Background: and Purpose: This clinical practice guideline provides evidence-based recommendations for treatment of dementia, focusing on cholinesterase inhibitors and N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) receptor antagonists for Alzheimer’s disease (AD) and other types of dementia. Methods: Using the Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcomes (PICO) framework, we developed key clinical questions and conducted systematic literature reviews. A multidisciplinary panel of experts, organized by the Korean Dementia Association, evaluated randomized controlled trials and observational studies. Recommendations were graded for evidence quality and strength using Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology. Results: Three main recommendations are presented: (1) For AD, cholinesterase inhibitors (donepezil, rivastigmine, galantamine) are strongly recommended for improving cognition and daily function based on moderate evidence; (2) Cholinesterase inhibitors are conditionally recommended for vascular dementia and Parkinson’s disease dementia, with a strong recommendation for Lewy body dementia; (3) For moderate to severe AD, NMDA receptor antagonist (memantine) is strongly recommended, demonstrating significant cognitive and functional improvements. Both drug classes showed favorable safety profiles with manageable side effects. Conclusions This guideline offers standardized, evidence-based pharmacologic recommendations for dementia management, with specific guidance on cholinesterase inhibitors and NMDA receptor antagonists. It aims to support clinical decision-making and improve patient outcomes in dementia care. Further updates will address emerging treatments, including amyloid-targeting therapies, to reflect advances in dementia management.

Background: and Purpose: This clinical practice guideline provides evidence-based recommendations for treatment of dementia, focusing on cholinesterase inhibitors and N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) receptor antagonists for Alzheimer’s disease (AD) and other types of dementia. Methods: Using the Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcomes (PICO) framework, we developed key clinical questions and conducted systematic literature reviews. A multidisciplinary panel of experts, organized by the Korean Dementia Association, evaluated randomized controlled trials and observational studies. Recommendations were graded for evidence quality and strength using Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology. Results: Three main recommendations are presented: (1) For AD, cholinesterase inhibitors (donepezil, rivastigmine, galantamine) are strongly recommended for improving cognition and daily function based on moderate evidence; (2) Cholinesterase inhibitors are conditionally recommended for vascular dementia and Parkinson’s disease dementia, with a strong recommendation for Lewy body dementia; (3) For moderate to severe AD, NMDA receptor antagonist (memantine) is strongly recommended, demonstrating significant cognitive and functional improvements. Both drug classes showed favorable safety profiles with manageable side effects. Conclusions This guideline offers standardized, evidence-based pharmacologic recommendations for dementia management, with specific guidance on cholinesterase inhibitors and NMDA receptor antagonists. It aims to support clinical decision-making and improve patient outcomes in dementia care. Further updates will address emerging treatments, including amyloid-targeting therapies, to reflect advances in dementia management.

Background: and Purpose: This clinical practice guideline provides evidence-based recommendations for treatment of dementia, focusing on cholinesterase inhibitors and N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) receptor antagonists for Alzheimer’s disease (AD) and other types of dementia. Methods: Using the Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcomes (PICO) framework, we developed key clinical questions and conducted systematic literature reviews. A multidisciplinary panel of experts, organized by the Korean Dementia Association, evaluated randomized controlled trials and observational studies. Recommendations were graded for evidence quality and strength using Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology. Results: Three main recommendations are presented: (1) For AD, cholinesterase inhibitors (donepezil, rivastigmine, galantamine) are strongly recommended for improving cognition and daily function based on moderate evidence; (2) Cholinesterase inhibitors are conditionally recommended for vascular dementia and Parkinson’s disease dementia, with a strong recommendation for Lewy body dementia; (3) For moderate to severe AD, NMDA receptor antagonist (memantine) is strongly recommended, demonstrating significant cognitive and functional improvements. Both drug classes showed favorable safety profiles with manageable side effects. Conclusions This guideline offers standardized, evidence-based pharmacologic recommendations for dementia management, with specific guidance on cholinesterase inhibitors and NMDA receptor antagonists. It aims to support clinical decision-making and improve patient outcomes in dementia care. Further updates will address emerging treatments, including amyloid-targeting therapies, to reflect advances in dementia management.

Background: and Purpose: This clinical practice guideline provides evidence-based recommendations for treatment of dementia, focusing on cholinesterase inhibitors and N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) receptor antagonists for Alzheimer’s disease (AD) and other types of dementia. Methods: Using the Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcomes (PICO) framework, we developed key clinical questions and conducted systematic literature reviews. A multidisciplinary panel of experts, organized by the Korean Dementia Association, evaluated randomized controlled trials and observational studies. Recommendations were graded for evidence quality and strength using Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology. Results: Three main recommendations are presented: (1) For AD, cholinesterase inhibitors (donepezil, rivastigmine, galantamine) are strongly recommended for improving cognition and daily function based on moderate evidence; (2) Cholinesterase inhibitors are conditionally recommended for vascular dementia and Parkinson’s disease dementia, with a strong recommendation for Lewy body dementia; (3) For moderate to severe AD, NMDA receptor antagonist (memantine) is strongly recommended, demonstrating significant cognitive and functional improvements. Both drug classes showed favorable safety profiles with manageable side effects. Conclusions This guideline offers standardized, evidence-based pharmacologic recommendations for dementia management, with specific guidance on cholinesterase inhibitors and NMDA receptor antagonists. It aims to support clinical decision-making and improve patient outcomes in dementia care. Further updates will address emerging treatments, including amyloid-targeting therapies, to reflect advances in dementia management.

Objective: Classification guides the surgical approach and predicts prognosis. However, existing classifications of spinal schwannomas often result in a high ‘unclassified’ rate. Here, we aim to develop a new comprehensive classification for spinal schwannomas based on their presumed origin. We compared the new classification with the existing classifications regarding the rate of ‘unclassified’. Finally, we assessed the surgical strategies, outcomes, and complications according to each type of the new classification. Methods: A new classification with 9 types was created by analyzing the anatomy of spinal nerves and the origin of significant tumor portions and cystic components in preoperative magnetic resonance images. A total of 482 patients with spinal schwannomas were analyzed to compare our new classification with the existing classifications. We defined ‘unclassified’ as the inability to classify a patient with spinal schwannoma using the classification criteria. Surgical approaches and outcomes were also aligned with our new classification. Results: Our classification uniquely reported no ‘unclassified’ cases, indicating full applicability. Also, the classification has demonstrated usefulness in predicting the surgical outcome with the approach planned. Gross total removal rates reached 88.0% overall, with type 1 and type 2 tumors at 95.3% and 96.0% respectively. The approach varied with tumor type, with laminectomy predominantly used for types 1, 2, and 9, and facetectomy with posterior fixation used for type 3 tumors. Conclusion The new classification for spinal schwannomas based on presumed origin is applicable to all spinal schwannomas. It could help plan a surgical approach and predict its outcome, compared with existing classifications.

Objective: Classification guides the surgical approach and predicts prognosis. However, existing classifications of spinal schwannomas often result in a high ‘unclassified’ rate. Here, we aim to develop a new comprehensive classification for spinal schwannomas based on their presumed origin. We compared the new classification with the existing classifications regarding the rate of ‘unclassified’. Finally, we assessed the surgical strategies, outcomes, and complications according to each type of the new classification. Methods: A new classification with 9 types was created by analyzing the anatomy of spinal nerves and the origin of significant tumor portions and cystic components in preoperative magnetic resonance images. A total of 482 patients with spinal schwannomas were analyzed to compare our new classification with the existing classifications. We defined ‘unclassified’ as the inability to classify a patient with spinal schwannoma using the classification criteria. Surgical approaches and outcomes were also aligned with our new classification. Results: Our classification uniquely reported no ‘unclassified’ cases, indicating full applicability. Also, the classification has demonstrated usefulness in predicting the surgical outcome with the approach planned. Gross total removal rates reached 88.0% overall, with type 1 and type 2 tumors at 95.3% and 96.0% respectively. The approach varied with tumor type, with laminectomy predominantly used for types 1, 2, and 9, and facetectomy with posterior fixation used for type 3 tumors. Conclusion The new classification for spinal schwannomas based on presumed origin is applicable to all spinal schwannomas. It could help plan a surgical approach and predict its outcome, compared with existing classifications.

Background: and Purpose: Dementia subtypes, including Alzheimer’s dementia (AD), dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB), and frontotemporal dementia (FTD), pose diagnostic challenges. This review examines the effectiveness of 18 F-Fluorodeoxyglucose Positron Emission Tomography ( 18 F-FDG PET) in differentiating these subtypes for precise treatment and management. Methods: A systematic review following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines was conducted using databases like PubMed and Embase to identify studies on the diagnostic utility of 18 F-FDG PET in dementia. The search included studies up to November 16, 2022, focusing on peer-reviewed journals and applying the goldstandard clinical diagnosis for dementia subtypes. Results: From 12,815 articles, 14 were selected for final analysis. For AD versus FTD, the sensitivity was 0.96 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.88–0.98) and specificity was 0.84 (95% CI, 0.70–0.92). In the case of AD versus DLB, 18F-FDG PET showed a sensitivity of 0.93 (95% CI 0.88-0.98) and specificity of 0.92 (95% CI, 0.70–0.92). Lastly, when differentiating AD from non-AD dementias, the sensitivity was 0.86 (95% CI, 0.80–0.91) and the specificity was 0.88 (95% CI, 0.80–0.91). The studies mostly used case-control designs with visual and quantitative assessments. Conclusions 18 F-FDG PET exhibits high sensitivity and specificity in differentiating dementia subtypes, particularly AD, FTD, and DLB. This method, while not a standalone diagnostic tool, significantly enhances diagnostic accuracy in uncertain cases, complementing clinical assessments and structural imaging.

Purpose: This study aimed to investigate the recurrence patterns in patients who underwent curative surgery for gastric cancer (GC) and analyze their prognostic value for post-recurrence survival (PRS). Materials and Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of 204 patients who experienced GC recurrence following curative gastrectomy for GC at a single institution between January 2012 and December 2017. Specific recurrence patterns (lymph node, peritoneal, and hematogenous) and their multiplicity were analyzed as prognostic factors of PRS. Results: The median PRS of the 204 patients was 8.3 months (interquartile range [IQR]:3.2–17.4). For patients with a single recurrence pattern (n=164), the difference in each recurrence pattern did not show a significant prognostic value for PRS (lymph node vs.peritoneal, P=0.343; peritoneal vs. hematogenous, P=0.660; lymph node vs. hematogenous, P=0.822). However, the patients with a single recurrence pattern had significantly longer PRS than those with multiple recurrence patterns (median PRS: 10.2 months [IQR: 3.7–18.7] vs. 3.9 months [IQR: 1.8–10.4]; P=0.037). In the multivariate analysis, multiple recurrence patterns emerged as independent prognostic factors for poor PRS (hazard ratio, 1.553; 95% confidence interval, 1.092–2.208; P=0.014) along with serosal invasion, recurrence within 1 year after gastrectomy, and the absence of post-recurrence chemotherapy. Conclusions Regardless of the specific recurrence pattern, multiple recurrence patterns emerged as independent prognostic factors for poor PRS compared with a single recurrence pattern.

Purpose: The original eCura system was designed to stratify the risk of lymph node metastasis (LNM) after endoscopic resection (ER) in patients with early gastric cancer (EGC).We assessed the effectiveness of a modified eCura system for reflecting the characteristics of undifferentiated-type (UD)-EGC. Materials and Methods: Six hundred thirty-four patients who underwent non-curative ER for UD-EGC and received either additional surgery (radical surgery group; n=270) or no further treatment (no additional treatment group; n=364) from 18 institutions between 2005 and 2015 were retrospectively included in this study. The eCuraU system assigned 1 point each for tumors >20 mm in size, ulceration, positive vertical margin, and submucosal invasion <500 µm; 2 points for submucosal invasion ≥500 µm; and 3 points for lymphovascular invasion. Results: LNM rates in the radical surgery group were 1.1%, 5.4%, and 13.3% for the low-(0–1 point), intermediate- (2–3 points), and high-risk (4–8 points), respectively (P-fortrend<0.001). The eCuraU system showed a significantly higher probability of identifying patients with LNM as high-risk than the eCura system (66.7% vs. 22.2%; McNemar P<0.001).In the no additional treatment group, overall survival (93.4%, 87.2%, and 67.6% at 5 years) and cancer-specific survival (99.6%, 98.9%, and 92.9% at 5 years) differed significantly among the low-, intermediate-, and high-risk categories, respectively (both P<0.001). In the high-risk category, surgery outperformed no treatment in terms of overall mortality (hazard ratio, 3.26; P=0.015). Conclusions The eCuraU system stratified the risk of LNM in patients with UD-EGC after ER. It is strongly recommended that high-risk patients undergo additional surgery.

Purpose: Studies on the appropriate amount of anti-adhesive agents for preventing postoperative adhesion are lacking. This animal study aimed to investigate the distribution of an anti-adhesive agent in the abdominal cavity and estimate the necessary amount to cover the entire cavity. Methods: Fluorescent dye Flamma-552 was conjugated to Guardix-sol to create Guardix-Flamma, which was laparoscopically applied to the abdominal cavity of two 10-kg pigs in different amounts: 15 mL for G1 and 35 mL for G2. After 24 hours, the distribution of Guardix-Flamma was examined under the near-infrared mode of the laparoscope, and the thickness was measured in tissues from the omentum, small, and large intestine by immunohistochemistry. Results: The average area of the abdominal cavity in 10 kg pigs was 2,755 cm2. Guardix-Flamma fluorescence was detected in the greater omentum, ascites in the pelvis, and right quadrant area in G1, whereas in G2, it was detected everywhere. On average, the total thickness of G1 and G2 were 12.68 ± 9.80 μm and 18.16 ± 15.57 μm, respectively. Guardix-Flamma thickness applied to the omentum, small, and large intestines of G2 were 1.31-, 1.45-, and 1.49-times thicker than those of G1, respectively, and were all statistically significant (P < 0.05). Conclusion The entire abdominal cavity of the 10 kg pig was not evenly covered with 15 mL of Guardix. Although 35 mL of Guardix is sufficient to cover the same area with an average thickness of 18 µm, further studies should evaluate the minimum thickness required for an effective anti-adhesive function.