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: We aimed to evaluate whether the modified Alvarado score-which is currently being used to diagnose acute appendicitis-can be applicable in the diagnosis of diseases in pregnant women. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed the medical records of 252 pregnant women who visited our emergency department (ED) with a chief complaint of abdominal pain and a suspicion of acute appendicitis, and ultimately underwent appendix ultrasonography or appendix magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). The modified Alvarado score was calculated for each pregnant woman. A receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was drawn for each subject, those in the first trimester, second trimester, and third trimester, from which the best cut-off value, sensitivity and specificity were induced. RESULTS: For all 252 pregnant women who visited our ED, the area under the curve was 0.742 (p<0.001), with sensitivity and specificity of 75.41% and 62.30%, respectively, when using the value of 5 as the cut-off point for the modified Alvarado score. The area under the curve was 0.811 (p<0.001) for those in their first trimester and 0.749 (p<0.001) for those in the second trimester, while it was 0.641, with the p-value of 0.109, for those in the third trimester. CONCLUSION: There is a limitation using the modified Alvarado score alone in pregnant woman, and if there is uncertainty in the diagnosis, other imaging studies, such as appendix ultrasonography or appendix MRI, should be considered.
Abdominal Pain ; Appendicitis* ; Appendix ; Diagnosis ; Emergency Service, Hospital ; Female ; Humans ; Magnetic Resonance Imaging ; Medical Records ; Pregnancy ; Pregnancy Trimester, First ; Pregnancy Trimester, Second ; Pregnancy Trimester, Third ; Pregnant Women* ; Retrospective Studies ; ROC Curve ; Sensitivity and Specificity ; Ultrasonography ; Uncertainty

BACKGROUND: To evaluate risk factors of redisplacement and remind surgeons of key factors regarding conservative treatment of distal radius fracture. METHODS: A total of 132 patients who received conservative treatment for distal radius fractures between March 2008 and February 2011 were included in this study. Radial inclination, radial length, volar tilting angle, ulnar variance, fragment translation, and presence of dorsal metaphyseal comminution were measured on the X-rays taken immediately after reduction, one week after injury during the first follow-up outpatient clinic visit, and after the gain of radiological union. Secondary displacement was defined as a loss of reduction during the follow-up period, and was divided into 'early' and 'late' categories. We analyzed the influence of initial displacement radiologic variables, dorsal cortex comminution, and patient age on the development of secondary displacement. RESULTS: Development of secondary displacement was significantly associated only with initial displacement radiologic variables (p < 0.001), development of the late secondary displacement was significantly associated with age (p = 0.005), and initial displacement radiologic variables were associated significantly with a serial increase in ulnar variance (p = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS: Greater displacement on the initial radiographs indicates a higher possibility of development for secondary displacement, and older patients had a higher probability of late secondary displacement development. Furthermore, dorsal comminutions did not affect secondary displacement directly.
Adult ; Aged ; Aged, 80 and over ; Cohort Studies ; Female ; Fracture Fixation, Internal ; Fractures, Comminuted/radiography/therapy ; Humans ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Prognosis ; Radius Fractures/epidemiology/radiography/*therapy ; *Splints ; Young Adult

PURPOSE: Cisplatin is highly effective for the treatment of solid tumors in children. However, the clinical use of cisplatin is limited by its ototoxicity. The aim of this study was to evaluate the ototoxicity in children treated with cisplatin. Method: We performed a single institution retrospective analysis of pediatric oncology patients who received cisplatin therapy between January 2001 and January 2008. Thirty-seven patients with sufficient medical and audiologic data were included in this study. RESULTS: The median age at the time of diagnosis was 10.7 (range 3.8-16.7) years. There were 16 males and 21 females. The underlying diseases were osteosarcoma (15 cases), medulloblastoma (14 cases), germ cell tumors (7 cases), and hepatoblastoma (1 case). The median individual dose was 100 mg/m2/cycle (56-200). The median cumulative dose was 480 mg/m2 (200-1,490). Sixteen patients (43%) received cranial radiotherapy. Of the 37 patients, 17 developed hearing loss, leading to an overall incidence of 46%. Logistic regression showed that age at treatment (P=0.04) and cumulative dose of cisplatin (P=0.005) were the significant risk factors in predicting hearing loss in children treated with cisplatin. In all the patients who had hearing loss, there was neither improvement nor aggravation during the follow-up (3-68 months). CONCLUSION: The cumulative dose of cisplatin (>500 mg/m2) and younger age at treatment (<12 years) were 2 most important risk factors for ototoxicity in patients treated with cisplatin. Serial audiometric evaluations are needed in the patients with risk factors during and after cisplatin treatment.
Adolescent ; Child ; Cisplatin ; Female ; Follow-Up Studies ; Hearing Loss ; Hepatoblastoma ; Humans ; Incidence ; Logistic Models ; Male ; Medulloblastoma ; Neoplasms, Germ Cell and Embryonal ; Osteosarcoma ; Retrospective Studies ; Risk Factors

BACKGROUND: It is known that chronic sustained hyperglycemia and its consequent oxidative stress causes diabetic complication in type 2 diabetes. It has been further proven that glycemic variability causes oxidative stress. The aim of this study is to measure the average daily risk range (ADDR)-index of glycemic variability, and to evaluate relevant variables. METHODS: We measured the blood glucose level of type 2 diabetic patients who were treated with multiple daily injections from January to July, 2008. The blood glucose levels were checked four times a day for 14 days and were conversed according to the ADRR formula. The degree of glycemic variability was categorized into non-fluctuation and fluctuation groups. We collected patient data on age, sex, duration of diabetes, body mass index, HOMA(IR), HOMA(betacell) and HbA1c. RESULTS: A total of 97 patients were enrolled in this study. The mean age, duration of diabetes, HbA1c and mean ADRR were 57.6 +/- 13.4, 11.5 +/- 8.5 years, 10.7 +/- 2.5%, and 26.6 +/- 9.8, respectively. We classified 18.5% of the patients to the non-fluctuation group, and 81.5% to the fluctuation group. ADRR was significantly correlated with duration of diabetes, fasting and postprandial glucose, fructosamine, HbA1c and BMI and HOMAbetacell. In addition, this study confirmed that BMI, HOMAbetacell and HbA1c were ADRR-related independent variables. CONCLUSION: ADRR can be used as an index for blood glucose fluctuation in type 2 diabetic patients. Measuring ADRR in patients with low BMI and a long duration of diabetes is helpful to improve the effectiveness of their care.
Blood Glucose ; Body Mass Index ; Diabetes Complications ; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2 ; Fasting ; Fructosamine ; Glucose ; Humans ; Hyperglycemia ; Inpatients ; Oxidative Stress

Guillain-Barre Syndrome (GBS) has been known to be preceded by various infections such as Campylobacter jejuni, cytomegalovirus, and so on. We have experienced a case of GBS after a preceding herpes zoster, which was complicated by GBS, which is rare. Some circumstantial and experimental clues suggest a possible causal relationship between those two. Here we report the case along with a literature review.
Campylobacter jejuni ; Cytomegalovirus ; Guillain-Barre Syndrome ; Herpes Zoster* ; Molecular Mimicry

No abstract available.
Hemorrhage* ; Intracranial Hemorrhage, Hypertensive ; Trigeminal Nerve Diseases

PURPOSE: Malignant lymphoma is the primary malignant tumor derived from lymphoid organs. It is composed of Hodgkin's disease and non-Hodgkin lymphoma. Recently, survival rate is on the rise due to improved combination chemotherapy, radiotherapy and high dose chemotherapy followed by hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. In South Korea, no epidemiologic studies concerning malignant lymphoma in the pediatric age group has been performed. Therefore, the Korean Society of Pediatric Hematology-Oncology retrospectively analyzed the incidence, pathologic subtypes, treatment strategies, and survival rates of pediatric malignant lymphomas in South Korea. METHOD: Questionnaires were made and sent to a group of training hospitals, with a return of 580 questionnaires from 24 hospitals. Among them, 517 reports were suitable for analysis. RESULTS: Among the 517 cases, Hodgkin's disease accounted for 58 cases and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma for 459 cases. Male to female ratio for malignant lymphoma was 2.7. Mean age at diagnosis was 8.3 years. Among the pathologic subtypes, mixed cellularity was the most frequent subtype for Hodgkin's disease. Most (70.7%) cases of non-Hodgkins lymphoma belonged to high grade NHL. Burkitt lymphoma accounted for 102 cases, and lymphoblastic lymphoma was found in 58 cases. Peripheral lymphadenopathy was the most common presenting sign upon diagnosis. B symptoms were significantly more frequent in Hodgkin's disease patients than in non-Hodgkin lymphoma patients. The Complete response rate was 62.1% for non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, and 82.8% for Hodgkin's disease. Overall 5 year survival rate was 60.0% in non-hodgkin's lymphoma, and 84.8% in Hodgkin's disease. CONCLUSION: The annual incidence of malignant lymphoma in Korea is 4.7 per million. In cases of chemotherapy-sensitive, refractory or relapsed malinant lymphoma, high dose chemotherapy followed by hematopoietic stem cell transplantation is vital for improved survival. For more systematic analysis of epidemiology on malignant lymphomas, better surveillance mechanisms on the occurrence of malignant lymphomas are crucial, and establishment of standardized treatment protocol for malignant lymphoma is required.
Burkitt Lymphoma ; Child* ; Clinical Protocols ; Diagnosis ; Drug Therapy ; Drug Therapy, Combination ; Epidemiologic Studies ; Epidemiology* ; Female ; Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation ; Hodgkin Disease ; Humans ; Incidence ; Korea* ; Lymphatic Diseases ; Lymphoma* ; Lymphoma, Non-Hodgkin ; Male ; Precursor Cell Lymphoblastic Leukemia-Lymphoma ; Surveys and Questionnaires ; Radiotherapy ; Retrospective Studies* ; Survival Rate