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.

<b><i>Introduction:</i></b> Loss of skeletal muscle mass and function (sarcopenia) is common in individuals with obesity due to metabolic changes associated with a sedentary lifestyle, adipose tissue derangements, comorbidities (acute and chronic diseases) and during the ageing process. Co-existence of excess adiposity and low muscle mass/function is referred to as sarcopenic obesity (SO), a condition increasingly recognized for its clinical and functional features that negatively influence important patient-centred outcomes. Effective prevention and treatment strategies for SO are urgently needed, but efforts are hampered by the lack of a universally established SO definition and diagnostic criteria. Resulting inconsistencies in the literature also negatively affect the ability to define prevalence as well as clinical relevance of SO for negative health outcomes. <b><i>Aims and Methods:</i></b> The European Society for Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism (ESPEN) and the European Association for the Study of Obesity (EASO) launched an initiative to reach expert consensus on a definition and diagnostic criteria for SO. The jointly appointed international expert panel proposes that SO is defined as the co-existence of excess adiposity and low muscle mass/function. The diagnosis of SO should be considered in at-risk individuals who screen positive for a co-occurring elevated body mass index or waist circumference, and markers of low skeletal muscle mass and function (risk factors, clinical symptoms, or validated questionnaires). Diagnostic procedures should initially include assessment of skeletal muscle function, followed by assessment of body composition where presence of excess adiposity and low skeletal muscle mass or related body compartments confirm the diagnosis of SO. Individuals with SO should be further stratified into stage I in the absence of clinical complications or stage II if cases are associated with complications linked to altered body composition or skeletal muscle dysfunction. <b><i>Conclusions:</i></b> ESPEN and EASO, as well as the expert international panel, advocate that the proposed SO definition and diagnostic criteria be implemented into routine clinical practice. The panel also encourages prospective studies in addition to secondary analysis of existing data sets, to study the predictive value, treatment efficacy and clinical impact of this SO definition.

Objective: The aim of this study was to develop and externally validate the first evidence-based guidelines on minimally invasive pancreas resection (MIPR) before and during the International Evidence-based Guidelines on Minimally Invasive Pancreas Resection (IG-MIPR) meeting in Miami (March 2019). Summary Background Data: MIPR has seen rapid development in the past decade. Promising outcomes have been reported by early adopters from high-volume centers. Subsequently, multicenter series as well as randomized controlled trials were reported; however, guidelines for clinical practice were lacking. Methods: The Scottisch Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) methodology was used, incorporating these 4 items: systematic reviews using PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases to answer clinical questions, whenever possible in PICO style, the GRADE approach for assessment of the quality of evidence, the Delphi method for establishing consensus on the developed recommendations, and the AGREE-II instrument for the assessment of guideline quality and external validation. The current guidelines are cosponsored by the International Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association, the Americas Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association, the Asian-Pacific Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association, the European-African Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association, the European Association for Endoscopic Surgery, Pancreas Club, the Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgery, the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract, and the Society of Surgical Oncology. Results: After screening 16,069 titles, 694 studies were reviewed, and 291 were included. The final 28 recommendations covered 6 topics; laparoscopic and robotic distal pancreatectomy, central pancreatectomy, pancreatoduodenectomy, as well as patient selection, training, learning curve, and minimal annual center volume required to obtain optimal outcomes and patient safety. Conclusion: The IG-MIPR using SIGN methodology give guidance to surgeons, hospital administrators, patients, and medical societies on the use and outcome of MIPR as well as the approach to be taken regarding this challenging type of surgery.

No abstract

Pancreatic fat can be quantified by using CT, and CT attenuation indexes that are applied to the quantification of pancreatic fat are significantly associated with clinical assessment of impaired glucose metabolism.