The Korean Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Committee within the Korean Society of Surgical Metabolism and Nutrition was established to develop ERAS guidelines tailored to the Korean context. This guideline focuses on creating the most current evidence-based practice guidelines for ERAS purposes, based on systematic reviews. All key questions targeted randomized controlled trials exclusively, and if fewer than 2 were available, studies employing propensity score matching were also included. Recommendations for each key question were marked with strength of recommendation and level of evidence following internal and external review processes by the committee.

The Korean Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Committee within the Korean Society of Surgical Metabolism and Nutrition was established to develop ERAS guidelines tailored to the Korean context. This guideline focuses on creating the most current evidence-based practice guidelines for ERAS purposes, based on systematic reviews. All key questions targeted randomized controlled trials exclusively, and if fewer than 2 were available, studies employing propensity score matching were also included. Recommendations for each key question were marked with strength of recommendation and level of evidence following internal and external review processes by the committee.

The Korean Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Committee within the Korean Society of Surgical Metabolism and Nutrition was established to develop ERAS guidelines tailored to the Korean context. This guideline focuses on creating the most current evidence-based practice guidelines for ERAS purposes, based on systematic reviews. All key questions targeted randomized controlled trials exclusively, and if fewer than 2 were available, studies employing propensity score matching were also included. Recommendations for each key question were marked with strength of recommendation and level of evidence following internal and external review processes by the committee.

The Korean Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Committee within the Korean Society of Surgical Metabolism and Nutrition was established to develop ERAS guidelines tailored to the Korean context. This guideline focuses on creating the most current evidence-based practice guidelines for ERAS purposes, based on systematic reviews. All key questions targeted randomized controlled trials exclusively, and if fewer than 2 were available, studies employing propensity score matching were also included. Recommendations for each key question were marked with strength of recommendation and level of evidence following internal and external review processes by the committee.

The Korean Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Committee within the Korean Society of Surgical Metabolism and Nutrition was established to develop ERAS guidelines tailored to the Korean context. This guideline focuses on creating the most current evidence-based practice guidelines for ERAS purposes, based on systematic reviews. All key questions targeted randomized controlled trials exclusively, and if fewer than 2 were available, studies employing propensity score matching were also included. Recommendations for each key question were marked with strength of recommendation and level of evidence following internal and external review processes by the committee.

Purpose: This study investigated the efficacy of intravesical gemcitabine as an alternative to bacillus Calmette–Guérin (BCG) therapy. Materials and Methods: Data were retrospectively collected across seven institutions from February 1999 to May 2023. Inclusion criteria included patients with intermediate- or high-risk non-muscle invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) who underwent transurethral resection of bladder tumors (TURBT) and received at least four sessions of intravesical gemcitabine or BCG induction therapy. Patient characteristics, complete remission (CR), occurrence, and progression rates were compared. Results: In total, 149 patients were included in this study (gemcitabine, 63; BCG, 86). No differences were apparent between the two groups in baseline characteristics, except for the follow-up period (gemcitabine, 9.2±5.9 months vs. BCG, 43.9±41.4 months, p<0.001). There were no consistent significant differences observed between the two groups in the 3-month (gemcitabine, 98.4% vs. BCG, 95.3%; p=0.848), 6-month (94.9% vs. 90.0%, respectively; p=0.793) and 1-year CR rates (84.2% vs. 83.3%, respectively;p=0.950). Also, there was no significant statistical difference in progression-free survival between the two groups (p=0.953). The occurrence rates of adverse events were similar between the groups (22.2% vs. 22.1%; p=0.989); however, the rate of Clavien– Dindo grade 2 or higher was significantly higher in the BCG group (1.6% vs. 16.3%, respectively; p<0.001). Conclusions Intravesical gemcitabine demonstrated efficacy comparable to BCG therapy for the first year in patients with intermediate- and high-risk NMIBC. However, long-term follow-up studies are warranted.

The Korean Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Committee within the Korean Society of Surgical Metabolism and Nutrition was established to develop ERAS guidelines tailored to the Korean context. This guideline focuses on creating the most current evidence-based practice guidelines for ERAS based on systematic reviews. All key questions targeted randomized controlled trials (RCTs) exclusively. If fewer than two RCTs were available, studies using propensity score matching were also included. Recommendations for each key question were marked with strength of recommendation and level of evidence following internal and external review processes by the committee.

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.

Metachronous carcinoma at the colostomy site is very rare after abdominoperineal resection. A 53-year-old male patient underwent an abdominoperineal resection 6 years earlier for rectal cancer developed metachronous carcinoma at the site of stoma. A portion of the colon, including the stoma and the surrounding skin, was resected and a new stoma was created in the transverse colon. Although the occurrence of carcinoma at the stoma site is a rare condition, careful observation for the stoma and colonoscopy for surveillance are necessary.

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.