Flowcharts for the diagnosis and treatment of acute cholangitis and cholecystitis: Tokyo Guidelines

Diagnostic and therapeutic strategies for acute biliary inflammation/ infection (acute cholangitis and acute cholecystitis), according to severity grade, have not yet been established in the world. Therefore we formulated flowcharts for the management of acute biliary inflammation/ infection in accordance with severity grade. For mild (grade I) acute cholangitis, medical treatment may be sufficient/appropriate. For moderate (grade II) acute cholangitis, early biliary drainage should be performed. For severe (grade III) acute cholangitis, appropriate organ support such as ventilatory/circulatory management is required. After hemodynamic stabilization is achieved, urgent endoscopic or percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage should be performed. For patients with acute cholangitis of any grade of severity, treatment for the underlying etiology, including endoscopic, percutaneous, or surgical treatment should be performed after the patient's general condition has improved. For patients with mild (grade I) cholecystitis, early laparoscopic cholecystectomy is the preferred treatment. For patients with moderate (grade II) acute cholecystitis, early laparoscopic or open cholecystectomy is preferred. In patients with extensive local inflammation, elective cholecystectomy is recommended after initial management with percutaneous gallbladder drainage and/or cholecystostomy. For the patient with severe (grade III) acute cholecystitis, multiorgan support is a critical part of management. Biliary peritonitis due to perforation of the gallbladder is an indication for urgent cholecystectomy and/or drainage. Delayed elective cholecystectomy may be performed after initial treatment with gallbladder drainage and improvement of the patient's general medical condition. © Springer-Verlag Tokyo 2007.published_or_final_versio

Delayed gastric emptying (DGE) after pancreatic surgery: a suggested definition by the International Study Group of Pancreatic Surgery (ISGPS).

BACKGROUND: Delayed gastric emptying (DGE) is one of the most common complications after pancreatic resection. In the literature, the reported incidence of DGE after pancreatic surgery varies considerably between different surgical centers, primarily because an internationally accepted consensus definition of DGE is not available. Several surgical centers use a different definition of DGE. Hence, a valid comparison of different study reports and operative techniques is not possible. METHODS: After a literature review on DGE after pancreatic resection, the International Study Group of Pancreatic Surgery (ISGPS) developed an objective and generally applicable definition with grades of DGE based primarily on severity and clinical impact. RESULTS: DGE represents the inability to return to a standard diet by the end of the first postoperative week and includes prolonged nasogastric intubation of the patient. Three different grades (A, B, and C) were defined based on the impact on the clinical course and on postoperative management. CONCLUSION: The proposed definition, which includes a clinical grading of DGE, should allow objective and accurate comparison of the results of future clinical trials and will facilitate the objective evaluation of novel interventions and surgical modalities in the field of pancreatic surgery

Immunosuppression: towards a logical approach in liver transplantation

Over the last two decades there has been a significant increase in the number and types of immunosuppressive agents that have been available to clinicians. The protocols for immunosuppression used in liver transplantation have been derived historically from those in renal transplantation. During the last decade there has been a shift in the use of immunosuppression, with the introduction of interleukin (IL)-2 receptor antagonists in place of anti-lymphocyte preparations, substitution of tacrolimus for cyclosporin and mycophenolate for azathioprine. The use of corticosteroids has been reduced. For a variety of reasons, these changes have not always been made on the basis of properly randomized studies. The place of newer agents, such as sirolimus and leflunomide derivatives and of the microbiological agents, is unclear. In this review, we outline briefly the mechanism of action of drugs and suggest possible approaches to the management of the liver allograft recipient, suggesting how treatment could be adjusted according to the indication for transplantation as well as the individual's comorbidities