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.

Recent amendments to regulatory frameworks have placed a greater emphasis on the utilization of in vitro testing platforms for preclinical drug evaluations and toxicity assessments. This requires advanced tissue models capable of accurately replicating liver functions for drug efficacy and toxicity predictions. Liver organoids, derived from human cell sources, offer promise as a reliable platform for drug evaluation. However, there is a lack of standardized quality evaluation methods, which hinders their regulatory acceptance. This paper proposes comprehensive quality standards tailored for liver organoids, addressing cell source validation, organoid generation, and functional assessment. These guidelines aim to enhance reproducibility and accuracy in toxicity testing, thereby accelerating the adoption of organoids as a reliable alternative or complementary tool to animal testing in drug development. The quality standards include criteria for size, cellular composition, gene expression, and functional assays, thus ensuring a robust hepatotoxicity testing platform.

Gastric cancer is one of the most common cancers in Korea and the world. Since 2004, this is the 4th gastric cancer guideline published in Korea which is the revised version of previous evidence-based approach in 2018. Current guideline is a collaborative work of the interdisciplinary working group including experts in the field of gastric surgery, gastroenterology, endoscopy, medical oncology, abdominal radiology, pathology, nuclear medicine, radiation oncology and guideline development methodology. Total of 33 key questions were updated or proposed after a collaborative review by the working group and 40 statements were developed according to the systematic review using the MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library and KoreaMed database. The level of evidence and the grading of recommendations were categorized according to the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation proposition. Evidence level, benefit, harm, and clinical applicability was considered as the significant factors for recommendation. The working group reviewed recommendations and discussed for consensus. In the earlier part, general consideration discusses screening, diagnosis and staging of endoscopy, pathology, radiology, and nuclear medicine. Flowchart is depicted with statements which is supported by meta-analysis and references. Since clinical trial and systematic review was not suitable for postoperative oncologic and nutritional follow-up, working group agreed to conduct a nationwide survey investigating the clinical practice of all tertiary or general hospitals in Korea. The purpose of this survey was to provide baseline information on follow up. Herein we present a multidisciplinary-evidence based gastric cancer guideline.

Purpose: This study aimed to conduct a comparison between 2D thin section intermediate-weighted Dixon turbo spin echo (TSE), 3D intermediate-weighted SPACE (sampling perfection with application-optimized contrasts using flip angle evolutions) TSE, and 2D fat-suppressed T2-weighted TSE in terms of their image quality and diagnostic performance for ankle ligament evaluation. Materials and Methods: Thirty-eight ankle MRI studies were retrospectively analyzed. The signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) of the multiplanar reformation images of the sequences were obtained. For each sequence, the subjective image quality and the diagnostic performance for ankle ligament tear were analyzed. Results: The Dixon demonstrated the highest CNR both between ligament and fluid and between ligament and bone marrow. The 3D SPACE showed the highest SNR of the ligament. Regarding subjective image quality, it was significantly higher in the T2-weighted image than it was in the SPACE (p < 0.05), while there was no significant difference between the Dixon and the SPACE. The Dixon showed the highest sensitivity for anterior talofibular ligament (ATFL) tear (80.0%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 64.4–92.3) and deep deltoid ligament (DL) tear (86.4%; 95% CI, 65.1–97.1), and it showed the highest specificity for ATFL tear (70.2%; 95% CI, 59.3–79.7). The interobserver agreement was moderate to good (intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC], 0.50–0.93) in most cases except for the SNR of deep DL (ICC of 0.35–0.62). Conclusion For ankle ligament evaluation, the 2D thin section Dixon provides adequate image quality with high SNR and CNR and the highest sensitivity for detecting tears.

Carbon monoxide (CO) can cause a variety of electrocardiogram (ECG) changes. The Brugada ECG patterns are very rare in CO poisoning cases. We detected a patient with a CO-induced type 1 Brugada ECG pattern with chest pain. The panel genetic test and echocardiogram revealed normal findings. The Brugada phenocopy gradually improved over 3 days. We reviewed the literature and suggested possible mechanisms.

PURPOSE: Nutritional therapy (NT), such as enteral nutrition (EN) or parenteral nutrition (PN), is essential for the malnourished patients. Although the complications related to NT has been well described, multicenter data on symptoms in the patients with receiving NT during hospitalization are still lacking. METHODS: Nutrition support team (NST) consultations, on which NT-related complications were described, were collected retrospectively for one year. The inclusion criteria were patients who were (1) older than 18 years, (2) hospitalized, and (3) receiving EN or PN at the time of NST consultation. The patients' demographics (age, sex, body mass index [BMI]), type of NT and type of complication were collected. To compare the severity of each complication, the intensive care unit (ICU) admission, hospital stay, and type of discharge were also collected. RESULTS: A total of 14,600 NT-related complications were collected from 13,418 cases from 27 hospitals in Korea. The mean age and BMI were 65.4 years and 21.8 kg/m2. The complications according to the type of NT, calorie deficiency (32.4%, n=1,229) and diarrhea (21.6%, n=820) were most common in EN. Similarly, calorie deficiency (56.8%, n=4,030) and GI problem except for diarrhea (8.6%, n=611) were most common in PN. Regarding the clinical outcomes, 18.7% (n=2,158) finally expired, 58.1% (n=7,027) were admitted to ICU, and the mean hospital days after NT-related complication were 31.3 days. Volume overload (odds ratio [OR]=3.48) and renal abnormality (OR=2.50) were closely associated with hospital death; hyperammonemia (OR=3.09) and renal abnormality (OR=2.77) were associated with ICU admission; “micronutrient and vitamin deficiency” (geometric mean [GM]=2.23) and volume overload (GM=1.61) were associated with a longer hospital stay. CONCLUSION: NT may induce or be associated with several complications, and some of them may seriously affect the patient's outcome. NST personnel in each hospital should be aware of each problem during nutritional support.
Adult ; Body Mass Index ; Demography ; Diarrhea ; Enteral Nutrition ; Hospitalization ; Humans ; Hyperammonemia ; Intensive Care Units ; Korea ; Length of Stay ; Multicenter Studies as Topic ; Nutrition Therapy ; Nutritional Support ; Parenteral Nutrition ; Referral and Consultation ; Retrospective Studies ; Vitamins

BACKGROUND: Malnutrition is associated with many adverse clinical outcomes. The present study aimed to identify the prevalence of malnutrition in hospitalized patients in Korea, evaluate the association between malnutrition and clinical outcomes, and ascertain the risk factors of malnutrition. METHODS: A multicenter cross-sectional study was performed with 300 patients recruited from among the patients admitted in 25 hospitals on January 6, 2014. Nutritional status was assessed by using the Subjective Global Assessment (SGA). Demographic characteristics and underlying diseases were compared according to nutritional status. Logistic regression analysis was performed to identify the risk factors of malnutrition. Clinical outcomes such as rate of admission in intensive care units, length of hospital stay, and survival rate were evaluated. RESULTS: The prevalence of malnutrition in the hospitalized patients was 22.0%. Old age (≥ 70 years), admission for medical treatment or diagnostic work-up, and underlying pulmonary or oncological disease were associated with malnutrition. Old age and admission for medical treatment or diagnostic work-up were identified to be risk factors of malnutrition in the multivariate analysis. Patients with malnutrition had longer hospital stay (SGA A = 7.63 ± 6.03 days, B = 9.02 ± 9.96 days, and C = 12.18 ± 7.24 days, P = 0.018) and lower 90-day survival rate (SGA A = 97.9%, B = 90.7%, and C = 58.3%, P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Malnutrition was common in hospitalized patients, and resulted in longer hospitalization and associated lower survival rate. The rate of malnutrition tended to be higher when the patient was older than 70 years old or hospitalized for medical treatment or diagnostic work-up compared to elective surgery.
Cross-Sectional Studies ; Hospitalization ; Humans ; Intensive Care Units ; Korea ; Length of Stay ; Logistic Models ; Malnutrition ; Multivariate Analysis ; Nutrition Assessment ; Nutritional Status ; Prevalence ; Risk Factors ; Survival Rate