Back to Authors

Cipriani, Federica

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8651-5982

Mayo Clinic

IRCCS Ospedale San Raffaele

Citations 3

E-AHPBA–ESSO–ESSR Innsbruck consensus guidelines for preoperative liver function assessment before hepatectomy
Primavesi, Florian , Maglione, Manuel , Cipriani, Federica , Denecke, Timm , Oberkofler, Christian E. , Dasari, B. , Heil, Jan , Sgarbură, Olivia , Søreide, Kjetil , Díaz-Nieto, Rafael, Geisel, Dominik , Henninger, Benjamin , Hessheimer, Amelia J. , Mole, Damian J. , Reiberger, Thomas , Schnitzbauer, Andreas A. , Sparrelid, Ernesto , Stockmann, Martin , Truant, Stéphanie , Aldrighetti, Luca , Braunwarth, Eva , D’Hondt, Mathieu , DeOliveira, Michelle L., Erdmann, Joris I. , Kaczirek, Klaus , Malik, Hassan , Öfner, Dietmar , Rahbari, Nuh N. , Göbel, Georg , Siriwardena, Ajith K. , Dasari, Bobby V M , Sgarbura, Olivia , Søreide, Kjetil , Lesurtel, Mickaël , Mole, Damian , Schnitzbauer, Andreas A , Aldrighetti, Luca , Erdmann, Joris I , Gruenberger, Thomas , Öfner, Dietmar , Siriwardena, Ajith K , Maier, Eva , Reiberger, Thomas , Cipriani, Federica , Oberkofler, Christian , Maglione, Manuel , Starlinger, Patrick , Fondevila, Constantino , Frampton, Adam E. , Lesurtel, Mickaël , Öllinger, Robert , Olthof, Pim , Schwarz, Christoph C. , Fuks, David , Gruenberger, Thomas , Stättner, Stefan

British Journal of Surgery | July 20, 2023 | Volume: 110 | Issue: 10 | Pages: 1331-1347

10.1093/bjs/znad233 Get It

Abstract Background Posthepatectomy liver failure (PHLF) contributes significantly to morbidity and mortality after liver surgery. Standardized assessment of preoperative liver function is crucial to identify patients at risk. These European consensus guidelines provide guidance for preoperative patient assessment. Methods A modified Delphi approach was used to achieve consensus. The expert panel consisted of hepatobiliary surgeons, radiologists, nuclear medicine specialists, and hepatologists. The guideline process was supervised by a methodologist and reviewed by a patient representative. A systematic literature search was performed in PubMed/MEDLINE, the Cochrane library, and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry. Evidence assessment and statement development followed Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network methodology. Results Based on 271 publications covering 4 key areas, 21 statements (at least 85 per cent agreement) were produced (median level of evidence 2− to 2+). Only a few systematic reviews (2++) and one RCT (1+) were identified. Preoperative liver function assessment should be considered before complex resections, and in patients with suspected or known underlying liver disease, or chemotherapy-associated or drug-induced liver injury. Clinical assessment and blood-based scores reflecting liver function or portal hypertension (for example albumin/bilirubin, platelet count) aid in identifying risk of PHLF. Volumetry of the future liver remnant represents the foundation for assessment, and can be combined with indocyanine green clearance or LiMAx® according to local expertise and availability. Functional MRI and liver scintigraphy are alternatives, combining FLR volume and function in one examination. Conclusion These guidelines reflect established methods to assess preoperative liver function and PHLF risk, and have uncovered evidence gaps of interest for future research.
The Miami International Evidence-based Guidelines on Minimally Invasive Pancreas Resection
Asbun, Horacio J. , Moekotte, Alma , Vissers, Frederique L., Kunzler, F. , Cipriani, Federica , D’Angelica, Michael I. , Balduzzi, Alberto , Bassi, Claudio , Björnsson, Bergþór , Boggi, Ugo , Callery, Mark P., Chiaro, Marco Del , Coimbra, Felipe José Fernández , Conrad, Claudius , Cook, Andrew , Coppola, Alessandro , Dervenis, Christos, Dokmak, Safi , Edil, Barish H. , Giulianotti, Pier Cristoforo , Hansen, Paul D., Heijde, Nicky van der , Hilst, Jony van , Hester, Caitlin A. , Hogg, Melissa E. , Jarufe, Nicolás , Jeyarajah, D. Rohan, Kim, Song Cheol, Khatkov, Igor , Kokudo, Norihiro , Kooby, David A. , Korrel, Maarten , Leon, Francisco J. de, Lluís, Núria , Lof, Sanne , Demartines, Nicolas , Merchant, Nipun B. , Molenaar, I. Quintus, Moravek, Cassadie, Mou, Yiping , Nealon, William H. , Palanivelu, Chinnusamy, Pessaux, Patrick , Pitt, Henry A. , Primrose, John N., Rawashdeh, Arab , Sanford, Dominic E. , Senthilnathan, Palanisamy, Shrikhande, Shailesh V. , Stauffer, John , Takaori, Kyoichi , Tang, Chung Ngai, Vollmer, Charles M., Wakabayashi, Go , Walsh, R. Matthew , Wang, Shin-E, Zinner, Michael J. , Wolfgang, Christopher L. , Zureikat, Amer H. , Zwart, M. , Conlon, Kevin C. , Kendrick, Michael L., Zeh, Herbert J. , Hilal, Mohammad Abu, Besselink, Marc G. , Primrose, John , Hilal, Mohammad Abu , Demartines, N , A Stauffer, John , Alseidi, Adnan A. , Edwin, Bjørn , Han, Ho-Seong , Jeyarajah, D. Rohan , Keck, Tobias , Machado, Marcel Autran C. , Martinie, John B. , Moravek, Cassadie, Nakamura, Masafumi , Palanivelu, Chinnusamy , Polanco, Patricio Marcelo , Talamonti, Marina , Wang, Shin‐E , Kendrick, Michael L. , Besselink, Marc G , Cipriani, Federica

Annals of Surgery | September 22, 2019 | Volume: 271 | Issue: 1 | Pages: 1-14

10.1097/sla.0000000000003590 Get It

Objective: The aim of this study was to develop and externally validate the first evidence-based guidelines on minimally invasive pancreas resection (MIPR) before and during the International Evidence-based Guidelines on Minimally Invasive Pancreas Resection (IG-MIPR) meeting in Miami (March 2019). Summary Background Data: MIPR has seen rapid development in the past decade. Promising outcomes have been reported by early adopters from high-volume centers. Subsequently, multicenter series as well as randomized controlled trials were reported; however, guidelines for clinical practice were lacking. Methods: The Scottisch Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) methodology was used, incorporating these 4 items: systematic reviews using PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases to answer clinical questions, whenever possible in PICO style, the GRADE approach for assessment of the quality of evidence, the Delphi method for establishing consensus on the developed recommendations, and the AGREE-II instrument for the assessment of guideline quality and external validation. The current guidelines are cosponsored by the International Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association, the Americas Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association, the Asian-Pacific Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association, the European-African Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association, the European Association for Endoscopic Surgery, Pancreas Club, the Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgery, the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract, and the Society of Surgical Oncology. Results: After screening 16,069 titles, 694 studies were reviewed, and 291 were included. The final 28 recommendations covered 6 topics; laparoscopic and robotic distal pancreatectomy, central pancreatectomy, pancreatoduodenectomy, as well as patient selection, training, learning curve, and minimal annual center volume required to obtain optimal outcomes and patient safety. Conclusion: The IG-MIPR using SIGN methodology give guidance to surgeons, hospital administrators, patients, and medical societies on the use and outcome of MIPR as well as the approach to be taken regarding this challenging type of surgery.
The Southampton Consensus Guidelines for Laparoscopic Liver Surgery
Hilal, Mohammad Abu , Aldrighetti, Luca , Dagher, Ibrahim, Troisi, Roberto , Alikhanov, Ruslan , Aroori, Somaiah , Belli, Giulio, Besselink, Marc G. , Briceño, Javier , Gayet, Brice, D’Hondt, Mathieu , Lesurtel, Mickaël , Menon, Krishna , Lodge, Peter, Rotellar, Fernando , Santoyo, Julio Santoyo , Scatton, Olivier , Sutcliffe, Robert P. , Dam, Ronald M. van , White, Steve, Halls, Mark , Cipriani, Federica , Poel, M. van der, Ciria, Rubén , Barkhatov, Leonid , Gomez-Luque, Yrene, Ocana-Garcia, Sira, Cook, Andrew , Buell, Joseph F. , Clavien, Pierre‐Alain , Dervenis, Christos, Fusai, Giuseppe , Lang, Hauke , Primrose, John , Taylor, Mark , Gulik, Thomas van , Wakabayashi, Go , Asbun, Horacio J. , Cherqui, Daniel , Asbun, Horacio, Ciria, Ruben , Aldrighetti, Luca , Edwin, Bjørn , Besselink, Marc G , Soubrane, Olivier , Poel, Marcel J. van der , Geller, David A. , Rotellar, Fernando , Lesurtel, Mickaël , Cipriani, Federica

Annals of Surgery | October 24, 2017 | Volume: 268 | Issue: 1 | Pages: 11-18

10.1097/sla.0000000000002524 Get It

Objective: The European Guidelines Meeting on Laparoscopic Liver Surgery was held in Southampton on February 10 and 11, 2017 with the aim of presenting and validating clinical practice guidelines for laparoscopic liver surgery. Background: The exponential growth of laparoscopic liver surgery in recent years mandates the development of clinical practice guidelines to direct the speciality's continued safe progression and dissemination. Methods: A unique approach to the development of clinical guidelines was adopted. Three well-validated methods were integrated: the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network methodology for the assessment of evidence and development of guideline statements; the Delphi method of establishing expert consensus, and the AGREE II-GRS Instrument for the assessment of the methodological quality and external validation of the final statements. Results: Along with the committee chairman, 22 European experts; 7 junior experts and an independent validation committee of 11 international surgeons produced 67 guideline statements for the safe progression and dissemination of laparoscopic liver surgery. Each of the statements reached at least a 95% consensus among the experts and were endorsed by the independent validation committee. Conclusion: The European Guidelines Meeting for Laparoscopic Liver Surgery has produced a set of clinical practice guidelines that have been independently validated for the safe development and progression of laparoscopic liver surgery. The Southampton Guidelines have amalgamated the available evidence and a wealth of experts’ knowledge taking in consideration the relevant stakeholders’ opinions and complying with the international methodology standards.