Objective: : In degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis, interbody fusion surgery (IFS) has long been recommended as the gold standard of surgical management. However, IFS is less recommended for high-risk patients such as the elderly because it involves extensive surgery, with a long operation time and high volumes of blood loss, which lead to marked perioperative morbidity. We report an alternative primary and salvage treatment technique for high-risk lumbar spondylolisthesis through posterior lumbar element reinforcement using interspinous fixation and decompression alone without interbody fusion. Methods: : Plain radiographs, computed tomography scans, and magnetic resonance imaging, taken at different intervals, were used to measure local disc height (DH), vertebral body slippage (BS), and segmental motion angle (SMA). A Visual analogue scale and the Oswestry disability index (ODI) were applied pre-operation and at the last follow-up. Results: : The local SMA decreased significantly by 3.46°±3.07°, from 10.61°±3.42° preoperatively to 7.15±3.70 at the last follow-up (p<0.001). The DH decreased from 8.61±2.88 mm preoperatively to 8.41±2.48 mm at the last follow-up (p=0.074). The BS decreased from 3.49±4.29 mm preoperatively to 3.41±4.91 mm at the last follow-up (p=0.092). None of the patients reported worsening pain or an increased ODI after surgery, and there were no surgery-related complications. Conclusion : Posterior lumbar element reinforcement by decompression alone with SPIRE™ fixation is an alternative primary and salvage treatment option for select patients with spondylolisthesis.

Objective: : In degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis, interbody fusion surgery (IFS) has long been recommended as the gold standard of surgical management. However, IFS is less recommended for high-risk patients such as the elderly because it involves extensive surgery, with a long operation time and high volumes of blood loss, which lead to marked perioperative morbidity. We report an alternative primary and salvage treatment technique for high-risk lumbar spondylolisthesis through posterior lumbar element reinforcement using interspinous fixation and decompression alone without interbody fusion. Methods: : Plain radiographs, computed tomography scans, and magnetic resonance imaging, taken at different intervals, were used to measure local disc height (DH), vertebral body slippage (BS), and segmental motion angle (SMA). A Visual analogue scale and the Oswestry disability index (ODI) were applied pre-operation and at the last follow-up. Results: : The local SMA decreased significantly by 3.46°±3.07°, from 10.61°±3.42° preoperatively to 7.15±3.70 at the last follow-up (p<0.001). The DH decreased from 8.61±2.88 mm preoperatively to 8.41±2.48 mm at the last follow-up (p=0.074). The BS decreased from 3.49±4.29 mm preoperatively to 3.41±4.91 mm at the last follow-up (p=0.092). None of the patients reported worsening pain or an increased ODI after surgery, and there were no surgery-related complications. Conclusion : Posterior lumbar element reinforcement by decompression alone with SPIRE™ fixation is an alternative primary and salvage treatment option for select patients with spondylolisthesis.

Objective: : In degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis, interbody fusion surgery (IFS) has long been recommended as the gold standard of surgical management. However, IFS is less recommended for high-risk patients such as the elderly because it involves extensive surgery, with a long operation time and high volumes of blood loss, which lead to marked perioperative morbidity. We report an alternative primary and salvage treatment technique for high-risk lumbar spondylolisthesis through posterior lumbar element reinforcement using interspinous fixation and decompression alone without interbody fusion. Methods: : Plain radiographs, computed tomography scans, and magnetic resonance imaging, taken at different intervals, were used to measure local disc height (DH), vertebral body slippage (BS), and segmental motion angle (SMA). A Visual analogue scale and the Oswestry disability index (ODI) were applied pre-operation and at the last follow-up. Results: : The local SMA decreased significantly by 3.46°±3.07°, from 10.61°±3.42° preoperatively to 7.15±3.70 at the last follow-up (p<0.001). The DH decreased from 8.61±2.88 mm preoperatively to 8.41±2.48 mm at the last follow-up (p=0.074). The BS decreased from 3.49±4.29 mm preoperatively to 3.41±4.91 mm at the last follow-up (p=0.092). None of the patients reported worsening pain or an increased ODI after surgery, and there were no surgery-related complications. Conclusion : Posterior lumbar element reinforcement by decompression alone with SPIRE™ fixation is an alternative primary and salvage treatment option for select patients with spondylolisthesis.

Objective: : In degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis, interbody fusion surgery (IFS) has long been recommended as the gold standard of surgical management. However, IFS is less recommended for high-risk patients such as the elderly because it involves extensive surgery, with a long operation time and high volumes of blood loss, which lead to marked perioperative morbidity. We report an alternative primary and salvage treatment technique for high-risk lumbar spondylolisthesis through posterior lumbar element reinforcement using interspinous fixation and decompression alone without interbody fusion. Methods: : Plain radiographs, computed tomography scans, and magnetic resonance imaging, taken at different intervals, were used to measure local disc height (DH), vertebral body slippage (BS), and segmental motion angle (SMA). A Visual analogue scale and the Oswestry disability index (ODI) were applied pre-operation and at the last follow-up. Results: : The local SMA decreased significantly by 3.46°±3.07°, from 10.61°±3.42° preoperatively to 7.15±3.70 at the last follow-up (p<0.001). The DH decreased from 8.61±2.88 mm preoperatively to 8.41±2.48 mm at the last follow-up (p=0.074). The BS decreased from 3.49±4.29 mm preoperatively to 3.41±4.91 mm at the last follow-up (p=0.092). None of the patients reported worsening pain or an increased ODI after surgery, and there were no surgery-related complications. Conclusion : Posterior lumbar element reinforcement by decompression alone with SPIRE™ fixation is an alternative primary and salvage treatment option for select patients with spondylolisthesis.

Colorectal cancer is the third most common cancer in Korea and the third leading cause of death from cancer. Treatment outcomes for colon cancer are steadily improving due to national health screening programs with advances in diagnostic methods, surgical techniques, and therapeutic agents.. The Korea Colon Cancer Multidisciplinary (KCCM) Committee intends to provide professionals who treat colon cancer with the most up-to-date, evidence-based practice guidelines to improve outcomes and help them make decisions that reflect their patients’ values and preferences. These guidelines have been established by consensus reached by the KCCM Guideline Committee based on a systematic literature review and evidence synthesis and by considering the national health insurance system in real clinical practice settings. Each recommendation is presented with a recommendation strength and level of evidence based on the consensus of the committee.

Interest in kidney transplant studies in the elderly population is increasing as more research has been conducted on the immune system. With this review, we hope to encourage the need for research on kidney transplantation in the elderly.

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.

Purpose: Gastric cancer (GC) is among the most prevalent and fatal cancers worldwide.National cancer screening programs in countries with high incidences of this disease provide medical aid beneficiaries with free-of-charge screening involving upper endoscopy to detect early-stage GC. However, the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has caused major disruptions to routine healthcare access. Thus, this study aimed to assess the impact of COVID-19 on the diagnosis, overall incidence, and stage distribution of GC. Materials and Methods: We identified patients in our hospital cancer registry who were diagnosed with GC between January 2018 and December 2021 and compared the cancer stage at diagnosis before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. Subgroup analyses were conducted according to age and sex. The years 2018 and 2019 were defined as the “before COVID” period, and the years 2020 and 2021 as the “during COVID” period. Results: Overall, 10,875 patients were evaluated; 6,535 and 4,340 patients were diagnosed before and during the COVID-19 period, respectively. The number of diagnoses was lower during the COVID-19 pandemic (189 patients/month vs. 264 patients/month) than before it.Notably, the proportion of patients with stages 3 or 4 GC in 2021 was higher among men and patients aged ≥40 years. Conclusions During the COVID-19 pandemic, the overall number of GC diagnoses decreased significantly in a single institute. Moreover, GCs were in more advanced stages at the time of diagnosis. Further studies are required to elucidate the relationship between the COVID-19 pandemic and the delay in the detection of GC worldwide.

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is a condition in which gastric contents regurgitate into the esophagus or beyond, resulting in either troublesome symptoms or complications. GERD is heterogeneous in terms of varied manifestations, test findings, and treatment responsiveness. GERD diagnosis can be established with symptomatology, pathology, or physiology. Recently the Lyon consensus defined the “proven GERD” with concrete evidence for reflux, including advanced grade erosive esophagitis (Los Angeles classification grades C and or D esophagitis), long-segment Barrett’s mucosa or peptic strictures on endoscopy or distal esophageal acid exposure time > 6% on 24-hour ambulatory pH-impedance monitoring. However, some Asian researchers have different opinions on whether the same standards should be applied to the Asian population. The prevalence of GERD is increasing in Asia. The present evidence-based guidelines were developed using a systematic review and meta-analysis approach. In GERD with typical symptoms, a proton pump inhibitor test can be recommended as a sensitive, cost-effective, and practical test for GERD diagnosis. Based on a meta-analysis of 19 estimated acid-exposure time values in Asians, the reference range upper limit for esophageal acid exposure time was 3.2% (95% confidence interval 2.7-3.9%) in the Asian countries. Esophageal manometry and novel impedance measurements, including mucosal impedance and a post-reflux swallow-induced peristaltic wave, are promising in discrimination of GERD among different reflux phenotypes, thus increasing its diagnostic yield. We also propose a long-term strategy of evidence-based GERD treatment with proton pump inhibitors and other drugs.

Background/Aims: This study assessed the efficacy and safety of adalimumab (ADA) and explored predictors of response in Korean patients with ulcerative colitis (UC). Methods: A prospective, observational, multicenter study was conducted over 56 weeks in adult patients with moderately to severely active UC who received ADA. Clinical response, remission, and mucosal healing were assessed using the Mayo score. Results: A total of 146 patients were enrolled from 17 academic hospitals. Clinical response rates were 52.1% and 37.7% and clinical remission rates were 24.0% and 22.0% at weeks 8 and 56, respectively. Mucosal healing rates were 39.0% and 30.1% at weeks 8 and 56, respectively. Prior use of anti-tumor necrosis factor-α (anti-TNF-α) did not affect clinical and endoscopic responses. The ADA drug level was significantly higher in patients with better outcomes at week 8 (P<0.05). In patients with lower endoscopic activity, higher body mass index, and higher serum albumin levels at baseline, the clinical response rate was higher at week 8. In patients with lower Mayo scores and C-reactive protein levels, clinical responses, and mucosal healing at week 8, the clinical response rate was higher at week 56. Serious adverse drug reactions were identified in 2.8% of patients. Conclusions ADA is effective and safe for induction and maintenance in Korean patients with UC, regardless of prior anti-TNF-α therapy. The ADA drug level is associated with the efficacy of induction therapy. Patients with better short-term outcomes were predictive of those with an improved long-term response.