Long-Term Impact of Iatrogenic Bile Duct Injury.

BACKGROUND: Bile duct injury (BDI) is a devastating complication following cholecystectomy. After initial management of BDI, patients stay at risk for late complications including anastomotic strictures, recurrent cholangitis, and secondary biliary cirrhosis. METHODS: We provide a comprehensive overview of current literature on the long-term outcome of BDI. Considering the availability of only limited data regarding treatment of anastomotic strictures in literature, we also retrospectively analyzed patients with anastomotic strictures following a hepaticojejunostomy (HJ) from a prospectively maintained database of 836 BDI patients. RESULTS: Although clinical outcomes of endoscopic, radiologic, and surgical treatment of BDI are good with success rates of around 90%, quality of life (QoL) may be impaired even after "clinically successful" treatment. Following surgical treatment, the incidence of anastomotic strictures varies from 5 to 69%, with most studies reporting incidences around 10-20%. The median time to stricture formation varies between 11 and 30 months. Long-term BDI-related mortality varies between 1.8 and 4.6%. Of 91 patients treated in our center for anastomotic strictures after HJ, 81 (89%) were treated by percutaneous balloon dilatation, with a long-term success rate of 77%. Twenty-four patients primarily or secondarily underwent surgical revision, with recurrent strictures occurring in 21%. CONCLUSIONS: The long-term impact of BDI is considerable, both in terms of clinical outcomes and QoL. Treatment should be performed in tertiary expert centers to optimize outcomes. Patients require a long-term follow-up to detect anastomotic strictures. Strictures should initially be managed by percutaneous dilatation, with surgical revision as a next step in treatment.

Impact of expanding indications on surgical and oncological outcome in 1434 consecutive pancreatoduodenectomies.

BACKGROUND: Over the years, high-volume pancreatic centers expanded their indications for pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) but with unknown impact on surgical and oncological outcome. METHODS: All consecutive PDs performed between 1992-2017 in a single pancreatic center were identified from a prospectively maintained database and analyzed according to three time periods. RESULTS: In total, 1434 patients underwent PD. Over time, more elderly patients underwent PD (P < 0.001) with increased use of vascular resection (10.4 to 16.0%, P < 0.001). In patients with cancer (n = 1049, 74.8%), the proportion pT3/T4 tumors increased from 54.3% to 70.6% over time (P < 0.001). The postoperative pancreatic fistula (16.0%), postpancreatectomy hemorrhage (8.0%) and delayed gastric emptying (31.0%) rate did not reduce over time, whereas median length of stay decreased from 16 to 12 days (P < 0.001). The overall failure-to-rescue rate (6.9%) and in-hospital mortality (2.2%) remained stable (P = 0.89 and P = 0.45). In 523 patients with pancreatic cancer (36.5%), the use of both adjuvant and neoadjuvant chemotherapy increased over time (both p<0.001), and the five-year overall survival improved from 11.0% to 17.4% (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In a period where indications for PD expanded, with more elderly patients, more advanced cancers and increased use of vascular resections, surgical outcome remained favorable and five-year survival for pancreatic cancer improved.

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy versus percutaneous catheter drainage for acute cholecystitis in high risk patients (CHOCOLATE): multicentre randomised clinical trial.

OBJECTIVE: To assess whether laparoscopic cholecystectomy is superior to percutaneous catheter drainage in high risk patients with acute calculous cholecystitis. DESIGN: Multicentre, randomised controlled, superiority trial. SETTING: 11 hospitals in the Netherlands, February 2011 to January 2016. PARTICIPANTS: 142 high risk patients with acute calculous cholecystitis were randomly allocated to laparoscopic cholecystectomy (n=66) or to percutaneous catheter drainage (n=68). High risk was defined as an acute physiological assessment and chronic health evaluation II (APACHE II) score of 7 or more. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary endpoints were death within one year and the occurrence of major complications, defined as infectious and cardiopulmonary complications within one month, need for reintervention (surgical, radiological, or endoscopic that had to be related to acute cholecystitis) within one year, or recurrent biliary disease within one year. RESULTS: The trial was concluded early after a planned interim analysis. The rate of death did not differ between the laparoscopic cholecystectomy and percutaneous catheter drainage group (3% v 9%, P=0.27), but major complications occurred in eight of 66 patients (12%) assigned to cholecystectomy and in 44 of 68 patients (65%) assigned to percutaneous drainage (risk ratio 0.19, 95% confidence interval 0.10 to 0.37; P<0.001). In the drainage group 45 patients (66%) required a reintervention compared with eight patients (12%) in the cholecystectomy group (P<0.001). Recurrent biliary disease occurred more often in the percutaneous drainage group (53% v 5%, P<0.001), and the median length of hospital stay was longer (9 days v 5 days, P<0.001). CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic cholecystectomy compared with percutaneous catheter drainage reduced the rate of major complications in high risk patients with acute cholecystitis. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Dutch Trial Register NTR2666.

Endoscopic versus percutaneous biliary drainage in patients with resectable perihilar cholangiocarcinoma: a multicentre, randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: In patients with resectable perihilar cholangiocarcinoma, biliary drainage is recommended to treat obstructive jaundice and optimise the clinical condition before liver resection. Little evidence exists on the preferred initial method of biliary drainage. We therefore investigated the incidence of severe drainage-related complications of endoscopic biliary drainage or percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage in patients with potentially resectable perihilar cholangiocarcinoma. METHODS: We did a multicentre, randomised controlled trial at four academic centres in the Netherlands. Patients who were aged at least 18 years with potentially resectable perihilar cholangiocarcinoma requiring major liver resection, and biliary obstruction of the future liver remnant (defined as a bilirubin concentration of >50 µmol/L [2·9 mg/dL]), were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive endoscopic biliary drainage or percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage through the use of computer-generated allocation. Randomisation, done by the trial coordinator, was stratified for previous (attempted) biliary drainage, the extent of bile duct involvement, and enrolling centre. Patients were enrolled by clinicians of the participating centres. The primary outcome was the number of severe complications between randomisation and surgery in the intention-to-treat population. The trial was registered at the Netherlands National Trial Register, number NTR4243. FINDINGS: From Sept 26, 2013, to April 29, 2016, 261 patients were screened for participation, and 54 eligible patients were randomly assigned to endoscopic biliary drainage (n=27) or percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (n=27). The study was prematurely closed because of higher mortality in the percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage group (11 [41%] of 27 patients) than in the endoscopic biliary drainage group (three [11%] of 27 patients; relative risk 3·67, 95% CI 1·15-11·69; p=0·03). Three of the 11 deaths among patients in the percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage group occurred before surgery. The proportion of patients with severe preoperative drainage-related complications was similar between the groups (17 [63%] patients in the percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage group vs 18 [67%] in the endoscopic biliary drainage group; relative risk 0·94, 95% CI 0·64-1·40). 16 (59%) patients in the percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage group and ten (37%) patients in the endoscopic biliary drainage group developed preoperative cholangitis (p=0·1). 15 (56%) patients required additional percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage after endoscopic biliary drainage, whereas only one (4%) patient required endoscopic biliary drainage after percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage. INTERPRETATION: The study was prematurely stopped because of higher all-cause mortality in the percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage group. Post-drainage complications were similar between groups, but the data should be interpreted with caution because of the small sample size. The results call for further prospective studies and reconsideration of indications and strategy towards biliary drainage in this complex disease. FUNDING: Dutch Cancer Foundation.

Pancreatoduodenectomy with colon resection for pancreatic cancer: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Radical resection of advanced pancreatic cancer may occasionally require a simultaneous colon resection. The risks and benefits of this combined procedure are largely unknown. This systematic review aimed to assess short and long term outcome after pancreatoduodenectomy with colon resection (PD-colon) for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). METHODS: A systematic literature search was performed in PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library for studies published between 1994 and 2017 concerning PD-colon for PDAC. RESULTS: After screening 2038 articles, 5 articles with a total of 181 patients undergoing PD-colon were eligible for inclusion. Included studies showed a relatively low risk of bias. The pooled complication rate was 73% (95% CI 61-84) including a pooled colonic anastomotic leak rate of 5.5%. Pooled mortality was 10% (95% CI 6-15). Pooled mean survival (data from 86 patients) was 18 months (95% CI 13-23) with pooled 3- and 5-year survival of 31% (95% CI 20-72) and 19% (95% CI 6-38). CONCLUSION: Based on the available data, PD-colon for PDAC seems to be associated with an increased morbidity and mortality but with survival comparable with standard PD in selected patients. Future large series are needed to allow for better patient selection for PD-colon.

Long-term follow-up and risk factors for strictures after hepaticojejunostomy for bile duct injury: An analysis of surgical and percutaneous treatment in a tertiary center.

BACKGROUND: Hepaticojejunostomy is commonly indicated for major bile duct injury after cholecystectomy. The debate about the timing of hepaticojejunostomy for bile duct injury persists since data on postoperative outcomes, including postoperative strictures, are lacking. The aim of this study was to analyze short- and long-term outcomes of hepaticojejunostomy for bile duct injury, including risk factors for strictures. METHOD: Analysis of outcome of hepaticojejunostomy in bile duct injury patients referred to a multidisciplinary team. RESULTS: Between the years1991 and 2016, 281 patients underwent hepaticojejunostomy for bile duct injury. Clavien-Dindo grade III complications occurred in 31 patients (11%) and 90-day mortality occurred in 2 patients (0.7%). After a median follow-up of 10.5 years (interquartile range 6.7-14.8 years), clinically relevant strictures were found in 37 patients (13.2%). Strictures were treated with percutaneous dilatation in 33 patients (89.2%), and 4 patients (1.4%) were reoperated. The stricture rate in patients undergoing hepaticojejunostomy <14 days, between 14-90 days, and >90 days after bile duct injury was 15.8%, 18.7%, and 9.9%, respectively. The stricture rate for early versus intermediate and late repair did not differ (P = 0.766 and 0.431, respectively). The stricture rate for repair after 14-90 days, however, was higher compared with repair >90 days after bile duct injury (P = 0.045). In multivariable analysis male gender was the only independent variable associated with stricture formation (OR 6.7, 95% CI 1.8-25.4, P = 0.005). CONCLUSION: Hepaticojejunostomy is a relatively safe treatment of bile duct injury. Timing of surgery and intermediate repair affect long-term stricture rate; most anastomotic strictures can be treated successfully with percutaneous dilation.

Percutaneous-endoscopic rendezvous procedure for the management of bile duct injuries after cholecystectomy: short- and long-term outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Bile duct injury (BDI) remains a daunting complication of laparoscopic cholecystectomy. In patients with complex BDI, a percutaneous-endoscopic rendezvous procedure may be required to establish bile duct continuity. The aim of this study was to assess short- and long-term outcomes of the rendezvous procedure. METHODS: All consecutive patients with BDI referred to our tertiary referral center between 1995 and 2016 were analyzed. A rendezvous procedure was performed when endoscopic or radiologic intervention failed, and when deemed feasible by a dedicated multidisciplinary team including hepatopancreaticobiliary surgeons, gastrointestinal endoscopists, and interventional radiologists. Classification of BDI, technical success of the rendezvous procedure, procedure-related adverse events, and outcomes were assessed. RESULTS: Among a total of 812 patients, rendezvous was performed in 47 (6 %), 31 (66 %) of whom were diagnosed with complete transection of the bile duct (Amsterdam type D/Strasberg type E injury). The primary success rate of rendezvous was 94 % (44 /47 patients). Overall morbidity was 18 % (10 /55 procedures). No life-threatening adverse events or 90-day mortality occurred. After a median follow-up of 40 months (interquartile range 23 - 54 months), rendezvous was the final successful treatment in 26 /47 patients (55 %). In 14 /47 patients (30 %), rendezvous acted as a bridge to surgery, with hepaticojejunostomy being chosen either primarily or secondarily to treat refractory or relapsing stenosis. CONCLUSIONS: In experienced hands, rendezvous was a safe procedure, with a long-term success rate of 55 %. When endoscopic or transhepatic interventions fail to restore bile duct continuity in patients with BDI, rendezvous should be considered, either as definitive treatment or as a bridge to elective surgery.

Tokyo Guidelines 2018: initial management of acute biliary infection and flowchart for acute cholangitis.

The initial management of patients with suspected acute biliary infection starts with the measurement of vital signs to assess whether or not the situation is urgent. If the case is judged to be urgent, initial medical treatment should be started immediately including respiratory/circulatory management if required, without waiting for a definitive diagnosis. The patient's medical history is then taken; an abdominal examination is performed; blood tests, urinalysis, and diagnostic imaging are carried out; and a diagnosis is made using the diagnostic criteria for cholangitis/cholecystitis. Once the diagnosis has been confirmed, initial medical treatment should be started immediately, severity should be assessed according to the severity grading criteria for acute cholangitis/cholecystitis, and the patient's general status should be evaluated. For mild acute cholangitis, in most cases initial treatment including antibiotics is sufficient, and most patients do not require biliary drainage. However, biliary drainage should be considered if a patient does not respond to initial treatment. For moderate acute cholangitis, early endoscopic or percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage is indicated. If the underlying etiology requires treatment, this should be provided after the patient's general condition has improved; endoscopic sphincterotomy and subsequent choledocholithotomy may be performed together with biliary drainage. For severe acute cholangitis, appropriate respiratory/circulatory management is required. Biliary drainage should be performed as soon as possible after the patient's general condition has been improved by initial treatment and respiratory/circulatory management. Free full articles and mobile app of TG18 are available at: http://www.jshbps.jp/modules/en/index.php?content_id=47. Related clinical questions and references are also included.

Long-term Impact of Bile Duct Injury on Morbidity, Mortality, Quality of Life, and Work Related Limitations.

OBJECTIVE: Assessment of long-term comprehensive outcome of multimodality treatment of bile duct injury (BDI) in terms of morbidity, mortality, quality of life (QoL), survival, and work related limitations. BACKGROUND: The impact of BDI on work ability is scarcely investigated. METHODS: BDI patients referred to a tertiary center after BDI were included (n = 800). QoL and work related limitations (HLQ) were compared with 175 control patients after uncomplicated laparoscopic cholecystectomy. RESULTS: The mean survival after BDI was 17.6 years (95% confidence interval, CI, 17.2-18.0 years). BDI related mortality was 3.5% (28/800). Corrected for sex, ASA classification, treatment and type of injury, survival is worse in male patients (hazard ratio, HR 1.50, 95% CI 1.01-2.33) and progressively worse with higher ASA classification (ASA2: 5.25 (2.94-9.37), ASA3: 18.1 (9.79-33.3). Patients treated surgically had a significantly better survival (HR: 0.45 (95% CI: 0.25-0.80). BDI patients reported a significantly worse physical QoL compared with the control group and worse disease specific QoL. Loss of productivity of work was significantly higher among BDI patients. There also was a significant hindrance in unpaid work. A higher number of bile duct injury patients were receiving disability benefits after long-term follow-up (34.9% vs 19.6%, P = 0.004). CONCLUSIONS: Reconstructive surgery in BDI patients is associated with improved survival. Although the clinical outcome of multidisciplinary treatment of bile duct injury is good, it is associated with a significant decrease in QoL, loss of productivity in both paid and unpaid work and high rates of disability benefits use.

Tokyo Guidelines 2018: management strategies for gallbladder drainage in patients with acute cholecystitis (with videos).

Since the publication of the Tokyo Guidelines in 2007 and their revision in 2013, appropriate management for acute cholecystitis has been more clearly established. Since the last revision, several manuscripts, especially for alternative endoscopic techniques, have been reported; therefore, additional evaluation and refinement of the 2013 Guidelines is required. We describe a standard drainage method for surgically high-risk patients with acute cholecystitis and the latest developed endoscopic gallbladder drainage techniques described in the updated Tokyo Guidelines 2018 (TG18). Our study confirmed that percutaneous transhepatic gallbladder drainage should be considered the first alternative to surgical intervention in surgically high-risk patients with acute cholecystitis. Also, endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage or endoscopic ultrasound-guided gallbladder drainage can be considered in high-volume institutes by skilled endoscopists. In the endoscopic transpapillary approach, either endoscopic naso-gallbladder drainage or gallbladder stenting can be considered for gallbladder drainage. We also introduce special techniques and the latest outcomes of endoscopic ultrasound-guided gallbladder drainage studies. Free full articles and mobile app of TG18 are available at: http://www.jshbps.jp/modules/en/index.php?content_id=47. Related clinical questions and references are also included.

Tokyo Guidelines 2018: surgical management of acute cholecystitis: safe steps in laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis (with videos).

In some cases, laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) may be difficult to perform in patients with acute cholecystitis (AC) with severe inflammation and fibrosis. The Tokyo Guidelines 2018 (TG18) expand the indications for LC under difficult conditions for each level of severity of AC. As a result of expanding the indications for LC to treat AC, it is absolutely necessary to avoid any increase in bile duct injury (BDI), particularly vasculo-biliary injury (VBI), which is known to occur at a certain rate in LC. Since the Tokyo Guidelines 2013 (TG13), an attempt has been made to assess intraoperative findings as objective indicators of surgical difficulty; based on expert consensus on these difficulty indicators, bail-out procedures (including conversion to open cholecystectomy) have been indicated for cases in which LC for AC is difficult to perform. A bail-out procedure should be chosen if, when the Calot's triangle is appropriately retracted and used as a landmark, a critical view of safety (CVS) cannot be achieved because of the presence of nondissectable scarring or severe fibrosis. We propose standardized safe steps for LC to treat AC. To achieve a CVS, it is vital to dissect at a location above (on the ventral side of) the imaginary line connecting the base of the left medial section (Segment 4) and the roof of Rouvière's sulcus and to fulfill the three criteria of CVS before dividing any structures. Achieving a CVS prevents the misidentification of the cystic duct and the common bile duct, which are most commonly confused. Free full articles and mobile app of TG18 are available at: http://www.jshbps.jp/modules/en/index.php?content_id=47. Related clinical questions and references are also included.

Tokyo Guidelines 2018: flowchart for the management of acute cholecystitis.

We propose a new flowchart for the treatment of acute cholecystitis (AC) in the Tokyo Guidelines 2018 (TG18). Grade III AC was not indicated for straightforward laparoscopic cholecystectomy (Lap-C). Following analysis of subsequent clinical investigations and drawing on Big Data in particular, TG18 proposes that some Grade III AC can be treated by Lap-C when performed at advanced centers with specialized surgeons experienced in this procedure and for patients that satisfy certain strict criteria. For Grade I, TG18 recommends early Lap-C if the patients meet the criteria of Charlson comorbidity index (CCI) ≤5 and American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status classification (ASA-PS) ≤2. For Grade II AC, if patients meet the criteria of CCI ≤5 and ASA-PS ≤2, TG18 recommends early Lap-C performed by experienced surgeons; and if not, after medical treatment and/or gallbladder drainage, Lap-C would be indicated. TG18 proposes that Lap-C is indicated in Grade III patients with strict criteria. These are that the patients have favorable organ system failure, and negative predictive factors, who meet the criteria of CCI ≤3 and ASA-PS ≤2 and who are being treated at an advanced center (where experienced surgeons practice). If the patient is not considered suitable for early surgery, TG18 recommends early/urgent biliary drainage followed by delayed Lap-C once the patient's overall condition has improved. Free full articles and mobile app of TG18 are available at: http://www.jshbps.jp/modules/en/index.php?content_id=47. Related clinical questions and references are also included.

Tokyo Guidelines 2018: antimicrobial therapy for acute cholangitis and cholecystitis.

Antimicrobial therapy is a mainstay of the management for patients with acute cholangitis and/or cholecystitis. The Tokyo Guidelines 2018 (TG18) provides recommendations for the appropriate use of antimicrobials for community-acquired and healthcare-associated infections. The listed agents are for empirical therapy provided before the infecting isolates are identified. Antimicrobial agents are listed by class-definitions and TG18 severity grade I, II, and III subcategorized by clinical settings. In the era of emerging and increasing antimicrobial resistance, monitoring and updating local antibiograms is underscored. Prudent antimicrobial usage and early de-escalation or termination of antimicrobial therapy are now important parts of decision-making. What is new in TG18 is that the duration of antimicrobial therapy for both acute cholangitis and cholecystitis is systematically reviewed. Prophylactic antimicrobial usage for elective endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography is no longer recommended and the section was deleted in TG18. Free full articles and mobile app of TG18 are available at: http://www.jshbps.jp/modules/en/index.php?content_id=47. Related clinical questions and references are also included.

Tokyo Guidelines 2018: management bundles for acute cholangitis and cholecystitis.

Management bundles that define items or procedures strongly recommended in clinical practice have been used in many guidelines in recent years. Application of these bundles facilitates the adaptation of guidelines and helps improve the prognosis of target diseases. In Tokyo Guidelines 2013 (TG13), we proposed management bundles for acute cholangitis and cholecystitis. Here, in Tokyo Guidelines 2018 (TG18), we redefine the management bundles for acute cholangitis and cholecystitis. Critical parts of the bundles in TG18 include the diagnostic process, severity assessment, transfer of patients if necessary, and therapeutic approach at each time point. Observance of these items and procedures should improve the prognosis of acute cholangitis and cholecystitis. Studies are now needed to evaluate the dissemination of these TG18 bundles and their effectiveness. Free full articles and mobile app of TG18 are available at: http://www.jshbps.jp/modules/en/index.php?content_id=47. Related clinical questions and references are also included.

Tokyo Guidelines 2018: diagnostic criteria and severity grading of acute cholangitis (with videos).

Although the diagnostic and severity grading criteria on the 2013 Tokyo Guidelines (TG13) are used worldwide as the primary standard for management of acute cholangitis (AC), they need to be validated through implementation and assessment in actual clinical practice. Here, we conduct a systematic review of the literature to validate the TG13 diagnostic and severity grading criteria for AC and propose TG18 criteria. While there is little evidence evaluating the TG13 criteria, they were validated through a large-scale case series study in Japan and Taiwan. Analyzing big data from this study confirmed that the diagnostic rate of AC based on the TG13 diagnostic criteria was higher than that based on the TG07 criteria, and that 30-day mortality in patients with a higher severity based on the TG13 severity grading criteria was significantly higher. Furthermore, a comparison of patients treated with early or urgent biliary drainage versus patients not treated this way showed no difference in 30-day mortality among patients with Grade I or Grade III AC, but significantly lower 30-day mortality in patients with Grade II AC who were treated with early or urgent biliary drainage. This suggests that the TG13 severity grading criteria can be used to identify Grade II patients whose prognoses may be improved through biliary drainage. The TG13 severity grading criteria may therefore be useful as an indicator for biliary drainage as well as a predictive factor when assessing the patient's prognosis. The TG13 diagnostic and severity grading criteria for AC can provide results quickly, are minimally invasive for the patients, and are inexpensive. We recommend that the TG13 criteria be adopted in the TG18 guidelines and used as standard practice in the clinical setting. Free full articles and mobile app of TG18 are available at: http://www.jshbps.jp/modules/en/index.php?content_id=47. Related clinical questions and references are also included.

Tokyo Guidelines 2018: diagnostic criteria and severity grading of acute cholecystitis (with videos).

The Tokyo Guidelines 2013 (TG13) for acute cholangitis and cholecystitis were globally disseminated and various clinical studies about the management of acute cholecystitis were reported by many researchers and clinicians from all over the world. The 1st edition of the Tokyo Guidelines 2007 (TG07) was revised in 2013. According to that revision, the TG13 diagnostic criteria of acute cholecystitis provided better specificity and higher diagnostic accuracy. Thorough our literature search about diagnostic criteria for acute cholecystitis, new and strong evidence that had been released from 2013 to 2017 was not found with serious and important issues about using TG13 diagnostic criteria of acute cholecystitis. On the other hand, the TG13 severity grading for acute cholecystitis has been validated in numerous studies. As a result of these reviews, the TG13 severity grading for acute cholecystitis was significantly associated with parameters including 30-day overall mortality, length of hospital stay, conversion rates to open surgery, and medical costs. In terms of severity assessment, breakthrough and intensive literature for revising severity grading was not reported. Consequently, TG13 diagnostic criteria and severity grading were judged from numerous validation studies as useful indicators in clinical practice and adopted as TG18/TG13 diagnostic criteria and severity grading of acute cholecystitis without any modification. Free full articles and mobile app of TG18 are available at: http://www.jshbps.jp/modules/en/index.php?content_id=47. Related clinical questions and references are also included.

Delphi consensus on bile duct injuries during laparoscopic cholecystectomy: an evolutionary cul-de-sac or the birth pangs of a new technical framework?

Bile duct injury (BDI) during laparoscopic cholecystectomy remains a serious iatrogenic surgical complication. BDI most often occurs as a result of misidentification of the anatomy; however, clinical evidence on its precise mechanism and surgeons' perceptions is scarce. Surgeons from Japan, Korea, Taiwan, and the USA, etc. (n = 614) participated in a questionnaire regarding their BDI experience and near-misses; and perceptions on landmarks, intraoperative findings, and surgical techniques. Respondents voted for a Delphi process and graded each item on a five-point scale. The consensus was built when ≥80% of overall responses were 4 or 5. Response rates for the first- and second-round Delphi were 60.6% and 74.9%, respectively. Misidentification of local anatomy accounted for 76.2% of BDI. Final consensus was reached on: (1) Effective retraction of the gallbladder, (2) Always obtaining critical view of safety, and (3) Avoiding excessive use of electrocautery/clipping as vital procedures; and (4) Calot's triangle area and (5) Critical view of safety as important landmarks. For (6) Impacted gallstone and (7) Severe fibrosis/scarring in Calot's triangle, bail-out procedures may be indicated. A consensus was reached among expert surgeons on relevant landmarks and intraoperative findings and appropriate surgical techniques to avoid BDI.

The 2016 update of the International Study Group (ISGPS) definition and grading of postoperative pancreatic fistula: 11 Years After.

BACKGROUND: In 2005, the International Study Group of Pancreatic Fistula developed a definition and grading of postoperative pancreatic fistula that has been accepted universally. Eleven years later, because postoperative pancreatic fistula remains one of the most relevant and harmful complications of pancreatic operation, the International Study Group of Pancreatic Fistula classification has become the gold standard in defining postoperative pancreatic fistula in clinical practice. The aim of the present report is to verify the value of the International Study Group of Pancreatic Fistula definition and grading of postoperative pancreatic fistula and to update the International Study Group of Pancreatic Fistula classification in light of recent evidence that has emerged, as well as to address the lingering controversies about the original definition and grading of postoperative pancreatic fistula. METHODS: The International Study Group of Pancreatic Fistula reconvened as the International Study Group in Pancreatic Surgery in order to perform a review of the recent literature and consequently to update and revise the grading system of postoperative pancreatic fistula. RESULTS: Based on the literature since 2005 investigating the validity and clinical use of the original International Study Group of Pancreatic Fistula classification, a clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula is now redefined as a drain output of any measurable volume of fluid with an amylase level >3 times the upper limit of institutional normal serum amylase activity, associated with a clinically relevant development/condition related directly to the postoperative pancreatic fistula. Consequently, the former "grade A postoperative pancreatic fistula" is now redefined and called a "biochemical leak," because it has no clinical importance and is no longer referred to a true pancreatic fistula. Postoperative pancreatic fistula grades B and C are confirmed but defined more strictly. In particular, grade B requires a change in the postoperative management; drains are either left in place >3 weeks or repositioned through endoscopic or percutaneous procedures. Grade C postoperative pancreatic fistula refers to those postoperative pancreatic fistula that require reoperation or lead to single or multiple organ failure and/or mortality attributable to the pancreatic fistula. CONCLUSION: This new definition and grading system of postoperative pancreatic fistula should lead to a more universally consistent evaluation of operative outcomes after pancreatic operation and will allow for a better comparison of techniques used to mitigate the rate and clinical impact of a pancreatic fistula. Use of this updated classification will also allow for more precise comparisons of surgical quality between surgeons and units who perform pancreatic surgery.