Murad, Sarwa Darwish

Noncirrhotic portal hypertension has historically been described using heterogeneous and region-specific terminology—such as idiopathic portal hypertension (IPH), noncirrhotic portal fibrosis (NCPF), obliterative portal venopathy, and nodular regenerative hyperplasia—leading to substantial variability in diagnosis, reporting, and international research collaboration. Differences in guideline definitions from major societies (AASLD, EASL, and APASL), together with the presence of characteristic histologic lesions in patients without clinically overt portal hypertension, have further complicated disease classification. To address these challenges, a large, multisociety, international initiative was convened to harmonize nomenclature and diagnostic criteria. Representatives from liver, pathology, and pediatric hepatology societies across the Americas, Europe, and Asia participated in a structured consensus process that included specialized working groups and external Delphi validation. The initiative produced a globally harmonized and implementable diagnostic framework. Consensus was reached that the terms porto-sinusoidal vascular disorder (PSVD) and NCPF may be used interchangeably when identical diagnostic criteria are applied, and that they should be written as PSVD or NCPF . The diagnosis was defined as fundamentally clinicopathological, requiring integrated assessment. Core principles include the need for a high-quality liver biopsy (≥10 mm), mandatory exclusion of cirrhosis, and systematic exclusion of specific alternative conditions. Importantly, the consensus recognizes that PSVD or NCPF may be diagnosed even without clinical portal hypertension and may coexist with other liver diseases, provided cirrhosis is excluded. Standardized major and minor histologic criteria were developed collaboratively by expert pathologists and externally validated. Features of portal hypertension were harmonized into specific and nonspecific categories applicable to routine clinical practice. An integrated diagnostic scoring system incorporating histology, clinical features, associated conditions, and concommitant etiologies was developed and validated using the Delphi method. This consensus provides the first internationally endorsed, unified framework for the diagnosis of PSVD or NCPF. Its global implementation is expected to reduce diagnostic variability, improve comparability across regions, and facilitate the development of robust, internationally harmonized clinical and translational research cohorts.

ABSTRACT Introduction Although liver transplantation (LT) rates have increased globally, the demand for organs still exceeds the supply. This review highlights cultures with significant influences on organ donation and LT. Methods We performed a literature search for articles related to cultures, ethnologies, philosophies, policies, religions, socio‐economic factors, and other influences affecting organ donation in LT around the world. Results There are astonishing similarities between different cultures. In Africa, Asia, and Europe, people often view the postmortem bodies as sacred and believe that their bodies are gifts from “God” or ancestors. To respect the gift of life, to have a chance in reincarnation, or to enjoy life after death, many believe that their bodily sanctity must be preserved. In Asia, Europe, and Latin America, there is a general reluctance to speak about death. Religions also play an important role in people's views on organ donation. Different regions around the world have similar challenges to organ donation, such as misconceptions about organ trafficking, political and economic instability, and a lack of governmental or religious support. Conclusion Addressing the complexities of organ donation and LT requires a multifaceted approach. Culturally sensitive education tailored to diverse communities can dispel myths and misconceptions surrounding organ donation. Fostering partnerships between healthcare providers, religious leaders, community organizations, and policymakers can further facilitate open dialogues and promote organ donation as a noble act to save lives. Social Media Similar cultures around the world post challenges for organ donation. Organizations should foster partnerships between healthcare providers, politicians, and religious leaders to promote donation.

Objective: To define benchmark values for liver transplantation (LT) in patients with perihilar cholangiocarcinoma (PHC) enabling unbiased comparisons. Background: Transplantation for PHC is used with reluctance in many centers and even contraindicated in several countries. Although benchmark values for LT are available, there is a lack of specific data on LT performed for PHC. Methods: PHC patients considered for LT after Mayo-like protocol were analyzed in 17 reference centers in 2 continents over the recent 5-year period (2014–2018). The minimum follow-up was 1 year. Benchmark patients were defined as operated at high-volume centers (≥50 overall LT/year) after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy, with a tumor diameter <3 cm, negative lymph nodes, and with the absence of relevant comorbidities. Benchmark cutoff values were derived from the 75th to 25th percentiles of the median values of all benchmark centers. Results: One hundred thirty-four consecutive patients underwent LT after completion of the neoadjuvant treatment. Of those, 89.6% qualified as benchmark cases. Benchmark cutoffs were 90-day mortality ≤5.2%; comprehensive complication index at 1 year of ≤33.7; grade ≥3 complication rates ≤66.7%. These values were better than benchmark values for other indications of LT. Five-year disease-free survival was largely superior compared with a matched group of nodal negative patients undergoing curative liver resection (n=106) (62% vs 32%, P<0.001). Conclusion: This multicenter benchmark study demonstrates that LT offers excellent outcomes with superior oncological results in early stage PHC patients, even in candidates for surgery. This provocative observation should lead to a change in available therapeutic algorithms for PHC.

Although short‐term risks of living donor hepatectomy have been well defined, little is known about the longterm impact. We aimed to perform a systematic follow‐up to screen for unanticipated health consequences of liver donation. All donors who were more than 1 year from donation were invited for a systematic evaluation including physical and laboratory assessment, quality of life questionnaire, and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)/magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP). Those unable to return were offered the questionnaire and laboratory assessment at home. Out of our total of 97 donors, 45 returned for a full assessment and 23 completed labs and survey locally (total n = 68; 70%) after a median of 5.5 years (1.5‐10.9 years) after donation. The only laboratory abnormality was a significant decrease in platelet count (median 198 ×109/L versus 224 ×109/L before donation; P < 0.001), whereas 93% of patients were still above normal limits. No late biliary strictures or other structural abnormalities were found on MRI/MRCP. Liver regeneration was complete. Spleen volume did significantly increase (median 278 cm3 versus 230 cm3 before donation; P < 0.001) without resulting in lowered platelets (P = 0.73). The most common complaints were persistent incisional numbness and changed bowel habits. Seven donors (11%) reported problems obtaining insurance. The vast majority (97%) would have donated again. In conclusion, longterm outcome following liver donation appears satisfactory. None of our donors have developed occult biliary strictures, failure of regeneration, abnormal liver function, or other important health consequences after a median of 5.5 years from surgery. These findings can be used when counseling potential donors in the future. Liver Transplantation 22 934–942 2016 AASLD