Seiki Kiriyama

Clinical diagnostic criteria of autoimmune pancreatitis: revised proposal.

In 1961, Sarles et al.1 asked the following question regarding the particular cases of pancreatitis with hypergammaglobulinemia: “Chronic inflammatory sclerosis of the pancreas—an autoimmune pancreatic disease?” As similar cases were rarely observed, a relationship between such pancreatitis and autoimmunity was viewed skeptically during the following several decades. In 1992, Toki et al.2 have reported 4 cases with unusual diffuse irregular narrowing of the main pancreatic duct and diffuse enlargement of the entire pancreas due to lymphocyte infiltration. In 1995, Japanese investigators3 firstly proposed a concept of “autoimmune pancreatitis (AIP)”, in which the patients showed diffusely enlarged pancreas, narrowing pancreatogram, increased serum IgG, presence of autoantibodies, fibrotic changes with lymphocytic infiltration and steroidal efficacy. Thereafter, many AIP cases have been reported from Japan, and AIP has been accepted as a new clinical entity.4,5 The histopathological findings of AIP show massive infiltration of lymphoplasmacytes with fibrosis, which is consistent with lymphoplasmacytic sclerosing pancreatitis (LPSP).6 Many Japanese investigators have paid great attention to AIP, especially with regard to its unique pancreatic images,2 IgG4,7 disease-associated autoantibodies,8 extrapancreatic lesions,6,9–14 and steroidal efficacy.14,15 Currently in Japan, diagnosis of AIP is based on the “diagnostic criteria 2002 of autoimmune pancreatitis”16 proposed by the Japan Pancreas Society. However, the accumulation of many AIP cases shows that the concept of AIP has changed slightly to include extrapancreatic lesions and associated disorders, which suggests that the current diagnostic criteria are becoming inadequate. In 2003, the Research Committee of Intractable Diseases of the Pancreas, supported by the Japanese Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare (Chairman, M. Otsuki), began to review the current diagnostic criteria in light of recently acquired information and knowledge. The team organized a working group (WG), consisting of the team members and researchers specializing in autoimmune pancreatitis, to develop a proposal for the revision of the current diagnostic criteria. On 7 October 2005 and 22 April 2006, the Research Committee of Intractable Diseases of the Pancreas and the Japan Pancreas Society jointly held open forums to discuss the proposed amendments. This report describes the background of the proposed amendments and the final proposal for the revised version of the clinical diagnostic criteria of AIP.

TG13 diagnostic criteria and severity grading of acute cholecystitis (with videos)

Since its publication in 2007, the Tokyo Guidelines for the management of acute cholangitis and cholecystitis (TG07) have been widely adopted. The validation of TG07 conducted in terms of clinical practice has shown that the diagnostic criteria for acute cholecystitis are highly reliable but that the definition of definite diagnosis is ambiguous. Discussion by the Tokyo Guidelines Revision Committee concluded that acute cholecystitis should be suspected when Murphy’s sign, local inflammatory findings in the gallbladder such as right upper quadrant abdominal pain and tenderness, and fever and systemic inflammatory reaction findings detected by blood tests are present but that definite diagnosis of acute cholecystitis can be made only on the basis of the imaging of ultrasonography, computed tomography or scintigraphy (HIDA scan). These proposed diagnostic criteria provided better specificity and accuracy rates than the TG07 diagnostic criteria. As for the severity assessment criteria in TG07, there is evidence that TG07 resulted in clarification of the concept of severe acute cholecystitis. Furthermore, there is evidence that severity assessment in TG07 has led to a reduction in the mean duration of hospital stay. As for the factors used to establish a moderate grade of acute cholecystitis, such as leukocytosis, ALP, old age, diabetes, being male, and delay in admission, no new strong evidence has been detected indicating that a change in the criteria used in TG07 is needed. Therefore, it was judged that the severity assessment criteria of TG07 could be applied in the updated Tokyo Guidelines (TG13) with minor changes. TG13 presents new standards for the diagnosis, severity grading and management of acute cholecystitis.Free full-text articles and a mobile application of TG13 are available via http://www.jshbps.jp/en/guideline/tg13.html.

TG13: Updated Tokyo Guidelines for the management of acute cholangitis and cholecystitis

In 2007, the Tokyo Guidelines for the management of acute cholangitis and cholecystitis (TG07) were first published in the Journal of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic Surgery. The fundamental policy of TG07 was to achieve the objectives of TG07 through the development of consensus among specialists in this field throughout the world. Considering such a situation, validation and feedback from the clinicians’ viewpoints were indispensable. What had been pointed out from clinical practice was the low diagnostic sensitivity of TG07 for acute cholangitis and the presence of divergence between severity assessment and clinical judgment for acute cholangitis. In June 2010, we set up the Tokyo Guidelines Revision Committee for the revision of TG07 (TGRC) and started the validation of TG07. We also set up new diagnostic criteria and severity assessment criteria by retrospectively analyzing cases of acute cholangitis and cholecystitis, including cases of non-inflammatory biliary disease, collected from multiple institutions. TGRC held meetings a total of 35 times as well as international email exchanges with co-authors abroad. On June 9 and September 6, 2011, and on April 11, 2012, we held three International Meetings for the Clinical Assessment and Revision of Tokyo Guidelines. Through these meetings, the final draft of the updated Tokyo Guidelines (TG13) was prepared on the basis of the evidence from retrospective multi-center analyses. To be specific, discussion took place involving the revised new diagnostic criteria, and the new severity assessment criteria, new flowcharts of the management of acute cholangitis and cholecystitis, recommended medical care for which new evidence had been added, new recommendations for gallbladder drainage and antimicrobial therapy, and the role of surgical intervention. Management bundles for acute cholangitis and cholecystitis were introduced for effective dissemination with the level of evidence and the grade of recommendations. GRADE systems were utilized to provide the level of evidence and the grade of recommendations. TG13 improved the diagnostic sensitivity for acute cholangitis and cholecystitis, and presented criteria with extremely low false positive rates adapted for clinical practice. Furthermore, severity assessment criteria adapted for clinical use, flowcharts, and many new diagnostic and therapeutic modalities were presented. The bundles for the management of acute cholangitis and cholecystitis are presented in a separate section in TG13.Free full-text articles and a mobile application of TG13 are available via http://www.jshbps.jp/en/guideline/tg13.html.

TG13 flowchart for the management of acute cholangitis and cholecystitis

We propose a management strategy for acute cholangitis and cholecystitis according to the severity assessment. For Grade I (mild) acute cholangitis, initial medical treatment including the use of antimicrobial agents may be sufficient for most cases. For non-responders to initial medical treatment, biliary drainage should be considered. For Grade II (moderate) acute cholangitis, early biliary drainage should be performed along with the administration of antibiotics. For Grade III (severe) acute cholangitis, appropriate organ support is required. After hemodynamic stabilization has been achieved, urgent endoscopic or percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage should be performed. In patients with Grade II (moderate) and Grade III (severe) acute cholangitis, treatment for the underlying etiology including endoscopic, percutaneous, or surgical treatment should be performed after the patient’s general condition has been improved. In patients with Grade I (mild) acute cholangitis, treatment for etiology such as endoscopic sphincterotomy for choledocholithiasis might be performed simultaneously, if possible, with biliary drainage. Early laparoscopic cholecystectomy is the first-line treatment in patients with Grade I (mild) acute cholecystitis while in patients with Grade II (moderate) acute cholecystitis, delayed/elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy after initial medical treatment with antimicrobial agent is the first-line treatment. In non-responders to initial medical treatment, gallbladder drainage should be considered. In patients with Grade III (severe) acute cholecystitis, appropriate organ support in addition to initial medical treatment is necessary. Urgent or early gallbladder drainage is recommended. Elective cholecystectomy can be performed after the improvement of the acute inflammatory process.Free full-text articles and a mobile application of TG13 are available via http://www.jshbps.jp/en/guideline/tg13.html.

TG13 antimicrobial therapy for acute cholangitis and cholecystitis.

Therapy with appropriate antimicrobial agents is an important component in the management of patients with acute cholangitis and/or acute cholecystitis. In the updated Tokyo Guidelines (TG13), we recommend antimicrobial agents that are suitable from a global perspective for management of these infections. These recommendations focus primarily on empirical therapy (presumptive therapy), provided before the infecting isolates are identified. Such therapy depends upon knowledge of both local microbial epidemiology and patient-specific factors that affect selection of appropriate agents. These patient-specific factors include prior contact with the health care system, and we separate community-acquired versus healthcare-associated infections because of the higher risk of resistance in the latter. Selection of agents for community-acquired infections is also recommended on the basis of severity (grades I–III). Free full-text articles and a mobile application of TG13 are available via http://www.jshbps.jp/en/guideline/tg13.html.

New diagnostic criteria of acute pancreatitis.

Practical guidelines for the diagnosis of acute pancreatitis are presented so that a rapid and adequate diagnosis can be made. When acute pancreatitis is suspected in patients with acute onset of abdominal pain and tenderness mainly in the upper abdomen, the diagnosis of acute pancreatitis is made on the basis of elevated levels of pancreatic enzymes in the blood and/or urine. Furthermore, other acute abdominal diseases are ruled out if local findings associated with pancreatitis are confirmed by diagnostic imaging. According to the diagnostic criteria established in Japan, patients who present with two of the following three manifestations are diagnosed as having acute pancreatitis: characteristic upper abdominal pain, elevated levels of pancreatic enzymes, and findings of ultrasonography (US), CT or MRI suggesting acute pancreatitis. Detection of elevated levels of blood pancreatic enzymes is crucial in the diagnosis of acute pancreatitis. Measurement of blood lipase is recommended, because it is reported to be superior to all other pancreatic enzymes in terms of sensitivity and specificity. For measurements of the blood amylase level widely used in Japan, it should be cautioned that, because of its low specificity, abnormal high values are also often obtained in diseases other than pancreatitis. The cut-off level of blood pancreatic enzymes for the diagnosis of acute pancreatitis is not able to be set because of lack of sufficient evidence and consensus to date. CT study is the most appropriate procedure to confirm image findings of acute pancreatitis. Elucidation of the etiology of acute pancreatitis should be continued after a diagnosis of acute pancreatitis. In the process of the etiologic elucidation of acute pancreatitis, judgment whether it is gallstone-induced or not is most urgent and crucial for deciding treatment policy including the assessment of whether endoscopic papillary treatment should be conducted or not. The diagnosis of gallstone-induced acute pancreatitis can be made by combining detection of elevated levels of bilirubin, transamylase (ALT, AST) and ALP detected by hematological examination and the visualization of gallstones by US.

TG13 management bundles for acute cholangitis and cholecystitis

Bundles that define mandatory items or procedures to be performed in clinical practice have been increasingly used in guidelines in recent years. Observance of bundles enables improvement of the prognosis of target diseases as well as guideline preparation. There were no bundles adopted in the Tokyo Guidelines 2007, but the updated Tokyo Guidelines 2013 (TG13) have adopted this useful tool. Items or procedures strongly recommended in clinical practice have been prepared in the practical guidelines and presented as management bundles. TG13 defined the mandatory items for the management of acute cholangitis and acute cholecystitis. Critical parts of the bundles in TG13 include diagnostic process, severity assessment, transfer of patients if necessary, therapeutic approach, and time course. Their observance should improve the prognosis of acute cholangitis and cholecystitis. When utilizing TG13 management bundles, further clinical research needs to be conducted to evaluate the effectiveness and outcomes of the bundles. It is also expected that the present report will lead to evidence construction and contribute to further updating of the Tokyo Guidelines.Free full-text articles and a mobile application of TG13 are available via http://www.jshbps.jp/en/guideline/tg13.html.

Cutting-edge information for the management of acute pancreatitis

Considering that the Japanese (JPN) guidelines for the management of acute pancreatitis were published in Takada et al. (J HepatoBiliary Pancreat Surg 13:2–6, 2006), doubts will be cast as to the reason for publishing a revised edition of the Guidelines for the management of acute pancreatitis: the JPN guidelines 2010, at this time. The rationale for this is that new criteria for the severity assessment of acute pancreatitis were made public on the basis of a summary of activities and reports of shared studies that were conducted in 2008. The new severity classification is entirely different from that adopted in the 2006 guidelines. A drastic revision was made in the new criteria. For example, about half of the cases that have been assessed previously as being ‘severe’ are assessed as being ‘mild’ in the new criteria. The JPN guidelines 2010 are published so that consistency between the criteria for severity assessment in the first edition and the new criteria will be maintained. In the new criteria, severity assessment can be made only by calculating the 9 scored prognostic factors. Severity assessment according to the contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CT) grade was made by scoring the poorly visualized pancreatic area in addition to determining the degree of extrapancreatic progress of inflammation and its extent. Changes made in accordance with the new criteria are seen in various parts of the guidelines. In the present revised edition, post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis is treated as an independent item. Furthermore, clinical indicators (pancreatitis bundles) are presented to improve the quality of the management of acute pancreatitis and to increase adherence to new guidelines.

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 patients 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 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.