Search

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 included.

In some cases, laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) may be difficult to perform in patients with acute cholecystitis (AC) with severe inflammation and fibrosis. The Tokyo Guidelines 2018 (TG18) expand the indications for LC under difficult conditions for each level of severity of AC. As a result of expanding the indications for LC to treat AC, it is absolutely necessary to avoid any increase in bile duct injury (BDI), particularly vasculo-biliary injury (VBI), which is known to occur at a certain rate in LC. Since the Tokyo Guidelines 2013 (TG13), an attempt has been made to assess intraoperative findings as objective indicators of surgical difficulty; based on expert consensus on these difficulty indicators, bail-out procedures (including conversion to open cholecystectomy) have been indicated for cases in which LC for AC is difficult to perform. A bail-out procedure should be chosen if, when the Calot's triangle is appropriately retracted and used as a landmark, a critical view of safety (CVS) cannot be achieved because of the presence of nondissectable scarring or severe fibrosis. We propose standardized safe steps for LC to treat AC. To achieve a CVS, it is vital to dissect at a location above (on the ventral side of) the imaginary line connecting the base of the left medial section (Segment 4) and the roof of Rouviere's sulcus and to fulfill the three criteria of CVS before dividing any structures. Achieving a CVS prevents the misidentification of the cystic duct and the common bile duct, which are most commonly confused. 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.

Since the publication of the Tokyo Guidelines in 2007 and their revision in 2013, appropriate management for acute cholecystitis has been more clearly established. Since the last revision, several manuscripts, especially for alternative endoscopic techniques, have been reported; therefore, additional evaluation and refinement of the 2013 Guidelines is required. We describe a standard drainage method for surgically high-risk patients with acute cholecystitis and the latest developed endoscopic gallbladder drainage techniques described in the updated Tokyo Guidelines 2018 (TG18). Our study confirmed that percutaneous transhepatic gallbladder drainage should be considered the first alternative to surgical intervention in surgically high-risk patients with acute cholecystitis. Also, endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage or endoscopic ultrasound-guided gallbladder drainage can be considered in high-volume institutes by skilled endoscopists. In the endoscopic transpapillary approach, either endoscopic naso-gallbladder drainage or gallbladder stenting can be considered for gallbladder drainage. We also introduce special techniques and the latest outcomes of endoscopic ultrasound-guided gallbladder drainage studies. 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.

Antimicrobial therapy is a mainstay of the management for patients with acute cholangitis and/or cholecystitis. The Tokyo Guidelines 2018 (TG18) provides recommendations for the appropriate use of antimicrobials for community-acquired and healthcare-associated infections. The listed agents are for empirical therapy provided before the infecting isolates are identified. Antimicrobial agents are listed by class-definitions and TG18 severity grade I, II, and III subcategorized by clinical settings. In the era of emerging and increasing antimicrobial resistance, monitoring and updating local antibiograms is underscored. Prudent antimicrobial usage and early de-escalation or termination of antimicrobial therapy are now important parts of decision-making. What is new in TG18 is that the duration of antimicrobial therapy for both acute cholangitis and cholecystitis is systematically reviewed. Prophylactic antimicrobial usage for elective endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography is no longer recommended and the section was deleted in TG18. 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.

Background The Tokyo Guidelines 2007 (TG07) first presented the diagnostic and severity grading criteria for acute cholangitis. Subsequently updated in 2013, the Tokyo Guidelines (TG13) have been widely adopted throughout the world as global standard guidelines. We set out to verify the efficacy of these TG13 criteria in an international multicenter study. Methods We reviewed 6,063 patients who were clinically diagnosed with acute cholangitis in Japan and Taiwan over a 2-year period. The TG13 diagnostic and severity grading criteria were retrospectively applied, and 30-day mortality was investigated. Results A diagnosis of acute cholangitis was made in 5,454 (90.0%) patients on the basis of the TG13 criteria, and in 4,815 (79.4%) patients on the basis of the TG07 criteria. The 30-day mortality rates of patients with Grade III, Grade II, and Grade I were 5.1%, 2.6%, and 1.2%, respectively, and increased significantly along with disease severity. The mortality rate in the 1,272 Grade II cases where urgent or early biliary drainage was performed was 2.0% (n = 25), which was significantly lower than that of 3.7% (n = 28) in the other 748 cases. Conclusion By using the TG13 diagnostic and severity grading criteria, more patients with possible acute cholangitis can be diagnosed, and patients whose prognosis can potentially be improved by early biliary drainage can be identified. The TG13 criteria are appropriate and useful for clinical practice.

Background The collaborative multicenter retrospective study of acute cholecystitis (AC) was performed in Japan and Taiwan. The aim for this study was evaluation of the clinical value of TG13 severity grading for AC. Method The study was designed as an international multicenter retrospective study of AC from 2011 to 2013. Based on the data, we investigated the TG13 severity grading by analyzing the correlations between grade and prognosis, surgical procedures, histopathology, and organ dysfunction and prognosis. Results An investigation revealed that 30-day overall mortality rate was 1.1% for Grade I, 0.8% for Grade II, 5.4% for Grade III. The mortality rate for Grade III was significantly higher than lower grades (P

Background Since the publication of the Tokyo Guidelines (TG13) for the management of acute cholecystitis (AC), multidirectional studies have been published. However, epidemiological research about AC with big data was not projected. The aim of this study was to reveal the actual clinical conditions of AC. Method The study was designed as an international multicenter retrospective study of AC in Japan and Taiwan from 2011 to 2013. The factors investigated comprised data related to demographic, history, physical examinations, laboratory and imaging findings. Based on these data, we investigated the various values of AC, and real situation with respect to severity and treatment. Results A total of 5,459 patients with AC were reviewed. Thirty-day mortality rate was 1.1%. Based on the diagnostic criteria, 4,088 patients had a definite diagnosis and 291 had a suspected diagnosis. According to the severity grading, 939 patients were classified as Grade III, 2,308 as Grade II, and 2,130 as Grade I. Cholecystectomy was performed in total of 4,266 patients and 2,765 patients had laparoscopic cholecystectomy. The main etiologies were gallbladder stones in 4,623 cases. Conclusion This epidemiological study with large population will undoubtedly contribute to establish the best practice for managing AC worldwide.

Background Japanese (JPN) guidelines for the management of acute pancreatitis were published in 2006. The severity assessment criteria for acute pancreatitis were later revised by the Japanese Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare (MHLW) in 2008, leading to their publication as the JPN Guidelines 2010. Following the 2012 revision of the Atlanta Classifications of Acute Pancreatitis, in which the classifications of regional complications of pancreatitis were revised, the development of a minimally invasive method for local complications of pancreatitis spread, and emerging evidence was gathered and revised into the JPN Guidelines. Methods A comprehensive evaluation was carried out on the evidence for epidemiology, diagnosis, severity, treatment, post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis and clinical indicators, based on the concepts of the GRADE system (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation). With the graded recommendations, where the evidence was unclear, Meta-Analysis team for JPN Guidelines 2015 conducted an additional new meta-analysis, the results of which were included in the guidelines. Results Thirty-nine questions were prepared in 17 subject areas, for which 43 recommendations were made. The 17 subject areas were: Diagnosis, Diagnostic imaging, Etiology, Severity assessment, Transfer indication, Fluid therapy, Nasogastric tube, Pain control, Antibiotics prophylaxis, Protease inhibitor, Nutritional support, Intensive care, management of Biliary Pancreatitis, management of Abdominal Compartment Syndrome, Interventions for the local complications, Post-ERCP pancreatitis and Clinical Indicator (Pancreatitis Bundles 2015). Meta-analysis was conducted in the following four subject areas based on randomized controlled trials: (1) prophylactic antibiotics use; (2) prophylactic pancreatic stent placement for the prevention of post-ERCP pancreatitis; (3) prophylactic non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) for the prevention of post-ERCP pancreatitis; and (4) peritoneal lavage. Using the results of the meta-analysis, recommendations were graded to create useful information. In addition, a mobile application was developed, which made it possible to diagnose, assess severity and check pancreatitis bundles. Conclusions The JPN Guidelines 2015 were prepared using the most up-to-date methods, and including the latest recommended medical treatments, and we are confident that this will make them easy for many clinicians to use, and will provide a useful tool in the decision-making process for the treatment of patients, and optimal medical support. The free mobile application and calculator for the JPN Guidelines 2015 is available via http://www.jshbps.jp/en/guideline/jpn-guideline2015.html

Background Although early laparoscopic cholecystectomy is widely performed for acute cholecystitis, the optimal timing of a cholecystectomy in clinically ill patients remains controversial. This study aims to determine the best practice for the patients presenting with acute cholecystitis focused on disease severity and comorbidities. Methods An international multicentric retrospective observational study was conducted over a 2-year period. Patients were divided into four groups: Group A: primary cholecystectomy; Group B: cholecystectomy after gallbladder drainage; Group C: gallbladder drainage alone; and Group D: medical treatment alone. Results The subjects of analyses were 5,329 patients. There were statistically significant differences in mortality rates between patients with Charlson comorbidity index (CCI) scores below and above 6 (P < 0.001). The shortest operative time was observed in Group A patients who underwent surgery 0–3 days after admission (P < 0.01). Multiple regression analysis revealed CCI and low body mass index

Background The international practice guidelines for patients with acute cholangitis and cholecystitis were released in 2007 (TG 07) and revised in 2013 (TG 13).This study investigated updated epidemiology and outcomes among patients with acute cholangitis on a larger scale for the first time. Methods This is an international multi-center retrospective observational study in Japan and Taiwan. All consecutive patients older than 18 years of age and given a clinical diagnosis of acute cholangitis by clinicians between January 1, 2011 and December 31, 2012 were enrolled. Those who met the diagnostic criteria of acute cholangitis by TG13 were statistically analyzed. Results A total of 7,294 patients were enrolled and 6,433 patients met the TG 13 diagnostic criteria. The severity distribution was Grade I (37.5%), Grade II (36.2%), and Grade III (26.2%). The 30 day all cause-mortality was 2.4%, 4.7%, and 8.4% in Grade I, II, III severity, respectively (p< 0.001). The incidence of liver abscess and endocarditis as complications of acute cholangitis was 2.0% and 0.26%, respectively. Conclusions This is the first large scale study to investigate patients with acute cholangitis. This study provides the basis to define the best practices to manage patients with acute cholangitis in future studies. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

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).

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 .

Background The Tokyo Guidelines for the management of acute cholangitis and cholecystitis (TG07) were published in 2007 as the world's first guidelines for acute cholangitis and cholecystitis. The diagnostic criteria and severity assessment of acute cholecystitis have since been widely used all over the world. A validation study of TG07 has shown that the diagnostic criteria for acute cholecystitis are highly reliable but that the definition of definite diagnosis is ambiguous. In addition, considerable new evidence referring to acute cholecystitis as well as evaluations of TG07 have been published. Consequently, we organized the Tokyo Guidelines Revision Committee to evaluate TG07, recognize new evidence, and conduct a multi-center analysis to revise the guidelines (TG13).Methods and materials We retrospectively analyzed 451 patients with acute cholecystitis from multiple tertiary care centers in Japan. All 451 patients were first evaluated using the criteria in TG07. The "gold standard" for acute cholecystitis in this study was a diagnosis by pathology. The validity of TG07 diagnostic criteria was investigated by comparing clinical with pathological diagnosis.Results Of 451 patients evaluated, a total of 227 patients were given a diagnosis of acute cholecystitis by pathological examination (prevalence 50.3 %). TG07 criteria provided a definite diagnosis of acute cholecystitis in 224 patients. The sensitivity of TG07 diagnostic criteria for acute cholecystitis was 92.1 %, and the specificity was 93.3 %. Based on the preliminary results, new diagnostic criteria for acute cholecystitis were proposed. Using the new criteria, the sensitivity of definite diagnosis was 91.2 %, and the specificity was 96.9 %. The accuracy rate was improved from 92.7 to 94.0 %. In regard to severity grading among 227 patients, 111 patients were classified as Mild (Grade I), 104 as Moderate (Grade II), and 12 as Severe (Grade III).Conclusion The proposed new diagnostic criteria achieved better performance than the diagnostic criteria in TG07. Therefore, the proposed criteria have been adopted as new diagnostic criteria for acute cholecystitis and are referred to as the 2013 Tokyo Guidelines (TG13). Regarding severity assessment, no new evidence was found to suggest that the criteria in TG07 needed major adjustment. As a result, TG07 severity assessment criteria have been adopted in TG13 with minor changes.

In 2007, the Tokyo Guidelines (TG07) working group established diagnostic criteria for assessment of the severity of acute cholangitis. This study aimed to analyze outcomes and identify predictors of mortality in patients with acute cholangitis managed according to the TG07.In this study, 215 consecutive cases of acute cholangitis were reviewed. Risk factors associated with mortality or refractory cholangitis, which is defined on the basis of prolonged hospitalization (28 days) or disease resulting in fatality, were examined using multivariate logistic regression analysis.There were 52, 133, and 30 cases of mild, moderate, and severe cholangitis, respectively. The overall mortality rate was 4.2 % (9/215). Mortality rates in patients with mild, moderate, and severe cholangitis were 0, 2.3, and 20.0 %, respectively (moderate vs. severe, p = 0.001). Multivariate analysis showed that serum albumin levels ≤2.8 g/dl and PT-INR1.5 were significant predictors of mortality. There were 57 patients (26.5 %) with refractory cholangitis. Multivariate analysis showed that serum albumin level ≤2.8 g/dl, PT-INR1.5, etiology and inpatient status were significant predictors of refractory cholangitis.The TG07 severity assessment criteria for acute cholangitis were significantly predictive of mortality. Hypoalbuminemia is an important risk factor in addition to organ dysfunction.

To examine the circumstances of medical treatment for acute pancreatitis before publication of the new Japanese (JPN) guidelines using the Japanese administrative database associated with the Diagnosis Procedure Combination system.We collected data from 7,193 patients with acute pancreatitis in 2008 and examined the recommended medical treatment in the new JPN guidelines [from recommendations B (considered to be recommended treatments) to D (considered to be unacceptable treatments)] according to severity of acute pancreatitis. Patients were divided into two groups: mild cases (n = 6,520) and severe cases (n = 673).Enteral nutrition for severe cases without ileus (recommendation B) was uncommon (13.5%). In contrast, prophylactic antibiotics were administered in a large number (80.4%) of mild cases without acute cholangitis (recommendation D). Furthermore, administration of H(2) receptor antagonists, except for cases of upper gastrointestinal bleeding (recommendation D), were performed in many patients with both mild and severe cases (66.8 vs. 78.6%).This study demonstrated a discrepancy between actual medical treatment performed and the new JPN guidelines with regard to some of the medical treatments. Future studies are required after publication of the new JPN guidelines to determine how they affect medical treatments.

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.

The Japanese Guidelines for the Management of Acute Pancreatitis was published in 2003. However, the impact of the guidelines on physicians’ practice patterns has not been well known. To examine the current clinical practices in the management of acute pancreatitis, we conducted a questionnaire survey with members of three societies involved in the treatment of pancreatic diseases and abdominal emergency medical care. Questions included diagnostic and treatment processes considered important in the management of acute pancreatitis in addition to demographic data, experience in medical care, and areas of specialty of respondents. We also examined changes in the treatment of acute pancreatitis before and after publication of the Guidelines. Of 1,000 society members to whom questionnaires were mailed, 590 responded. Respondents who had read the Guidelines also handled significantly more cases in the most recent 3 years. A variety of changes were observed in the performance of clinical practices before and after publication of the Guidelines. The use of amylase in the assessment of severity decreased significantly, while its use for determination of severity scores increased significantly after publication of the Guidelines. In treatment, use of a nasogastric tube in mild and moderate cases deceased after the Guidelines. The frequency of prophylactic use of antibiotics decreased with mild pancreatitis after publication of the Guidelines. Although it is difficult to attribute these changes to the direct influence of the Guidelines, several changes were observed in performance of clinical practices in accordance with recommendations of the Guidelines.

The clinical course of acute pancreatitis varies from mild to severe. Assessment of severity and etiology of acute pancreatitis is important to determine the strategy of management for acute pancreatitis. Acute pancreatitis is classified according to its morphology into edematous pancreatitis and necrotizing pancreatitis. Edematous pancreatitis accounts for 80-90% of acute pancreatitis and remission can be achieved in most of the patients without receiving any special treatment. Necrotizing pancreatitis occupies 10-20% of acute pancreatitis and the mortality rate is reported to be 14-25%. The mortality rate is particularly high (34-40%) for infected pancreatic necrosis that is accompanied by bacterial infection in the necrotic tissue of the pancreas (Widdison and Karanjia in Br J Surg 80:148-154, 1993; Ogawa et al. in Research of the actual situations of acute pancreatitis. Research Group for Specific Retractable Diseases, Specific Disease Measure Research Work Sponsored by Ministry of Health, Labour, and Welfare. Heisei 12 Research Report, pp 17-33, 2001). On the other hand, the mortality rate is reported to be 0-11% for sterile pancreatic necrosis which is not accompanied by bacterial infection (Ogawa et al. 2001; Bradely and Allen in Am J Surg 161:19-24, 1991; Rattner et al. in Am J Surg 163:105-109, 1992). The Japanese (JPN) Guidelines were designed to provide recommendations regarding the management of acute pancreatitis in patients having a variety of clinical characteristics. This article describes the guidelines for the surgical management and interventional therapy of acute pancreatitis by incorporating the latest evidence for the management of acute pancreatitis in the Japanese-language version of JPN guidelines 2010. Eleven clinical questions (CQ) are proposed: (1) worsening clinical manifestations and hematological data, positive blood bacteria culture test, positive blood endotoxin test, and the presence of gas bubbles in and around the pancreas on CT scan are indirect findings of infected pancreatic necrosis; (2) bacteriological examination by fine needle aspiration is useful for making a definitive diagnosis of infected pancreatic necrosis; (3) conservative treatment should be performed in sterile pancreatic necrosis; (4) infected pancreatic necrosis is an indication for interventional therapy. However, conservative treatment by antibiotic administration is also available in patients who are in stable general condition; (5) early surgery for necrotizing pancreatitis is not recommended, and it should be delayed as long as possible; (6) necrosectomy is recommended as a surgical procedure for infected necrosis; (7) after necrosectomy, a long-term follow-up paying attention to pancreatic function and complications including the stricture of the bile duct and the pancreatic duct is necessary; (8) drainage including percutaneous, endoscopic and surgical procedure should be performed for pancreatic abscess; (9) if the clinical findings of pancreatic abscess are not improved by percutaneous or endoscopic drainage, surgical drainage should be performed; (10) interventional treatment should be performed for pancreatic pseudocysts that give rise to symptoms, accompany complications or increase the diameter of cysts and (11) percutaneous drainage, endoscopic drainage or surgical procedures are selected in accordance with the conditions of individual cases.

The assessment of severity at the initial medical examination plays an important role in introducing adequate early treatment and the transfer of patients to a medical facility that can cope with severe acute pancreatitis. Under these circumstances, "criteria for severity assessment" have been prepared in various countries, including Japan, and these criteria are now being evaluated. The criteria for severity assessment of acute pancreatitis in Japan were determined in 1990 (of which a partial revision was made in 1999). In 2008, an overall revision was made and the new Japanese criteria for severity assessment of acute pancreatitis were prepared. In the new criteria for severity assessment, the diagnosis of severe acute pancreatitis can be made according to 9 prognostic factors and/or the computed tomography (CT) grades based on contrast-enhanced CT. Patients with severe acute pancreatitis are expected to be transferred to a specialist medical center or to an intensive care unit to receive adequate treatment there. In Japan, severe acute pancreatitis is recognized as being a specified intractable disease on the basis of these criteria, so medical expenses associated with severe acute pancreatitis are covered by Government payment.

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.

In the care of acute pancreatitis, a prompt search for the etiologic condition of the disease should be conducted. A differentiation of gallstone-induced acute pancreatitis should be given top priority in its etiologic diagnosis because it is related to the decision of treatment policy. Examinations necessary for diagnosing gallstone-induced acute pancreatitis include blood tests and ultrasonography. Early ERCP/ES should be performed in patients with gallstone-induced acute pancreatitis if a complication of cholangitis and a prolonged passage disorder of the biliary tract are suspected. The treatment for bile duct stones with the use of ERCP/ES alone is not recommended in cases of gallstone-induced pancreatitis with gallbladder stones. Cholecystectomy for gallstone-induced acute pancreatitis should be performed using a laparoscopic procedure as the first option as soon as the disease has subsided.

When a diagnosis of acute pancreatitis (AP) is made, fundamental medical treatment consisting of fasting, intravenous (IV) fluid replacement, and analgesics with a close monitoring of vital signs should be immediately started. In parallel with fundamental medical treatment, assessment of severity based on clinical signs, blood test, urinalysis and imaging tests should be performed to determine the way of treatment for each patient. A repeat evaluation of severity is important since the condition is unstable especially in the early stage of AP. At the time of initial diagnosis, the etiology should be investigated by means of blood test, urinalysis and diagnostic imaging. If a biliary pancreatitis accompanied with acute cholangitis or biliary stasis is diagnosed or suspected, an early endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography with or without endoscopic sphincterotomy (ERCP/ES) is recommended in addition to the fundamental medical treatment. In mild cases, the fundamental medical treatment should be continued until clinical symptom is subsided with normal laboratory data. In cases with severe acute pancreatitis (SAP) referral should be considered to medical centers experienced in the treatment of SAP, and intensive care is recommended for preventing both organ failures and infectious complications. Hemodynamic stabilization with vigorous fluid resuscitation, respiratory support and antibiotics are the major parts of intensive care in the early period of SAP. Continuous hemodiafiltration (CHDF) and continuous regional arterial infusion (CRAI) of protease inhibitor and/or antibiotics may be effective to improve pathophysiology of AP especially in the early stage of the disease. In the late stage of AP, infectious complications are critical. If an infectious complication is suspected based on clinical signs, blood test and imaging, a fine needle aspiration (FNA) is recommended to establish a diagnosis. The accuracy of FNA is reported to be 89 ~ 100%. For patients with sterile pancreatitis, non-surgical treatment should be indicated. For patients with infected pancreatic necrosis, therapeutic intervention either by percutaneous, endoscopic, laparoscopic or surgical approach are indicated. The most preferred surgical intervention is necrosectomy, however, non-surgical treatment with antibiotics is still the treatment of choice if the general condition is stable. Necrosectomy should be performed as late as possible. For patients with pancreatic abscess, drainage is recommended.

Clinical indicators set forth in the guidelines have been found to contribute to the improvement in compliance with the guidelines. On the other hand, it has been shown that clinical indicators are more effective when individual indicators are presented in the form of a bundle than when they are given separately. Accordingly, in the JPN Guidelines 2010 for management of acute pancreatitis, those indicators that are judged to be important on the basis of a recommendation classification of "A or B" are presented as a pancreatitis bundle. Each item includes assessment of severity after a diagnosis of pancreatitis has been made, differentiation of pathogenesis, management of gallstone-induced pancreatitis, a sufficient dose of fluid replacement and monitoring, pain control, prophylactic administration of wide-spectrum antibiotics and cholecystectomy following resolution of pancreatic symptoms caused by cholecystolithiasis. Hereafter, the efficacy of these indicators and the significance of their achievement should be examined carefully. Then, the assessment of the compliance rate with the guidelines as well as the assessment of the guidelines and pancreatitis itself should become possible.

Since the publication of the Tokyo Guidelines for the management of acute cholangitis and cholecystitis (TG07), diagnostic criteria and severity assessment criteria for acute cholangitis have been presented and extensively used as the primary standard all over the world. However, it has been found that there are crucial limitations in these criteria. The diagnostic criteria of TG07 do not have enough sensitivity and specificity, and its severity assessment criteria are unsuitable for clinical use. A working team for the revision of TG07 was organized in June, 2010, and these criteria have been updated through clinical implementation and its assessment by means of multi-center analysis. The diagnostic criteria of acute cholangitis have been revised as criteria to establish the diagnosis where cholestasis and inflammation demonstrated by clinical signs or blood test in addition to biliary manifestations demonstrated by imaging are present. The diagnostic criteria of the updated Tokyo Guidelines (TG13) have high sensitivity (87.6 %) and high specificity (77.7 %). TG13 has better diagnostic capacity than TG07. Severity assessment is classified as follows: Grade III: associated with organ failure; Grade II: early biliary drainage should be conducted; Grade1: others. As for the severity assessment criteria of TG07, separating Grade II and Grade I at the time of diagnosis was impossible, so they were unsuitable for clinical practice. Therefore, the severity assessment criteria of TG13 have been revised so as not to lose the timing of biliary drainage or treatment for etiology. Based on evidence, five predictive factors for poor prognosis in acute cholangitis––hyperbilirubinemia, high fever, leukocytosis, elderly patient and hypoalbuminemia––have been extracted. Grade II can be diagnosed if two of these five factors are present. Free full-text articles and a mobile application of TG13 are available via http://www.jshbps.jp/en/guideline/tg13.html .

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.

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.

Background The Tokyo Guidelines for the management of acute cholangitis and cholecystitis were published in 2007 (TG07) and have been widely cited in the world literature. Because of new information that has been published since 2007, we organized the Tokyo Guidelines Revision Committee to conduct a multicenter analysis to develop the updated Tokyo Guidelines (TG13).Methods/materials We retrospectively analyzed 1,432 biliary disease cases where acute cholangitis was suspected. The cases were collected from multiple tertiary care centers in Japan. The 'gold standard' for acute cholangitis in this study was that one of the three following conditions was present: (1) purulent bile was observed; (2) clinical remission following bile duct drainage; or (3) remission was achieved by antibacterial therapy alone, in patients in whom the only site of infection was the biliary tree. Comparisons were made for the validity of each diagnostic criterion among TG13, TG07 and Charcot's triad.Results The major changes in diagnostic criteria of TG07 were re-arrangement of the diagnostic items and exclusion of abdominal pain from the diagnostic list. The sensitivity improved from 82.8 % (TG07) to 91.8 % (TG13). While the specificity was similar to TG07, the false positive rate in cases of acute cholecystitis was reduced from 15.5 to 5.9 %. The sensitivity of Charcot's triad was only 26.4 % but the specificity was 95.6 %. However, the false positive rate in cases of acute cholecystitis was 11.9 % and not negligible. As for severity grading, Grade II (moderate) acute cholangitis is defined as being associated with any two of the significant prognostic factors which were derived from evidence presented recently in the literature. The factors chosen allow severity assessment to be performed soon after diagnosis of acute cholangitis.Conclusion TG13 present a new standard for the diagnosis, severity grading, and management of acute cholangitis.

Three years have passed since the publication of the Tokyo Guidelines for the management of acute cholangitis and cholecystitis, and we believe that the time has come to assess their validity. In this study, we validated the diagnostic accuracy of these criteria in 74 patients with an initial diagnosis of acute cholangitis and 81 patients with an initial diagnosis of acute cholecystitis. We also statistically compared the accuracy of the diagnosis made based on the Tokyo Guidelines with that based on the presence of Charcot’s triad for acute cholangitis and Murphy’s sign for acute cholecystitis with use of the sign test to assess differences. The results revealed that the diagnostic sensitivity and specificity of the Tokyo Guidelines for suspected or definitive acute cholangitis were 72.1 and 38.5%, respectively, and the corresponding values for definitive cholangitis alone were 63.9 and 69.2%, respectively. For definitive acute cholecystitis, the diagnostic sensitivity and specificity of the Tokyo Guidelines were 84.9 and 50.0%, respectively. The accuracy of diagnosis based on the Tokyo Guidelines was significantly higher than that based on the presence of Charcot’s triad (acute cholangitis, p

Pancreatitis remains the most common severe complication of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). Detailed information about the findings of previous studies concerning post-ERCP pancreatitis has not been utilized sufficiently. The purpose of the present article was to present guidelines for the diagnostic criteria of post-ERCP pancreatitis, and its incidence, risk factors, and prophylactic procedures that are supported by evidence. To achieve this purpose, a critical examination was made of the articles on post-ERCP pancreatitis, based on the data obtained by research studies published up to 2009. At present, there are no standardized diagnostic criteria for post-ERCP pancreatitis. It is appropriate that post-ERCP pancreatitis is defined as acute pancreatitis that has developed following ERCP, and its diagnosis and severity assessment should be made according to the diagnostic criteria and severity assessment of the Japanese Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare. The incidence of acute pancreatitis associated with diagnostic and therapeutic ERCP is 0.4–1.5 and 1.6–5.4%, respectively. Endoscopic papillary balloon dilation is associated with a high risk of acute pancreatitis compared with endoscopic sphincterotomy. It was made clear that important risk factors include dysfunction of the Oddi sphincter, being of the female sex, past history of post-ERCP pancreatitis, and performance of pancreaticography. Temporary prophylactic placement of pancreatic stents in the high-risk group is useful for the prevention of post-ERCP pancreatitis [odds ratio (OR) 3.2, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.6–6.4, number needed to treat (NNT) 10]. Use of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) is associated with a reduction in the development of post-ERCP pancreatitis (OR 0.46, 95% CI 0.32–0.65). Single rectal administration of NSAIDs is useful for the prevention of post-ERCP pancreatitis [relative risk (RR) 0.36, 95% CI 0.22–0.60, NNT 15] and decreases the development of pancreatitis in both the low-risk group (RR 0.29, 95% CI 0.12–0.71) and the high-risk group (RR 0.40, 95% CI 0.23–0.72) of post-ERCP pancreatitis. As for somatostatin, a bolus injection may be most useful compared with short- or long-term infusion (OR 0.271, 95% CI 0.138–0.536, risk difference 8.2%, 95% CI 4.4–12.0%). The usefulness of gabexate mesilate was not apparent in any of the following conditions: acute pancreatitis (control 5.7 vs. 4.8% for gabexate mesilate), hyperamylasemia (40.6 vs. 36.9%), and abdominal pain (1.7 vs. 8.9%). Formulation of diagnostic criteria for post-ERCP pancreatitis is needed. Temporary prophylactic placement of pancreatic stents in the high-risk group offers the most promise as a means of preventing post-ERCP pancreatitis. As for pharmacological attempts, there are high expectations concerning NSAIDs because they are excellent in terms of cost-effectiveness, ease of use, and safety. There was no evidence of effective prophylaxis with the use of protease inhibitors, especially gabexate mesilate.

Patients who have been diagnosed as having acute pancreatitis should be, on principle, hospitalized. Crucial fundamental management is required soon after a diagnosis of acute pancreatitis has been made and includes monitoring of the conscious state, the respiratory and cardiovascular system, the urinary output, adequate fluid replacement and pain control. Along with such management, etiologic diagnosis and severity assessment should be conducted. Patients with a diagnosis of severe acute pancreatitis should be transferred to a medical facility where intensive respiratory and cardiovascular management as well as interventional treatment, blood purification therapy and nutritional support are available. The disease condition in acute pancreatitis changes every moment and even symptoms that are mild at the time of diagnosis may become severe later. Therefore, severity assessment should be conducted repeatedly at least within 48 h following diagnosis. An adequate dose of fluid replacement is essential to stabilize cardiovascular dynamics and the dose should be adjusted while assessing circulatory dynamics constantly. A large dose of fluid replacement is usually required in patients with severe acute pancreatitis. Prophylactic antibiotic administration is recommended to prevent infectious complications in patients with severe acute pancreatitis. Although the efficacy of intravenous administration of protease inhibitors is still a matter of controversy, there is a consensus in Japan that a large dose of a synthetic protease inhibitor should be given to patients with severe acute pancreatitis in order to prevent organ failure and other complications. Enteral feeding is superior to parenteral nutrition when it comes to the nutritional support of patients with severe acute pancreatitis. The JPN Guidelines recommend, as optional continuous regional arterial infusion and blood purification therapy.

There are a few typographical mistakes in the original article. Below are the corrections. 1. Table 3, Community-acquired biliary infections, Grade II and III, notes for metronidazole should be ‘‘d’’ instead of ‘‘c.’’ Table 3, Grade II and III column, metronidazole should be corrected as metronidazole 2. Page 68, in the right upper paragraph, piperacillin/ sulbactam should be corrected as piperacillin/tazobactam as in Table 7. The online version of the original article can be found under doi:10.1007/s00534-012-0572-0.