hoon LEE ; Kee Don CHOI ; Ho June SONG ; Gin Hyug LEE ; Hwoon-Yong JUNG
The Korean Journal of Internal Medicine 2025;40(3):394-403
Background/Aims:
Cytomegalovirus (CMV) disease in the upper gastrointestinal (UGI) tract frequently occurs in immunocompromised patients. However, data regarding UGI CMV disease in non-transplant patients compared with those in transplant recipients are limited. Therefore, we compared the clinical characteristics, endoscopic findings, and outcomes of UGI CMV disease in non-transplant patients with those in transplant recipients.
Methods:
We reviewed the medical records of patients diagnosed with UGI CMV disease between May 1999 and January 2022. UGI CMV disease was defined as symptoms or signs of gastrointestinal disease with typical findings of CMV inclusion body and positive immunochemistry stain or CMV polymerase chain reaction from the endoscopic biopsy specimen.
Results:
Among the 219 eligible patients, 132 (60.3%) were transplant patients. Age, male sex, and Charlson Comorbidity Index were significantly higher in the non-transplant group than in the transplant group. The most common symptoms were pain and odynophagia (43.8%). Transplant recipients more frequently experienced UGI CMV disease in the stomach than non-transplant patients, typically presenting as erosions or mucosal hyperemia. However, non-transplant patients more commonly experienced UGI CMV disease in the esophagus than transplant recipients, typically presenting as ulcers. The transplant group had a significantly higher clinical response than the non-transplant group.
Conclusions
UGI CMV disease in transplant patients can be present in the stomach in various forms, including ulcers or erosions. In transplant patients suspected of UGI CMV disease, conducting an esophagogastroduodenoscopy with tissue biopsy in any area where even the slightest mucosal abnormality is observed is essential to facilitate a prompt diagnosis.
7.Korean Practice Guidelines for Gastric Cancer 2024: An Evidence-based, Multidisciplinary Approach (Update of 2022 Guideline)
In-Ho KIM ; Seung Joo KANG ; Wonyoung CHOI ; An Na SEO ; Bang Wool EOM ; Beodeul KANG ; Bum Jun KIM ; Byung-Hoon MIN ; Chung Hyun TAE ; Chang In CHOI ; Choong-kun LEE ; Ho Jung AN ; Hwa Kyung BYUN ; Hyeon-Su IM ; Hyung-Don KIM ; Jang Ho CHO ; Kyoungjune PAK ; Jae-Joon KIM ; Jae Seok BAE ; Jeong Il YU ; Jeong Won LEE ; Jungyoon CHOI ; Jwa Hoon KIM ; Miyoung CHOI ; Mi Ran JUNG ; Nieun SEO ; Sang Soo EOM ; Soomin AHN ; Soo Jin KIM ; Sung Hak LEE ; Sung Hee LIM ; Tae-Han KIM ; Hye Sook HAN ; On behalf of The Development Working Group for the Korean Practice Guideline for Gastric Cancer 2024
Journal of Gastric Cancer 2025;25(1):5-114
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.
8.Endoscopic features of cytomegalovirus disease of the upper gastrointestinal tract between transplant and non-transplant patients
Yuri KIM ; Do Hoon KIM ; Myeongsook SEO ; Hee Kyong NA ; Kee Wook JUNG ; Ji Yong AHN ; Jeong Hoon LEE ; Kee Don CHOI ; Ho June SONG ; Gin Hyug LEE ; Hwoon-Yong JUNG
The Korean Journal of Internal Medicine 2025;40(3):394-403
Background/Aims:
Cytomegalovirus (CMV) disease in the upper gastrointestinal (UGI) tract frequently occurs in immunocompromised patients. However, data regarding UGI CMV disease in non-transplant patients compared with those in transplant recipients are limited. Therefore, we compared the clinical characteristics, endoscopic findings, and outcomes of UGI CMV disease in non-transplant patients with those in transplant recipients.
Methods:
We reviewed the medical records of patients diagnosed with UGI CMV disease between May 1999 and January 2022. UGI CMV disease was defined as symptoms or signs of gastrointestinal disease with typical findings of CMV inclusion body and positive immunochemistry stain or CMV polymerase chain reaction from the endoscopic biopsy specimen.
Results:
Among the 219 eligible patients, 132 (60.3%) were transplant patients. Age, male sex, and Charlson Comorbidity Index were significantly higher in the non-transplant group than in the transplant group. The most common symptoms were pain and odynophagia (43.8%). Transplant recipients more frequently experienced UGI CMV disease in the stomach than non-transplant patients, typically presenting as erosions or mucosal hyperemia. However, non-transplant patients more commonly experienced UGI CMV disease in the esophagus than transplant recipients, typically presenting as ulcers. The transplant group had a significantly higher clinical response than the non-transplant group.
Conclusions
UGI CMV disease in transplant patients can be present in the stomach in various forms, including ulcers or erosions. In transplant patients suspected of UGI CMV disease, conducting an esophagogastroduodenoscopy with tissue biopsy in any area where even the slightest mucosal abnormality is observed is essential to facilitate a prompt diagnosis.
9.Differential Diagnosis of Thickened Gastric Wall between Hypertrophic Gastritis and Borrmann Type 4 Advanced Gastric Cancer
Jun-young SEO ; Do Hoon KIM ; Ji Yong AHN ; Kee Don CHOI ; Hwa Jung KIM ; Hee Kyong NA ; Jeong Hoon LEE ; Kee Wook JUNG ; Ho June SONG ; Gin Hyug LEE ; Hwoon-Yong JUNG
Gut and Liver 2024;18(6):961-969
Background/Aims:
Accurately diagnosing diffuse gastric wall thickening is challenging. Hypertrophic gastritis (HG), while benign, mimics the morphology of Borrmann type 4 advanced gastric cancer (AGC B-4). We compared the features of endoscopy and endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) between them.
Methods:
We retrospectively reviewed patients who underwent EUS for gastric wall thickening between 2000 and 2021, selecting HG and pathologically confirmed advanced gastric cancer cases. Ulceration and antral wall thickening were determined via endoscopy, while EUS assessed the 5-layered gastric wall structure, measuring the proper muscle (PM) layer and total wall thickness.
Results:
Male dominance was observed in AGC B-4, and the hemoglobin and albumin levels were significantly lower. The rate of antral wall thickening and presence of ulceration were significantly higher in AGC B-4 cases. Destruction of the PM layers was observed only in AGC B-4 cases, and the PM was significantly thicker in AGC B-4 cases. Forceps biopsy had an excellent success rate in ulcer-present AGC B-4 cases, but only a 42.6% success rate was observed for cases without ulcers, necessitating additional diagnostic modalities. A PM thickness of 2.39 mm distinguished between AGC B-4 and HG effectively. The multivariable analysis showed that a thickened PM layer and the presence of ulceration were significant risk factors for the diagnosis of AGC B-4.
Conclusions
Endoscopic findings of a thickened gastric wall, including antral involvement, and presence of ulcer were significant risk factors for the diagnosis of AGC B-4. EUS findings of destroyed wall layers and a thickened PM of >2.39 mm were the key points of differentiation between HG and AGC B-4.
10.Differential Diagnosis of Thickened Gastric Wall between Hypertrophic Gastritis and Borrmann Type 4 Advanced Gastric Cancer
Jun-young SEO ; Do Hoon KIM ; Ji Yong AHN ; Kee Don CHOI ; Hwa Jung KIM ; Hee Kyong NA ; Jeong Hoon LEE ; Kee Wook JUNG ; Ho June SONG ; Gin Hyug LEE ; Hwoon-Yong JUNG
Gut and Liver 2024;18(6):961-969
Background/Aims:
Accurately diagnosing diffuse gastric wall thickening is challenging. Hypertrophic gastritis (HG), while benign, mimics the morphology of Borrmann type 4 advanced gastric cancer (AGC B-4). We compared the features of endoscopy and endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) between them.
Methods:
We retrospectively reviewed patients who underwent EUS for gastric wall thickening between 2000 and 2021, selecting HG and pathologically confirmed advanced gastric cancer cases. Ulceration and antral wall thickening were determined via endoscopy, while EUS assessed the 5-layered gastric wall structure, measuring the proper muscle (PM) layer and total wall thickness.
Results:
Male dominance was observed in AGC B-4, and the hemoglobin and albumin levels were significantly lower. The rate of antral wall thickening and presence of ulceration were significantly higher in AGC B-4 cases. Destruction of the PM layers was observed only in AGC B-4 cases, and the PM was significantly thicker in AGC B-4 cases. Forceps biopsy had an excellent success rate in ulcer-present AGC B-4 cases, but only a 42.6% success rate was observed for cases without ulcers, necessitating additional diagnostic modalities. A PM thickness of 2.39 mm distinguished between AGC B-4 and HG effectively. The multivariable analysis showed that a thickened PM layer and the presence of ulceration were significant risk factors for the diagnosis of AGC B-4.
Conclusions
Endoscopic findings of a thickened gastric wall, including antral involvement, and presence of ulcer were significant risk factors for the diagnosis of AGC B-4. EUS findings of destroyed wall layers and a thickened PM of >2.39 mm were the key points of differentiation between HG and AGC B-4.

Result Analysis
Print
Save
E-mail