@article{European_Association_for_the_Study_of_the_Liver_Electronic_address_easlofficeeaslofficeeu2023-gz,

title = {EASL-ILCA clinical practice guidelines on intrahepatic  cholangiocarcinoma},

author = {European Association easloffice@easloffice.eu and European Association Liver},

url = {https://www.journal-of-hepatology.eu/article/S0168-8278(23)00185-X/fulltext

https://www.journal-of-hepatology.eu/action/showPdf?pii=S0168-8278%2823%2900185-X

},

doi = {10.1016/j.jhep.2023.03.010},

year  = {2023},

date = {2023-03-01},

urldate = {2023-03-01},

journal = {J. Hepatol.},

abstract = {Intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (iCCA) emerges inside the liver 

 from bile ductules to the second-order bile ducts, represents the 

 second most frequent primary liver cancer besides hepatocellular 

 carcinoma and, unfortunately, is globally increasing in term of 

 incidence. The silent presentation, late diagnosis, the highly 

 aggressive nature and resistance to treatments lead to alarming 

 mortality. Early diagnosis, molecular characterization, accurate 

 staging and personalized multidisciplinary treatments represent 

 challenges for researchers and physicians. Unfortunately, these 

 challenges are beset by the high heterogeneity of iCCA at the 

 clinical, genomic, epigenetic and molecular levels that very 

 often preclude successful management. Nonetheless, in the last 

 few years, progress has been achieved in molecular 

 characterization, surgical management and targeted therapies. The 

 recent advance together with the awareness that iCCA represents a 

 distinct entity amongst the CCA family, led the ILCA and EASL 

 governing boards to commission and charge international experts 

 to draft dedicated guidelines to aid physicians towards an 

 evidence-based approach for the diagnostic, prognostic, and 

 therapeutic management of iCCA.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{pmid36495912,

title = {Enhanced recovery for liver transplantation: recommendations from the 2022 International Liver Transplantation Society consensus conference},

author = {Joerg M Pollok and Pascale Tinguely and Marina Berenguer and Claus U Niemann and Dimitri A Raptis and Michael Spiro},

doi = {10.1016/S2468-1253(22)00268-0},

issn = {2468-1253},

year  = {2023},

date = {2023-01-01},

urldate = {2023-01-01},

journal = {Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol},

volume = {8},

number = {1},

pages = {81--94},

abstract = {There is much controversy regarding enhanced recovery for recipients of liver transplants from deceased and living donors. The objectives of this Review were to summarise current knowledge on individual enhanced recovery elements on short-term outcomes, identify key components for comprehensive pathways, and create internationally accepted guidelines on enhanced recovery for liver-transplant recipients. The ERAS4OLT.org collaborative partnered by the International Liver Transplantation Society performed systematic literature reviews on the effect of 32 relevant enhanced perioperative recovery elements on short-term outcomes, and global specialists prepared expert statements on deceased and living donor liver transplantation. The Grading Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations approach was used for rating of quality of evidence and grading of recommendations. A virtual international consensus conference was held in January, 2022, in which results were presented, voted on by the audience, and discussed by an independent international jury of eight members, applying the Danish model of consensus. 273 liver transplantation specialists from 30 countries prepared expert statements on elements of enhanced recovery for liver transplantation based on the systematic literature reviews. The consensus conference yielded 80 final recommendations, covering aspects of enhanced recovery for preoperative assessment and optimisation, intraoperative surgical and anaesthetic conduct, and postoperative management for the recipients of liver transplants from both deceased and living donors, and for the living donor. The recommendations represent a comprehensive overview of the relevant elements and areas of enhanced recovery for liver transplantation. These internationally established guidelines could direct the development of enhanced recovery programmes worldwide, allowing adjustments according to local resources and practices.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{Kamaya2022-oq,

title = {Management of incidentally detected gallbladder polyps: Society  of Radiologists in Ultrasound consensus conference  recommendations},

author = {Aya Kamaya and Christopher Fung and Jean-Luc Szpakowski and David T Fetzer and Andrew J Walsh and Yewande Alimi and David B Bingham and Michael T Corwin and Nirvikar Dahiya and Helena Gabriel and Walter G Park and Matthew R Porembka and Shuchi K Rodgers and Mitchell E Tublin and Xin Yuan and Yang Zhang and William D Middleton},

url = {https://pubs.rsna.org/doi/10.1148/radiol.213079?url_ver=Z39.88-2003&rfr_id=ori:rid:crossref.org&rfr_dat=cr_pub%20%200pubmed

https://pubs.rsna.org/doi/epdf/10.1148/radiol.213079},

doi = {10.1148/radiol.213079},

year  = {2022},

date = {2022-11-01},

urldate = {2022-11-01},

journal = {Radiology},

volume = {305},

number = {2},

pages = {277--289},

publisher = {Radiological Society of North America (RSNA)},

abstract = {Gallbladder polyps (also known as polypoid lesions of the 

 gallbladder) are a common incidental finding. The vast majority 

 of gallbladder polyps smaller than 10 mm are not true neoplastic 

 polyps but are benign cholesterol polyps with no inherent risk 

 of malignancy. In addition, recent studies have shown that the 

 overall risk of gallbladder cancer is not increased in patients 

 with small gallbladder polyps, calling into question the 

 rationale for frequent and prolonged follow-up of these common 

 lesions. In 2021, a Society of Radiologists in Ultrasound, or 

 SRU, consensus conference was convened to provide 

 recommendations for the management of incidentally detected 

 gallbladder polyps at US. See also the editorial by Sidhu and 

 Rafailidis in this issue.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{nokey,

title = {Treatment of Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: ASCO Guideline},

author = {Morris, Van K. and Kennedy, Erin B. and Baxter, Nancy N. and Benson, Al B. and Cercek, Andrea and Cho, May and Ciombor, Kristen K. and Cremolini, Chiara and Davis, Anjee and Deming, Dustin A. and Fakih, Marwan G. and Gholami, Sepideh and Hong, Theodore S. and Jaiyesimi, Ishmael and Klute, Kelsey and Lieu, Christopher and Sanoff, Hanna and Strickler, John H. and White, Sarah and Willis, Jason A. and Eng, Cathy},

doi = {https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.22.01690},

year  = {2022},

date = {2022-10-17},

journal = {Journal of Clinical Oncology},

volume = {0},

number = {0},

pages = {JCO.22.01690},

abstract = {PURPOSETo develop recommendations for treatment of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC).METHODSASCO convened an Expert Panel to conduct a systematic review of relevant studies and develop recommendations for clinical practice.RESULTSFive systematic reviews and 10 randomized controlled trials met the systematic review inclusion criteria.RECOMMENDATIONSDoublet chemotherapy should be offered, or triplet therapy may be offered to patients with previously untreated, initially unresectable mCRC, on the basis of included studies of chemotherapy in combination with anti–vascular endothelial growth factor antibodies. In the first-line setting, pembrolizumab is recommended for patients with mCRC and microsatellite instability-high or deficient mismatch repair tumors; chemotherapy and anti–epidermal growth factor receptor therapy is recommended for microsatellite stable or proficient mismatch repair left-sided treatment-naive RAS wild-type mCRC; chemotherapy and anti–vascular endothelial growth factor therapy is recommended for microsatellite stable or proficient mismatch repair RAS wild-type right-sided mCRC. Encorafenib plus cetuximab is recommended for patients with previously treated BRAF V600E–mutant mCRC that has progressed after at least one previous line of therapy. Cytoreductive surgery plus systemic chemotherapy may be recommended for selected patients with colorectal peritoneal metastases; however, the addition of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy is not recommended. Stereotactic body radiation therapy may be recommended following systemic therapy for patients with oligometastases of the liver who are not considered candidates for resection. Selective internal radiation therapy is not routinely recommended for patients with unilobar or bilobar metastases of the liver. Perioperative chemotherapy or surgery alone should be offered to patients with mCRC who are candidates for potentially curative resection of liver metastases. Multidisciplinary team management and shared decision making are recommended. Qualifying statements with further details related to implementation of guideline recommendations are also included.Additional information is available at www.asco.org/gastrointestinal-cancer-guidelines.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{pmid36083140,

title = {AASLD Practice Guidance on Primary Sclerosing Cholangitis and Cholangiocarcinoma},

author = {Christopher L Bowlus and Lionel Arrivé and Annika Bergquist and Mark Deneau and Lisa Forman and Sumera I Ilyas and Keri E Lunsford and Mercedes Martinez and Gonzalo Sapisochin and Rachna Shroff and James H Tabibian and David N Assis},

doi = {10.1002/hep.32771},

issn = {1527-3350},

year  = {2022},

date = {2022-09-01},

urldate = {2022-09-01},

journal = {Hepatology},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{pmid36089525,

title = {Benign liver lesions 2022: Guideline for clinical practice of Associazione Italiana Studio del Fegato (AISF), Società Italiana di Radiologia Medica e Interventistica (SIRM), Società Italiana di Chirurgia (SIC), Società Italiana di Ultrasonologia in Medicina e Biologia (SIUMB), Associazione Italiana di Chirurgia Epatobilio-Pancreatica (AICEP), Società Italiana Trapianti d'Organo (SITO), Società Italiana di Anatomia Patologica e Citologia Diagnostica (SIAPEC-IAP) - Part I - Cystic lesions},

author = {Maurizio Pompili and Francesco Ardito and Enrico Brunetti and Giuseppe Cabibbo and Fabrizio Calliada and Umberto Cillo and Ilario de Sio and Rita Golfieri and Mauro Grova and Salvatore Gruttadauria and Maria Guido and Massimo Iavarone and Tommaso Manciulli and Duilio Pagano and Irene Pettinari and Francesco Santopaolo and Maurizio Soresi and Agostino Colli},

doi = {10.1016/j.dld.2022.08.030},

issn = {1878-3562},

year  = {2022},

date = {2022-09-01},

urldate = {2022-09-01},

journal = {Dig Liver Dis},

abstract = {Benign liver lesions are increasingly diagnosed in daily clinical practice due to the growing use of imaging techniques for the study of the abdomen in patients who have non-specific symptoms and do not have an increased risk of hepatic malignancy. They include simple or parasitic cysts and solid benign tumors which differ widely in terms of prevalence, clinical relevance, symptoms and natural history and often lead to significant clinical problems relating to diagnosis and clinical management. Following the need to have updated guidelines on the management of benign focal liver lesions, the Scientific Societies mainly involved in their management have promoted the drafting of a new dedicated document. This document was drawn up according to the present Italian rules and methodologies necessary to produce clinical, diagnostic, and therapeutic guidelines based on evidence. Here we present the first part of the guideline, concerning the characterization of focal hepatic lesions detected by ultrasound, and the diagnosis and clinical management of simple and parasitic hepatic cysts, and of polycystic liver disease.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{pmid36089523,

title = {Benign liver lesions 2022: Guideline for clinical practice of Associazione Italiana Studio del Fegato (AISF), Società Italiana di Radiologia Medica e Interventistica (SIRM), Società Italiana di Chirurgia (SIC), Società Italiana di Ultrasonologia in Medicina e Biologia (SIUMB), Associazione Italiana di Chirurgia Epatobilio-Pancreatica (AICEP), Società Italiana Trapianti d'Organo (SITO), Società Italiana di Anatomia Patologica e Citologia Diagnostica (SIAPEC-IAP) - Part II - Solid lesions},

author = {Maurizio Pompili and Francesco Ardito and Enrico Brunetti and Giuseppe Cabibbo and Fabrizio Calliada and Umberto Cillo and Ilario de Sio and Rita Golfieri and Mauro Grova and Salvatore Gruttadauria and Maria Guido and Massimo Iavarone and Tommaso Manciulli and Duilio Pagano and Irene Pettinari and Francesco Santopaolo and Maurizio Soresi and Agostino Colli},

doi = {10.1016/j.dld.2022.08.031},

issn = {1878-3562},

year  = {2022},

date = {2022-09-01},

urldate = {2022-09-01},

journal = {Dig Liver Dis},

abstract = {Benign liver lesions are increasingly diagnosed in daily clinical practice due to the growing use of imaging techniques for the study of the abdomen in patients who have non-specific symptoms and do not have an increased risk of hepatic malignancy. They include simple or parasitic hepatic cysts and solid benign tumors which differ widely in terms of prevalence, clinical relevance, symptoms and natural history and often lead to significant clinical problems relating to diagnosis and clinical management. Following the need to have updated guidelines on the management of benign focal liver lesions, the Scientific Societies mainly involved in their management have promoted the drafting of a new dedicated document. This document was drawn up according to the present Italian rules and methodologies necessary to produce clinical, diagnostic, and therapeutic guidelines based on evidence. Here we present the second part of the guideline, concerning the diagnosis and clinical management of hemangioma, focal nodular hyperplasia, and hepatocellular adenoma.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{pmid35975642,

title = {Revised Clinical Practice Guidelines of the Korean Pancreatobiliary Association for Acute Pancreatitis},

author = {Sang Hyub Lee and Jung Wan Choe and Young Koog Cheon and Miyoung Choi and Min Kyu Jung and Dong Kee Jang and Jung Hyun Jo and Jae Min Lee and Eui Joo Kim and Sung Yong Han and Young Hoon Choi and Hyung-Il Seo and Dong Ho Lee and Hong Sik Lee},

doi = {10.5009/gnl220108},

issn = {2005-1212},

year  = {2022},

date = {2022-08-01},

urldate = {2022-08-01},

journal = {Gut Liver},

abstract = {Acute pancreatitis can range from a mild, self-limiting disease requiring no more than supportive care, to severe disease with life-threatening complications. With the goal of providing a recommendation framework for clinicians to manage acute pancreatitis, and to contribute to improvements in national health care, the Korean Pancreatobiliary Association (KPBA) established the Korean guidelines for acute pancreatitis management in 2013. However, many challenging issues exist which often lead to differences in clinical practices. In addition, with newly obtained evidence regarding acute pancreatitis, there have been great changes in recent knowledge and information regarding this disorder. Therefore, the KPBA committee underwent an extensive revision of the guidelines. The revised guidelines were developed using the Delphi method, and the main topics of the guidelines include the following: diagnosis, severity assessment, initial treatment, nutritional support, convalescent treatment, and the treatment of local complications and necrotizing pancreatitis. Specific recommendations are presented, along with the evidence levels and recommendation grades.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{Wakabayashi20226,

title = {The Tokyo 2020 terminology of liver anatomy and resections: Updates of the Brisbane 2000 system},

author = {Go Wakabayashi and Daniel Cherqui and David A. Geller and Mohammed Abu Hilal and Giammauro Berardi and Ruben Ciria and Yuta Abe and Takeshi Aoki and Horacio J. Asbun and Albert C. Y. Chan and Rawisak Chanwat and Kuo-Hsin Chen and Yajin Chen and Tan To Cheung and David Fuks and Naoto Gotohda and Ho-Seong Han and Kiyoshi Hasegawa and Etsuro Hatano and Goro Honda and Osamu Itano and Yukio Iwashita and Hironori Kaneko and Yutaro Kato and Ji Hoon Kim and Rong Liu and Santiago López-Ben and Mamoru Morimoto and Kazuteru Monden and Fernando Rotellar and Yoshihiro Sakamoto and Atsushi Sugioka and Tomoharu Yoshiizumi and Keiichi Akahoshi and Felipe Alconchel and Shunichi Ariizumi and Andrea Benedetti Cacciaguerra and Manuel Durán and Alain Garcia Vazquez and Nicolas Golse and Yoshihiro Miyasaka and Yasuhisa Mori and Satoshi Ogiso and Chikara Shirata and Federico Tomassini and Takeshi Urade and Taiga Wakabayashi and Hitoe Nishino and Taizo Hibi and Norihiro Kokudo and Masayuki Ohtsuka and Daisuke Ban and Yuichi Nagakawa and Takao Ohtsuka and Minoru Tanabe and Masafumi Nakamura and Akihiko Tsuchida and Masakazu Yamamoto},

url = {https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85123901612&doi=10.1002%2fjhbp.1091&partnerID=40&md5=6f9e9231b8cbd8b84b02db4d4c118e4c},

doi = {10.1002/jhbp.1091},

issn = {18686974},

year  = {2022},

date = {2022-01-01},

urldate = {2022-01-01},

journal = {Journal of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic Sciences},

volume = {29},

number = {1},

pages = {6 – 15},

publisher = {John Wiley and Sons Inc},

abstract = {Background: The Brisbane 2000 Terminology for Liver Anatomy and Resections, based on Couinaud’s segments, did not address how to identify segmental borders and anatomic territories of less than one segment. Smaller anatomic resections including segmentectomies and subsegmentectomies, have not been well defined. The advent of minimally invasive liver resection has enhanced the possibilities of more precise resection due to a magnified view and reduced bleeding, and minimally invasive anatomic liver resection (MIALR) is becoming popular gradually. Therefore, there is a need for updating the Brisbane 2000 system, including anatomic segmentectomy or less. An online "Expert Consensus Meeting: Precision Anatomy for Minimally Invasive HBP Surgery (PAM-HBP Surgery Consensus)" was hosted on February 23, 2021. Methods: The Steering Committee invited 34 international experts from around the world. The Expert Committee (EC) selected 12 questions and two future research topics in the terminology session. The EC created seven tentative definitions and five recommendations based on the experts’ opinions and the literature review performed by the Research Committee. Two Delphi Rounds finalized those definitions and recommendations. Results: This paper presents seven definitions and five recommendations regarding anatomic segmentectomy or less. In addition, two future research topics are discussed. Conclusions: The PAM-HBP Surgery Consensus has presented the Tokyo 2020 Terminology for Liver Anatomy and Resections. The terminology has added definitions of liver anatomy and resections that were not defined in the Brisbane 2000 system. © 2021 Japanese Society of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic Surgery},

note = {Cited by: 6},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{Su2022920,

title = {AGA Clinical Practice Guideline on Systemic Therapy for Hepatocellular Carcinoma},

author = {Grace L. Su and Osama Altayar and Robert O'Shea and Raj Shah and Bassam Estfan and Candice Wenzell and Shahnaz Sultan and Yngve Falck-Ytter},

url = {https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85125309277&doi=10.1053%2fj.gastro.2021.12.276&partnerID=40&md5=a1859600a1f8fbfe3313b5ac84e921fb},

doi = {10.1053/j.gastro.2021.12.276},

issn = {00165085},

year  = {2022},

date = {2022-01-01},

urldate = {2022-01-01},

journal = {Gastroenterology},

volume = {162},

number = {3},

pages = {920 – 934},

publisher = {W.B. Saunders},

abstract = {Background & Aims: Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), the most common primary liver cancer, remains a deadly cancer, with an incidence that has tripled in the United States since 1980. In recent years, new systemic therapies for HCC have been approved and a critical assessment of the existing data is necessary to balance benefits and harms and inform the development of evidence-based guidelines. Methods: The American Gastroenterological Association formed a multidisciplinary group consisting of a Technical Review Panel and a Guideline Panel. The Technical Review Panel prioritized clinical questions and outcomes according to their importance for clinicians and patients and conducted an evidence review of systemic therapies in patients with advanced-stage HCC. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework was used to assess evidence. The Guideline Panel reviewed the evidence and used the Evidence-to-Decision Framework to develop recommendations. Results: The Panel reviewed the evidence, summarized in the Technical Review, for the following medications approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for HCC: first-line therapies: bevacizumab+atezolizumab, sorafenib, and lenvatinib; second-line therapies: cabozantinib, pembrolizumab, ramucirumab, and regorafenib; and other agents: bevacizumab, nivolumab, and nivolumab+ipilimumab. Conclusions: The Panel agreed on 11 recommendations focused on systemic therapy for HCC in patients who are not eligible for locoregional therapy or resection, those with metastatic disease and preserved liver function, those with poor liver function, and those on systemic therapy as adjuvant therapy. © 2022},

note = {Cited by: 7; All Open Access, Bronze Open Access},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{Reig2022681,

title = {BCLC strategy for prognosis prediction and treatment recommendation: The 2022 update},

author = {Maria Reig and Alejandro Forner and Jordi Rimola and Joana Ferrer-Fàbrega and Marta Burrel and Ángeles Garcia-Criado and Robin K. Kelley and Peter R. Galle and Vincenzo Mazzaferro and Riad Salem and Bruno Sangro and Amit G. Singal and Arndt Vogel and Josep Fuster and Carmen Ayuso and Jordi Bruix},

url = {https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85123587056&doi=10.1016%2fj.jhep.2021.11.018&partnerID=40&md5=36b700ec2237537cabf51cf558f1201c},

doi = {10.1016/j.jhep.2021.11.018},

issn = {01688278},

year  = {2022},

date = {2022-01-01},

urldate = {2022-01-01},

journal = {Journal of Hepatology},

volume = {76},

number = {3},

pages = {681 – 693},

publisher = {Elsevier B.V.},

abstract = {There have been major advances in the armamentarium for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) since the last official update of the Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer prognosis and treatment strategy published in 2018. Whilst there have been advances in all areas, we will focus on those that have led to a change in strategy and we will discuss why, despite being encouraging, data for select interventions are still too immature for them to be incorporated into an evidence-based model for clinicians and researchers. Finally, we describe the critical insight and expert knowledge that are required to make clinical decisions for individual patients, considering all of the parameters that must be considered to deliver personalised clinical management. © 2021 European Association for the Study of the Liver},

note = {Cited by: 118; All Open Access, Bronze Open Access},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}