Objective: To establish local diagnostic reference levels (DRLs) for pediatric neck CT based on age, weight, and water-equivalent diameter (WED) across multiple university hospitals in South Korea. Materials and Methods: This retrospective study analyzed pediatric neck CT examinations from nine university hospitals, involving patients aged 0–18 years. Data were categorized by age, weight, and WED, and radiation dose metrics, including volume CT dose index (CTDIvol) and dose length product, were recorded. Data retrieval and analysis were conducted using a commercially available dose-management system (Radimetrics, Bayer Healthcare). Local DRLs were established following the International Commission on Radiological Protection guidelines, using the 75th percentile as the reference value. Results: A total of 1159 CT examinations were analyzed, including 169 scans from Institution 1, 132 from Institution 2, 126 from Institution 3, 129 from Institution 4, 128 from Institution 5, 105 from Institution 6, 162 from Institution 7, 127 from Institution 8, and 81 from Institution 9. Radiation dose metrics increased with age, weight, and WED, showing significant variability both within and across institutions. For patients weighing less than 10 kg, the DRL for CTDIvol was 5.2 mGy. In the 10–19 kg group, the DRL was 5.8 mGy; in the 20–39 kg group, 7.6 mGy; in the 40–59 kg group, 11.0 mGy; and for patients weighing 60 kg or more, 16.2 mGy. DRLs for CTDIvol by age groups were as follows: 5.3 mGy for infants under 1 year, 5.7 mGy for children aged 1–4 years, 7.6 mGy for ages 5–9 years, 11.2 mGy for ages 10–14 years, and 15.6 mGy for patients 15 years or older. Conclusion Local DRLs for pediatric neck CT were established based on age, weight, and WED across nine university hospitals in South Korea.

Objective: To establish local diagnostic reference levels (DRLs) for pediatric neck CT based on age, weight, and water-equivalent diameter (WED) across multiple university hospitals in South Korea. Materials and Methods: This retrospective study analyzed pediatric neck CT examinations from nine university hospitals, involving patients aged 0–18 years. Data were categorized by age, weight, and WED, and radiation dose metrics, including volume CT dose index (CTDIvol) and dose length product, were recorded. Data retrieval and analysis were conducted using a commercially available dose-management system (Radimetrics, Bayer Healthcare). Local DRLs were established following the International Commission on Radiological Protection guidelines, using the 75th percentile as the reference value. Results: A total of 1159 CT examinations were analyzed, including 169 scans from Institution 1, 132 from Institution 2, 126 from Institution 3, 129 from Institution 4, 128 from Institution 5, 105 from Institution 6, 162 from Institution 7, 127 from Institution 8, and 81 from Institution 9. Radiation dose metrics increased with age, weight, and WED, showing significant variability both within and across institutions. For patients weighing less than 10 kg, the DRL for CTDIvol was 5.2 mGy. In the 10–19 kg group, the DRL was 5.8 mGy; in the 20–39 kg group, 7.6 mGy; in the 40–59 kg group, 11.0 mGy; and for patients weighing 60 kg or more, 16.2 mGy. DRLs for CTDIvol by age groups were as follows: 5.3 mGy for infants under 1 year, 5.7 mGy for children aged 1–4 years, 7.6 mGy for ages 5–9 years, 11.2 mGy for ages 10–14 years, and 15.6 mGy for patients 15 years or older. Conclusion Local DRLs for pediatric neck CT were established based on age, weight, and WED across nine university hospitals in South Korea.

Objective: To establish local diagnostic reference levels (DRLs) for pediatric neck CT based on age, weight, and water-equivalent diameter (WED) across multiple university hospitals in South Korea. Materials and Methods: This retrospective study analyzed pediatric neck CT examinations from nine university hospitals, involving patients aged 0–18 years. Data were categorized by age, weight, and WED, and radiation dose metrics, including volume CT dose index (CTDIvol) and dose length product, were recorded. Data retrieval and analysis were conducted using a commercially available dose-management system (Radimetrics, Bayer Healthcare). Local DRLs were established following the International Commission on Radiological Protection guidelines, using the 75th percentile as the reference value. Results: A total of 1159 CT examinations were analyzed, including 169 scans from Institution 1, 132 from Institution 2, 126 from Institution 3, 129 from Institution 4, 128 from Institution 5, 105 from Institution 6, 162 from Institution 7, 127 from Institution 8, and 81 from Institution 9. Radiation dose metrics increased with age, weight, and WED, showing significant variability both within and across institutions. For patients weighing less than 10 kg, the DRL for CTDIvol was 5.2 mGy. In the 10–19 kg group, the DRL was 5.8 mGy; in the 20–39 kg group, 7.6 mGy; in the 40–59 kg group, 11.0 mGy; and for patients weighing 60 kg or more, 16.2 mGy. DRLs for CTDIvol by age groups were as follows: 5.3 mGy for infants under 1 year, 5.7 mGy for children aged 1–4 years, 7.6 mGy for ages 5–9 years, 11.2 mGy for ages 10–14 years, and 15.6 mGy for patients 15 years or older. Conclusion Local DRLs for pediatric neck CT were established based on age, weight, and WED across nine university hospitals in South Korea.

Purpose: This study evaluated the postoperative quality of life (QoL) after various types of gastrectomy for gastric cancer. Materials and Methods: A multicenter prospective observational study was conducted in Korea using the Korean Quality of Life in Stomach Cancer Patients Study (KOQUSS)-40, a new QoL assessment tool focusing on postgastrectomy syndrome. Overall, 496 patients with gastric cancer were enrolled, and QoL was assessed at 5 time points: preoperatively and at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery. Results: Distal gastrectomy (DG) and pylorus-preserving gastrectomy (PPG) showed significantly better outcomes than total gastrectomy (TG) and proximal gastrectomy (PG) with regard to total score, indigestion, and dysphagia. DG, PPG, and TG also showed significantly better outcomes than PG in terms of dumping syndrome and worry about cancer. Postoperative QoL did not differ significantly according to anastomosis type in DG, except for Billroth I anastomosis, which achieved better bowel habit change scores than the others. No domains differed significantly when comparing double tract reconstruction and esophagogastrostomy after PG. The total QoL score correlated significantly with postoperative body weight loss (more than 10%) and extent of resection (P<0.05 for both).Reflux as assessed by KOQUSS-40 did not correlate significantly with reflux observed on gastroscopy 1 year postoperatively (P=0.064). Conclusions Our prospective observation using KOQUSS-40 revealed that DG and PPG lead to better QoL than TG and PG. Further study is needed to compare postoperative QoL according to anastomosis type in DG and PG.

Purpose: This study evaluated the postoperative quality of life (QoL) after various types of gastrectomy for gastric cancer. Materials and Methods: A multicenter prospective observational study was conducted in Korea using the Korean Quality of Life in Stomach Cancer Patients Study (KOQUSS)-40, a new QoL assessment tool focusing on postgastrectomy syndrome. Overall, 496 patients with gastric cancer were enrolled, and QoL was assessed at 5 time points: preoperatively and at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery. Results: Distal gastrectomy (DG) and pylorus-preserving gastrectomy (PPG) showed significantly better outcomes than total gastrectomy (TG) and proximal gastrectomy (PG) with regard to total score, indigestion, and dysphagia. DG, PPG, and TG also showed significantly better outcomes than PG in terms of dumping syndrome and worry about cancer. Postoperative QoL did not differ significantly according to anastomosis type in DG, except for Billroth I anastomosis, which achieved better bowel habit change scores than the others. No domains differed significantly when comparing double tract reconstruction and esophagogastrostomy after PG. The total QoL score correlated significantly with postoperative body weight loss (more than 10%) and extent of resection (P<0.05 for both).Reflux as assessed by KOQUSS-40 did not correlate significantly with reflux observed on gastroscopy 1 year postoperatively (P=0.064). Conclusions Our prospective observation using KOQUSS-40 revealed that DG and PPG lead to better QoL than TG and PG. Further study is needed to compare postoperative QoL according to anastomosis type in DG and PG.

Objective: To establish local diagnostic reference levels (DRLs) for pediatric neck CT based on age, weight, and water-equivalent diameter (WED) across multiple university hospitals in South Korea. Materials and Methods: This retrospective study analyzed pediatric neck CT examinations from nine university hospitals, involving patients aged 0–18 years. Data were categorized by age, weight, and WED, and radiation dose metrics, including volume CT dose index (CTDIvol) and dose length product, were recorded. Data retrieval and analysis were conducted using a commercially available dose-management system (Radimetrics, Bayer Healthcare). Local DRLs were established following the International Commission on Radiological Protection guidelines, using the 75th percentile as the reference value. Results: A total of 1159 CT examinations were analyzed, including 169 scans from Institution 1, 132 from Institution 2, 126 from Institution 3, 129 from Institution 4, 128 from Institution 5, 105 from Institution 6, 162 from Institution 7, 127 from Institution 8, and 81 from Institution 9. Radiation dose metrics increased with age, weight, and WED, showing significant variability both within and across institutions. For patients weighing less than 10 kg, the DRL for CTDIvol was 5.2 mGy. In the 10–19 kg group, the DRL was 5.8 mGy; in the 20–39 kg group, 7.6 mGy; in the 40–59 kg group, 11.0 mGy; and for patients weighing 60 kg or more, 16.2 mGy. DRLs for CTDIvol by age groups were as follows: 5.3 mGy for infants under 1 year, 5.7 mGy for children aged 1–4 years, 7.6 mGy for ages 5–9 years, 11.2 mGy for ages 10–14 years, and 15.6 mGy for patients 15 years or older. Conclusion Local DRLs for pediatric neck CT were established based on age, weight, and WED across nine university hospitals in South Korea.

Purpose: This study evaluated the postoperative quality of life (QoL) after various types of gastrectomy for gastric cancer. Materials and Methods: A multicenter prospective observational study was conducted in Korea using the Korean Quality of Life in Stomach Cancer Patients Study (KOQUSS)-40, a new QoL assessment tool focusing on postgastrectomy syndrome. Overall, 496 patients with gastric cancer were enrolled, and QoL was assessed at 5 time points: preoperatively and at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery. Results: Distal gastrectomy (DG) and pylorus-preserving gastrectomy (PPG) showed significantly better outcomes than total gastrectomy (TG) and proximal gastrectomy (PG) with regard to total score, indigestion, and dysphagia. DG, PPG, and TG also showed significantly better outcomes than PG in terms of dumping syndrome and worry about cancer. Postoperative QoL did not differ significantly according to anastomosis type in DG, except for Billroth I anastomosis, which achieved better bowel habit change scores than the others. No domains differed significantly when comparing double tract reconstruction and esophagogastrostomy after PG. The total QoL score correlated significantly with postoperative body weight loss (more than 10%) and extent of resection (P<0.05 for both).Reflux as assessed by KOQUSS-40 did not correlate significantly with reflux observed on gastroscopy 1 year postoperatively (P=0.064). Conclusions Our prospective observation using KOQUSS-40 revealed that DG and PPG lead to better QoL than TG and PG. Further study is needed to compare postoperative QoL according to anastomosis type in DG and PG.

Objective: To establish local diagnostic reference levels (DRLs) for pediatric neck CT based on age, weight, and water-equivalent diameter (WED) across multiple university hospitals in South Korea. Materials and Methods: This retrospective study analyzed pediatric neck CT examinations from nine university hospitals, involving patients aged 0–18 years. Data were categorized by age, weight, and WED, and radiation dose metrics, including volume CT dose index (CTDIvol) and dose length product, were recorded. Data retrieval and analysis were conducted using a commercially available dose-management system (Radimetrics, Bayer Healthcare). Local DRLs were established following the International Commission on Radiological Protection guidelines, using the 75th percentile as the reference value. Results: A total of 1159 CT examinations were analyzed, including 169 scans from Institution 1, 132 from Institution 2, 126 from Institution 3, 129 from Institution 4, 128 from Institution 5, 105 from Institution 6, 162 from Institution 7, 127 from Institution 8, and 81 from Institution 9. Radiation dose metrics increased with age, weight, and WED, showing significant variability both within and across institutions. For patients weighing less than 10 kg, the DRL for CTDIvol was 5.2 mGy. In the 10–19 kg group, the DRL was 5.8 mGy; in the 20–39 kg group, 7.6 mGy; in the 40–59 kg group, 11.0 mGy; and for patients weighing 60 kg or more, 16.2 mGy. DRLs for CTDIvol by age groups were as follows: 5.3 mGy for infants under 1 year, 5.7 mGy for children aged 1–4 years, 7.6 mGy for ages 5–9 years, 11.2 mGy for ages 10–14 years, and 15.6 mGy for patients 15 years or older. Conclusion Local DRLs for pediatric neck CT were established based on age, weight, and WED across nine university hospitals in South Korea.

Since the role of the liver in metabolic dysfunction, including type 2 diabetes mellitus, was demonstrated, studies on non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) and metabolic dysfunction-associated fatty liver disease (MAFLD) have shown associations between fatty liver disease and other metabolic diseases. Unlike the exclusionary diagnostic criteria of NAFLD, MAFLD diagnosis is based on the presence of metabolic dysregulation in fatty liver disease. Renaming NAFLD as MAFLD also introduced simpler diagnostic criteria. In 2023, a new nomenclature, steatotic liver disease (SLD), was proposed. Similar to MAFLD, SLD diagnosis is based on the presence of hepatic steatosis with at least one cardiometabolic dysfunction. SLD is categorized into metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD), metabolic dysfunction and alcohol-related/-associated liver disease, alcoholrelated liver disease, specific etiology SLD, and cryptogenic SLD. The term MASLD has been adopted by a number of leading national and international societies due to its concise diagnostic criteria, exclusion of other concomitant liver diseases, and lack of stigmatizing terms. This article reviews the diagnostic criteria, clinical relevance, and differences among NAFLD, MAFLD, and MASLD from a diabetologist’s perspective and provides a rationale for adopting SLD/MASLD in the Fatty Liver Research Group of the Korean Diabetes Association.

Since the role of the liver in metabolic dysfunction, including type 2 diabetes mellitus, was demonstrated, studies on non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) and metabolic dysfunction-associated fatty liver disease (MAFLD) have shown associations between fatty liver disease and other metabolic diseases. Unlike the exclusionary diagnostic criteria of NAFLD, MAFLD diagnosis is based on the presence of metabolic dysregulation in fatty liver disease. Renaming NAFLD as MAFLD also introduced simpler diagnostic criteria. In 2023, a new nomenclature, steatotic liver disease (SLD), was proposed. Similar to MAFLD, SLD diagnosis is based on the presence of hepatic steatosis with at least one cardiometabolic dysfunction. SLD is categorized into metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD), metabolic dysfunction and alcohol-related/-associated liver disease, alcoholrelated liver disease, specific etiology SLD, and cryptogenic SLD. The term MASLD has been adopted by a number of leading national and international societies due to its concise diagnostic criteria, exclusion of other concomitant liver diseases, and lack of stigmatizing terms. This article reviews the diagnostic criteria, clinical relevance, and differences among NAFLD, MAFLD, and MASLD from a diabetologist’s perspective and provides a rationale for adopting SLD/MASLD in the Fatty Liver Research Group of the Korean Diabetes Association.