Spectral evolution of GRB 060904A observed with Swift and Suzaku -- Possibility of Inefficient Electron Acceleration

We observed an X-ray afterglow of GRB 060904A with the Swift and Suzaku satellites. We found rapid spectral softening during both the prompt tail phase and the decline phase of an X-ray flare in the BAT and XRT data. The observed spectra were fit by power-law photon indices which rapidly changed from $\Gamma = 1.51^{+0.04}_{-0.03}$ to $\Gamma = 5.30^{+0.69}_{-0.59}$ within a few hundred seconds in the prompt tail. This is one of the steepest X-ray spectra ever observed, making it quite difficult to explain by simple electron acceleration and synchrotron radiation. Then, we applied an alternative spectral fitting using a broken power-law with exponential cutoff (BPEC) model. It is valid to consider the situation that the cutoff energy is equivalent to the synchrotron frequency of the maximum energy electrons in their energy distribution. Since the spectral cutoff appears in the soft X-ray band, we conclude the electron acceleration has been inefficient in the internal shocks of GRB 060904A. These cutoff spectra suddenly disappeared at the transition time from the prompt tail phase to the shallow decay one. After that, typical afterglow spectra with the photon indices of 2.0 are continuously and preciously monitored by both XRT and Suzaku/XIS up to 1 day since the burst trigger time. We could successfully trace the temporal history of two characteristic break energies (peak energy and cutoff energy) and they show the time dependence of $\propto t^{-3} \sim t^{-4}$ while the following afterglow spectra are quite stable. This fact indicates that the emitting material of prompt tail is due to completely different dynamics from the shallow decay component. Therefore we conclude the emission sites of two distinct phenomena obviously differ from each other.Comment: 19 pages, 9 figures, accepted for publication in PASJ (Suzaku 2nd Special Issue

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: . Related clinical questions and references are also include

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 include

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 include