A rapid, non-invasive, clinical surveillance for CachExia, sarcopenia, portal hypertension, and hepatocellular carcinoma in end-stage liver disease: the ACCESS-ESLD study protocol.

BACKGROUND: Liver cirrhosis, the advanced stage of many chronic liver diseases, is associated with escalated risks of liver-related complications like decompensation and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Morbidity and mortality in cirrhosis patients are linked to portal hypertension, sarcopenia, and hepatocellular carcinoma. Although conventional cirrhosis management centered on treating complications, contemporary approaches prioritize preemptive measures. This study aims to formulate novel blood- and imaging-centric methodologies for monitoring liver cirrhosis patients. METHODS: In this prospective study, 150 liver cirrhosis patients will be enrolled from three Swedish liver clinics. Their conditions will be assessed through extensive blood-based markers and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). The MRI protocol encompasses body composition profile with Muscle Assement Score, portal flow assessment, magnet resonance elastography, and a abbreviated MRI for HCC screening. Evaluation of lifestyle, muscular strength, physical performance, body composition, and quality of life will be conducted. Additionally, DNA, serum, and plasma biobanking will facilitate future investigations. DISCUSSION: The anticipated outcomes involve the identification and validation of non-invasive blood- and imaging-oriented biomarkers, enhancing the care paradigm for liver cirrhosis patients. Notably, the temporal evolution of these biomarkers will be crucial for understanding dynamic changes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov, registration identifier NCT05502198. Registered on 16 August 2022. Link: https://classic. CLINICALTRIALS: gov/ct2/show/NCT05502198 .

Malignancy in elective cholecystectomy due to gallbladder polyps or thickened gallbladder wall: a single-centre experience.

INTRODUCTION: Gallbladder cancer is a rare but aggressive malignancy. Surgical resection is recommended for gallbladder polyps ≥10 mm. For gallbladder wall thickening, resection is recommended if malignancy cannot be excluded. The incidence of gallbladder malignancy after cholecystectomy with indications of polyps or wall thickening in the Swedish population is not known. MATERIAL/METHODS: A retrospective study was performed at Linköping University Hospital and included patients who underwent cholecystectomy 2010 - 2018. All cholecystectomies performed due to gallbladder polyps or gallbladder wall thickening without other preoperative malignant signs were identified. Preoperative radiological examinations were re-analysed by a single radiologist. Medical records and histopathology reports were analysed. RESULTS: In all, 102 patients were included, of whom 65 were diagnosed with gallbladder polyps and 37 with gallbladder wall thickening. In each group, one patient (1.5% and 2.7% in each group) had gallbladder malignancy ≥ pT1b.Two (3.1%) and three (8.1%) patients with gallbladder malignancy < T1b were identified in each group. DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION: This study indicates that the incidence of malignancy is low without other malignant signs beyond gallbladder polyps and/or gallbladder wall thickening. We propose that these patients should be discussed at a multidisciplinary tumour board. If the polyp is 10-15 mm or if the gallbladder wall is thickened but no other malignant signs are observed, cholecystectomy can be safely performed by an experienced general surgeon at a general surgery unit. If the histopathology indicates ≥ pT1b, the patient should be referred immediately to a hepatobiliary centre for liver and lymph node resection.

Radiological assessment of local resectability status in patients with pancreatic cancer: Interreader agreement and reader performance in two different classification systems.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the interreader agreement and reader performance in the evaluation of patients with pancreatic cancer (PC) in two classification systems of local resectability status prior to initiation of therapy, namely the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) and Karolinska classification system (KCS). METHODS: In this ethics review board-approved retrospective study, six radiologists independently evaluated pancreatic CT-examinations of 30 patients randomly selected from a tertiary referral centre's multidisciplinary tumour board database. Based on well-defined criteria of tumour-vessel relationship, each patient was assigned to one of three NCCN and six KCS categories. We assessed the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and compared the percentages of correct tumour classification of the six readers in both systems (Chi-square test; a P-value <0.05 was considered significant). The standard of reference was a consensus evaluation of CT-examinations by three readers not involved in the image analysis. RESULTS: The ICC for NCCN and KCS was 0.82 and 0.84, respectively (very strong agreement). The percentages of correct tumour classification at NCCN and KCS were 53-83% and 30-57%, respectively, with no statistically significant differences in the overall reader comparison per classification system. In pair-wise comparison between readers for NCCN/KCS, there were statistically significant differences between reader 5 vs. readers 4 (P = 0.012) and 3 (P = 0.045)/ reader 5 vs. reader 4 (P = 0.037). CONCLUSION: Interreader agreement in both PC classification systems is very strong. NCCN may be advantageous in terms of reader performance compared to KCS.