The reprocessing of gastrointestinal endoscopes and accessories, including pre-cleaning, cleaning, high-level disinfection, rinsing, drying, and storage, is essential for preventing infections during endoscopic procedures. The risk of infection is significantly minimized when these processes are performed properly. However, the reprocessing environment in primary care settings differs from that in endoscopy centers, and ongoing advancements in medical practices and reprocessing technologies highlight the need for updated, context-specific guidelines. The Korean Academy of Family Medicine has developed these guidelines, tailored to the unique conditions of primary care settings, through a comprehensive review of both international and local standards, as well as systematic reviews of relevant literature. This guideline presents step-by-step procedures and key principles for effective endoscope reprocessing, with a focus on the needs of primary care institutions. By adhering to these guidelines, primary care physicians can maintain the highest standards of safety and effectiveness, minimize infection risks, and promote optimal clinical outcomes.

The reprocessing of gastrointestinal endoscopes and accessories, including pre-cleaning, cleaning, high-level disinfection, rinsing, drying, and storage, is essential for preventing infections during endoscopic procedures. The risk of infection is significantly minimized when these processes are performed properly. However, the reprocessing environment in primary care settings differs from that in endoscopy centers, and ongoing advancements in medical practices and reprocessing technologies highlight the need for updated, context-specific guidelines. The Korean Academy of Family Medicine has developed these guidelines, tailored to the unique conditions of primary care settings, through a comprehensive review of both international and local standards, as well as systematic reviews of relevant literature. This guideline presents step-by-step procedures and key principles for effective endoscope reprocessing, with a focus on the needs of primary care institutions. By adhering to these guidelines, primary care physicians can maintain the highest standards of safety and effectiveness, minimize infection risks, and promote optimal clinical outcomes.

The reprocessing of gastrointestinal endoscopes and accessories, including pre-cleaning, cleaning, high-level disinfection, rinsing, drying, and storage, is essential for preventing infections during endoscopic procedures. The risk of infection is significantly minimized when these processes are performed properly. However, the reprocessing environment in primary care settings differs from that in endoscopy centers, and ongoing advancements in medical practices and reprocessing technologies highlight the need for updated, context-specific guidelines. The Korean Academy of Family Medicine has developed these guidelines, tailored to the unique conditions of primary care settings, through a comprehensive review of both international and local standards, as well as systematic reviews of relevant literature. This guideline presents step-by-step procedures and key principles for effective endoscope reprocessing, with a focus on the needs of primary care institutions. By adhering to these guidelines, primary care physicians can maintain the highest standards of safety and effectiveness, minimize infection risks, and promote optimal clinical outcomes.

The reprocessing of gastrointestinal endoscopes and accessories, including pre-cleaning, cleaning, high-level disinfection, rinsing, drying, and storage, is essential for preventing infections during endoscopic procedures. The risk of infection is significantly minimized when these processes are performed properly. However, the reprocessing environment in primary care settings differs from that in endoscopy centers, and ongoing advancements in medical practices and reprocessing technologies highlight the need for updated, context-specific guidelines. The Korean Academy of Family Medicine has developed these guidelines, tailored to the unique conditions of primary care settings, through a comprehensive review of both international and local standards, as well as systematic reviews of relevant literature. This guideline presents step-by-step procedures and key principles for effective endoscope reprocessing, with a focus on the needs of primary care institutions. By adhering to these guidelines, primary care physicians can maintain the highest standards of safety and effectiveness, minimize infection risks, and promote optimal clinical outcomes.

Background: s/Aims: Reported incidence of extrahepatic bile duct cancer is higher in Asians than in Western populations. Korea, in particular, is one of the countries with the highest incidence rates of extrahepatic bile duct cancer in the world. Although research and innovative therapeutic modalities for extrahepatic bile duct cancer are emerging, clinical guidelines are currently unavailable in Korea. The Korean Society of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic Surgery in collaboration with related societies (Korean Pancreatic and Biliary Surgery Society, Korean Society of Abdominal Radiology, Korean Society of Medical Oncology, Korean Society of Radiation Oncology, Korean Society of Pathologists, and Korean Society of Nuclear Medicine) decided to establish clinical guideline for extrahepatic bile duct cancer in June 2021. Methods: Contents of the guidelines were developed through subgroup meetings for each key question and a preliminary draft was finalized through a Clinical Guidelines Committee workshop. Results: In November 2021, the finalized draft was presented for public scrutiny during a formal hearing. Conclusions The extrahepatic guideline committee believed that this guideline could be helpful in the treatment of patients.

Background: It is well known that a large number of patients with diabetes also have dyslipidemia, which significantly increases the risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD). This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of combination drugs consisting of metformin and atorvastatin, widely used as therapeutic agents for diabetes and dyslipidemia. Methods: This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group and phase III multicenter study included adults with glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) levels >7.0% and <10.0%, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) >100 and <250 mg/dL. One hundred eighty-five eligible subjects were randomized to the combination group (metformin+atorvastatin), metformin group (metformin+atorvastatin placebo), and atorvastatin group (atorvastatin+metformin placebo). The primary efficacy endpoints were the percent changes in HbA1c and LDL-C levels from baseline at the end of the treatment. Results: After 16 weeks of treatment compared to baseline, HbA1c showed a significant difference of 0.94% compared to the atorvastatin group in the combination group (0.35% vs. −0.58%, respectively; P<0.0001), whereas the proportion of patients with increased HbA1c was also 62% and 15%, respectively, showing a significant difference (P<0.001). The combination group also showed a significant decrease in LDL-C levels compared to the metformin group (−55.20% vs. −7.69%, P<0.001) without previously unknown adverse drug events. Conclusion The addition of atorvastatin to metformin improved HbA1c and LDL-C levels to a significant extent compared to metformin or atorvastatin alone in diabetes and dyslipidemia patients. This study also suggested metformin’s preventive effect on the glucose-elevating potential of atorvastatin in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and dyslipidemia, insufficiently controlled with exercise and diet. Metformin and atorvastatin combination might be an effective treatment in reducing the CVD risk in patients with both diabetes and dyslipidemia because of its lowering effect on LDL-C and glucose.

Background: Unexpected conversion to thoracotomy during planned video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) can lead to poor outcomes and comparatively high morbidity. This study was conducted to assess preoperative risk factors associated with unexpected thoracotomy conversion and to develop a risk scoring model for preoperative use, aimed at identifying patients with an elevated risk of conversion. Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted of 1,506 patients who underwent surgical resection for non-small cell lung cancer. To evaluate the risk factors, univariate analysis and logistic regression were performed. A risk scoring model was established to predict unexpected thoracotomy conversion during VATS of the lung, based on preoperative factors. To validate the model, an additional cohort of 878 patients was analyzed. Results: Among the potentially significant clinical variables, male sex, previous ipsilateral lung surgery, preoperative detection of calcified lymph nodes, and clinical T stage were identified as independent risk factors for unplanned conversion to thoracotomy. A 6-point risk scoring model was developed to predict conversion based on the assessed risk, with patients categorized into 4 groups. The results indicated an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.747, with a sensitivity of 80.5%, specificity of 56.4%, positive predictive value of 1.8%, and negative predictive value of 91.0%. When applied to the validation cohort, the model exhibited good predictive accuracy. Conclusion We successfully developed and validated a risk scoring model for preoperative use that can predict the likelihood of unplanned conversion to thoracotomy during VATS of the lung.

Objective: Dysphagia is a common clinical condition characterized by difficulty in swallowing. It is sub-classified into oropharyngeal dysphagia, which refers to problems in the mouth and pharynx, and esophageal dysphagia, which refers to problems in the esophageal body and esophagogastric junction. Dysphagia can have a significant negative impact one’s physical health and quality of life as its severity increases. Therefore, proper assessment and management of dysphagia are critical for improving swallowing function and preventing complications. Thus a guideline was developed to provide evidence-based recommendations for assessment and management in patients with dysphagia. Methods: Nineteen key questions on dysphagia were developed. These questions dealt with various aspects of problems related to dysphagia, including assessment, management, and complications. A literature search for relevant articles was conducted using Pubmed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and one domestic database of KoreaMed, until April 2021. The level of evidence and recommendation grade were established according to the Grading of Recommendation Assessment, Development and Evaluation methodology. Results: Early screening and assessment of videofluoroscopic swallowing were recommended for assessing the presence of dysphagia. Therapeutic methods, such as tongue and pharyngeal muscle strengthening exercises and neuromuscular electrical stimulation with swallowing therapy, were effective in improving swallowing function and quality of life in patients with dysphagia. Nutritional intervention and an oral care program were also recommended. Conclusion This guideline presents recommendations for the assessment and management of patients with oropharyngeal dysphagia, including rehabilitative strategies.

Background: Although respiratory tract infection is one of the most important factors triggering acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AE-COPD), limited data are available to suggest an epidemiologic pattern of microbiology in South Korea. Methods: A multicenter observational study was conducted between January 2015 and December 2018 across 28 hospitals in South Korea. Adult patients with moderate-to-severe acute exacerbations of COPD were eligible to participate in the present study. The participants underwent all conventional tests to identify etiology of microbial pathogenesis. The primary outcome was the percentage of different microbiological pathogens causing AE-COPD. A comparative microbiological analysis of the patients with overlapping asthma–COPD (ACO) and pure COPD was performed. Results: We included 1,186 patients with AE-COPD. Patients with pure COPD constituted 87.9% and those with ACO accounted for 12.1%. Nearly half of the patients used an inhaled corticosteroid-containing regimen and one-fifth used systemic corticosteroids. Respiratory pathogens were found in 55.3% of all such patients. Bacteria and viruses were detected in 33% and 33.2%, respectively. Bacterial and viral coinfections were found in 10.9%. The most frequently detected bacteria were Pseudomonas aeruginosa (9.8%), and the most frequently detected virus was influenza A (10.4%). Multiple bacterial infections were more likely to appear in ACO than in pure COPD (8.3% vs. 3.6%, p=0.016). Conclusion Distinct microbiological patterns were identified in patients with moderate-to-severe AE-COPD in South Korea. These findings may improve evidence-based management of patients with AE-COPD and represent the basis for further studies investigating infectious pathogens in patients with COPD.

Objectives: We introduced the cohort studies included in the Korean Cohort Consortium (KCC), focusing on large-scale cohort studies established in Korea with a prolonged follow-up period. Moreover, we also provided projections of the follow-up and estimates of the sample size that would be necessary for big-data analyses based on pooling established cohort studies, including population-based genomic studies. Methods: We mainly focused on the characteristics of individual cohort studies from the KCC. We developed “PROFAN”, a Shiny application for projecting the follow-up period to achieve a certain number of cases when pooling established cohort studies. As examples, we projected the follow-up periods for 5000 cases of gastric cancer, 2500 cases of prostate and breast cancer, and 500 cases of non-Hodgkin lymphoma. The sample sizes for sequencing-based analyses based on a 1:1 case-control study were also calculated. Results: The KCC consisted of 8 individual cohort studies, of which 3 were community-based and 5 were health screening-based cohorts. The population-based cohort studies were mainly organized by Korean government agencies and research institutes. The projected follow-up period was at least 10 years to achieve 5000 cases based on a cohort of 0.5 million participants. The mean of the minimum to maximum sample sizes for performing sequencing analyses was 5917-72 102. Conclusions We propose an approach to establish a large-scale consortium based on the standardization and harmonization of existing cohort studies to obtain adequate statistical power with a sufficient sample size to analyze high-risk groups or rare cancer subtypes.