Citations

Mayo Clinic

Clear

1140 citation(s) found for "Núñez, Jorge".

International Delphi Consensus on Medial Meniscal Root Tears Shows High Agreement on Diagnosis, Treatment, and Rehabilitation but Lack of Agreement on Treatment of Asymptomatic Tears
Chahla, Jorge , Chahla, Jorge, García, José Rafael , Tollefson, Luke V. , Dzidzishvili, Lika , Gerhold, Cameron , Krych, Aaron J. , LaPrade, Robert F., Group, Meniscus Root International Expert, Bassett, Ashley J., Bernholt, David L., Bhatia, Sanjeev, Bøe, Berte, Brown, Charles H., Chung, Kyu Sung, Cohen, Moisés, Engebretsen, Lars, Familiari, Filippo, Faucett, Scott C., Feucht, Matthias J., Furumatsu, Takayuki, Geeslin, Andrew G., Getgood, Alan M.J., Hiranaka, Takaaki, Inderhaug, Eivind, Iñiguez, C. Magaly, Johnson, Darren L., Kim, Jin Goo, Kim, Sung‐Hwan, Kodama, Yuya, Kon, Elizaveta, Kopf, Sebastian, LaPrade, Christopher M., Larson, Christopher M., Lee, Dhong Won, Lind, Martin, Logan, Catherine A., López‐Torres, Irene I., Lording, Timothy, Maestu, Rodrigo, Moatshe, Gilbert, Monson, Jill K., Murray, Iain R., Musahl, Volker, Vyhmeister, Roberto Negrin, Okazaki, Yuki, Parker, David, Petersen, Wolf, Riboh, Jonathan C., Seil, Romain, Servien, Elvire, Sonnery‐Cottet, Bertrand, Spalding, Tim, Stevenson, Ciara, Stuart, Michael J., Tanaka, Miho J., Tapasvi, Sachin, Tuca, Maria, Wal, Wybren A. van der, Verma, Nikhil N., Bormann, Richard PB. von, Yanke, Adam B., Krych, Aaron J., Kopf, Sebastian , Krych, Aaron J , Chahla, Jorge A , Chahla, Jorge, Allende, Felicitas , LaPrade, Robert F., Group, Meniscus Root International Expert, Bassett, Ashley J., Bernholt, David L., Bhatia, Sanjeev, Bøe, Berte, Brown, Charles H., Chung, Kyu Sung, Cohen, Moisés, Engebretsen, Lars, Familiari, Filippo, Faucett, Scott C., Feucht, Matthias J., Furumatsu, Takayuki, Geeslin, Andrew G., Getgood, Alan M.J., Hiranaka, Takaaki, Inderhaug, Eivind, Iñiguez, C. Magaly, Johnson, Darren L., Kim, Jin Goo, Kim, Sung‐Hwan, Kodama, Yuya, Kon, Elizaveta , LaPrade, Christopher M., Larson, Christopher M., Lee, Dhong Won, Lind, Martin, Logan, Catherine A., López‐Torres, Irene I., Lording, Timothy, Maestu, Rodrigo, Moatshe, Gilbert, Monson, Jill K., Murray, Iain R., Musahl, Volker, Vyhmeister, Roberto Negrin, Okazaki, Yuki, Parker, David, Petersen, Wolf, Riboh, Jonathan C., Seil, Romain, Servien, Elvire, Sonnery‐Cottet, Bertrand, Spalding, Tim, Stevenson, Ciara, Stuart, Michael J., Tanaka, Miho J., Tapasvi, Sachin, Tuca, Maria, Wal, Wybren A. van der, Verma, Nikhil N., Bormann, Richard PB. von, Yanke, Adam B., Krych, Aaron J.

Arthroscopy | July 3, 2025 | Volume: 41 | Issue: 11 | Pages: 4683-4698

10.1016/j.arthro.2025.06.028 | PMID 40614908 Get It

Purpose To develop an expert consensus statement on the diagnosis, management, and rehabilitation of medial meniscal root tears (MMRTs) using a modified Delphi technique. Methods A working group developed statements on MMRT diagnosis, nonoperative management, surgical indications, surgical management, alignment, and rehabilitation using modified Delphi techniques. Fifty‐six experts were surveyed over 3 rounds to reach consensus, with agreement measured on a 5‐point Likert scale. Statements were included, revised, or excluded on the basis of predefined thresholds (≥75% agreement, <20% disagreement). Experts suggested revisions or new statements in the first 2 rounds, and final consensus statements were included. Results All 56 experts completed 3 survey rounds. Experts agreed that root tears may occur with no known history of trauma, typically in older patients, and that it should be diagnosed with an magnetic resonance imaging. In symptomatic patients with MMRTs without advanced osteoarthritis should be repaired using an anatomic transtibial pull‐out technique (performing a pie‐crusting technique can be helpful for visualization). Nonoperative management is advised for patients with advanced osteoarthritis. High tibial osteotomy may be considered for significant varus malalignment during MMRT repair. The only statement without consensus was the management of asymptomatic MMRTs with mild medial compartment cartilage wear, indicating ongoing debate. Conclusions Overall, 98% of statements reached consensus. There is agreement that magnetic resonance imaging is the gold standard for diagnosis. Symptomatic MMRTs without advanced osteoarthritis should be repaired early using an anatomic transtibial pull‐out technique. End‐stage knee osteoarthritis warrants nonoperative management of MMRTs, and a structured postoperative protocol with limited weightbearing and range of motion is essential after repair. No agreement was reached on managing asymptomatic MMRTs in patients without significant medial compartment degeneration. Meniscal centralization sutures may help in cases of substantial extrusion, but their routine use is debated. Level of Evidence Level V, consensus of expert opinion.
The PIEE Cycle: A Structured Framework for Red Teaming Large Language Models in Clinical Decision-Making
Trabilsy, Maissa , Prabha, Srinivasagam , Haider, Syed Ali , Genovese, Ariana , Wood, Nadia , Gopala, Narayanan, Tao, Cui , Forte, Antonio J. , Haider, Syed A , Genovese, Ariana , Wood, Nadia , Tao, Cui , Forte, Antonio Jorge , Prabha, Srinivagasam , Gomez-Cabello, Cesar A. , Borna, Sahar

Bioengineering | July 1, 2025 | Volume: 12 | Issue: 7 | Pages: 706

10.3390/bioengineering12070706 | PMID 40722398 Get It

The increasing integration of large language models (LLMs) into healthcare presents significant opportunities, but also critical risks related to patient safety, accuracy, and ethical alignment. Despite these concerns, no standardized framework exists for systematically evaluating and stress testing LLM behavior in clinical decision-making. The PIEE cycle—Planning and Preparation, Information Gathering and Prompt Generation, Execution, and Evaluation—is a structured red-teaming framework developed specifically to address artificial intelligence (AI) safety risks in healthcare decision-making. PIEE enables clinicians and informatics teams to simulate adversarial prompts, including jailbreaking, social engineering, and distractor attacks, to stress-test language models in real-world clinical scenarios. Model performance is evaluated using specific metrics such as true positive and false positive rates for detecting harmful content, hallucination rates measured through adapted TruthfulQA scoring, safety and reliability assessments, bias detection via adapted BBQ benchmarks, and ethical evaluation using structured Likert-based scoring rubrics. The framework is illustrated using examples from plastic surgery, but is adaptable across specialties, and is intended for use by all medical providers, regardless of their backgrounds or familiarity with artificial intelligence. While the framework is currently conceptual and validation is ongoing, PIEE provides a practical foundation for assessing the clinical reliability and ethical robustness of LLMs in medicine.
Consensus guideline for the management of gastric cancer with synchronous peritoneal metastases
Butensky, Samuel D. , Bansal, Varun , Su, David , Waheed, Muhammad Talha , Nikiforchin, Andrei , Gomez‐Mayorga, Jorge L. , Radomski, Shannon N. , Sun, Beatrice J. , Turaga, Kiran K. , Gunderson, Craig G. , Lacy, Jill , In, Haejin, Kennedy, Timothy J., Yoon, Harry H. , Sundar, Raghav , Ly, Quan P. , Fackche, Nadege , Chan, Carlos H.F. , Maron, Steven B. , Hoehn, Richard S. , Bansal, Varun V , Su, David G , Radomski, Shannon N , Turaga, Kiran K , Badgwell, Brian D , Yoon, Harry H , Chan, Carlos H F , Hoehn, Richard , Olecki, Elizabeth Josephine , Badgwell, Brian D. , In, Haejin , Greer, Jonathan B. , Woo, Yanghee

Cancer | June 25, 2025 | Volume: 131 | Issue: 13 | Pages: No page available

10.1002/cncr.35870 | PMID 40558029 Get It

AbstractBackgroundGastric cancer with synchronous peritoneal metastases is a debilitating disease with limited treatment options. This article describes an update of the 2018 Chicago Consensus guidelines addressing the management of gastric cancer with synchronous peritoneal metastases in line with the most recent evidence.MethodsA clinical management pathway was updated through two rounds of a Delphi consensus to assess agreement levels with pathway blocks. Supporting evidence underwent evaluation using a rapid literature review. Meta‐analyses were performed as appropriate.ResultsOverall, the level of evidence in this disease subset was low to moderate. Of 124 participants in the first round, 109 (88%) responded in the second round. Strong consensus (>90%) was achieved in six of eight blocks (75%) in rounds 1 and 2. A multidisciplinary preoperative assessment and diagnostic laparoscopy should be offered to all patients, whereas patients with a high burden of disease or progression should undergo nonsurgical management. Patients with stable/responsive disease and a low peritoneal carcinomatosis index should subsequently be offered treatment with regional therapeutic interventions and cytoreductive surgery. In patients who are cytology‐positive, systemic therapy can be used to convert them to cytology‐negative, with subsequent surgery offered according to the patient's goals of care. Meta‐analysis of observational and randomized control trials revealed a survival benefit with the addition of intraperitoneal chemotherapy to cytoreductive surgery (hazard ratio, 0.52).ConclusionsThe consensus‐driven clinical pathway for gastric cancer with synchronous peritoneal metastases offers vital clinical guidance for practitioners. There is a growing body of high‐quality evidence to support management strategies, and future clinical trials are eagerly awaited.
International Registry of thyroid cancer in Latin American (CaTaLiNA): epidemiology, clinical and follow-up study protocol in Latin American countries during the period 2023–2028
Solís-Pazmiño, Paola , Solis-Pazmino, Paola , Ledesma, Tannya, Alvarado, Brayner Alejandro Ramírez, Rojas, Tatiana, Pazmino, Camila , Tite, Belen, Figueroa, Luis, Hernández, Víctor, Salazar, Jorge, García, Cristhian, Rosero, Daniela, Ruilova, Lisbeth, Imaicela, Luis , Abad, Hamilton, Palacios, Antonio Lozano, Zanella, Virgílio Gonzales , Nasseri, Yosef , Cohen, Jason , Brito, Juan P. , Ponce-Ponte, Oscar J., Ponce, Oscar J. , Lincango, Eddy, Rojas, Tatiana , Brito, Juan P , Ponce, Oscar Josue , Pilatuna, Eduardo A , Ron, Mario , Alvarado, Benjamin, Figueroa, Luis, Lincango-Naranjo, Eddy , Rosero, Daniela, López‐Guerrero, José Antonio , Paz‐Ibarra, José , Gonzalez, Camilo, Palacios, Antonio, Soto-Becerra, Percy

BMJ Open | June 22, 2025 | Volume: 15 | Issue: 6 | Pages: e093471

10.1136/bmjopen-2024-093471 | PMID 40545306 Get It

Introduction Differentiated thyroid cancer (DTC) is the most common endocrine malignancy, with a high 5-year survival rate of approximately 98%. Despite advances in diagnosis and treatment, up to 20% of patients experience recurrence, adversely affecting their quality of life. Predictive models have been developed to assess recurrence risk and guide clinical decision-making, but these models often face limitations such as retrospective design, lack of diversity in study populations and absence of external validation. The primary aim is to externally validate existing predictive models for DTC recurrence using prospective data from a diverse Latin American cohort. The secondary aim is to explore opportunities for model recalibration to improve their performance in our population. Methods and analysis The CaTaLiNA study is a multicentre prospective observational study conducted across 10 hospitals in five Latin American countries, including Ecuador, Peru, Uruguay and Mexico. Patients aged 18 years or older receiving treatment for DTC, such as the first thyroid surgery, active surveillance or radiofrequency ablation will be included. Recruitment will occur from November 2023 to June 2025, with follow-up extending until June 2028. Data collection will include baseline clinical, surgical and histological characteristics, treatment details and follow-up outcomes. Statistical analysis will follow the Transparent Reporting of a multivariable prediction model for Individual Prognosis or Diagnosis guidelines, using imputation strategies for missing data and evaluating calibration and discrimination of the prediction models. Calibration measures include the ratio of expected and observed events, calibration slope and calibration plot, while discrimination will be assessed using the C-index and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve. Ethics and dissemination This study protocol was approved by Comité de Ética de Investigación en Seres Humanos de la Universidad San Francisco de Quito USFQ ‘CEISH-USFQ’ APO-010–2023-CEIHS-USFQ Oficio No. 161-2023-CA-23030M-CEISH-USFQ. Results will be disseminated via peer-reviewed publications.
Surgical Treatment and Complications of Lateral Extra‐articular Procedures in the Anterior Cruciate Ligament–Reconstructed Knee: Part II of an International Consensus Statement
Sonnery‐Cottet, Bertrand , Carrozzo, Alessandro , Saithna, Adnan , Vieira, Thaïs Dutra , Musahl, Volker , Helito, Camilo Partezani , Panel, The International Experts, Bedi, Asheesh, Bryant, Dianne, Cavaignac, Etienne, Chahla, Jorge, Claes, Steven, Cordasco, Frank, Daggett, Matt, Devitt, Brian, Feller, Julian, Fink, Christian, Frank, Rachel, Geeslin, Andrew, Grassi, Alberto, Green, Daniel, Guenther, Daniel, Heard, Mark, Herbst, Elmar, Hopper, Graeme, Inderhaug, Eivind, Irrgang, James, Kaeding, Christopher, Kittl, Christopher, Kocher, Mininder, Koga, Hideyuki, Krych, Aaron J., LaPrade, Robert, Levy, Bruce, Litchfield, Robert Bruce, Lording, Tim, Lowe, Walter, MacDonald, Peter, Marx, Robert, Moatshe, Gilbert, Neri, Thomas, Ouanezar, Herve, Padua, Vitor Barion de Castro, Parker, David, Pioger, Charles, Servien, Elvire, Sherman, Seth, Smith, Patrick, Spalding, Tim, Tapasvi, Sachin, Verdonk, Peter, Williams, Andy, Xerogeanes, John, Young, Simon W., Monaco, Edoardo , Getgood, Alan , Panel, The International Experts, Bedi, Asheesh, Bryant, Dianne, Cavaignac, Etienne, Chahla, Jorge, Claes, Steven, Cordasco, Frank, Daggett, Matt, Devitt, Brian, Feller, Julian, Fink, Christian, Frank, Rachel, Geeslin, Andrew, Grassi, Alberto, Green, Daniel, Guenther, Daniel, Heard, Mark, Herbst, Elmar, Hopper, Graeme, Inderhaug, Eivind, Irrgang, James, Kaeding, Christopher, Kittl, Christopher, Kocher, Mininder, Koga, Hideyuki, Krych, Aaron J., LaPrade, Robert, Levy, Bruce, Litchfield, Robert Bruce, Lording, Tim, Lowe, Walter, MacDonald, Peter, Marx, Robert, Moatshe, Gilbert, Neri, Thomas, Ouanezar, Herve, Padua, Vitor Barion de Castro, Parker, David, Pioger, Charles , Servien, Elvire, Sherman, Seth, Smith, Patrick, Spalding, Tim, Tapasvi, Sachin, Verdonk, Peter, Williams, Andy, Xerogeanes, John, Young, Simon W.

Arthroscopy | June 20, 2025 | Volume: 41 | Issue: 9 | Pages: 3313-3321

10.1016/j.arthro.2025.06.013 | PMID 40544924 Get It

Purpose To establish international expert consensus on surgical techniques, complications, and rehabilitation protocols for lateral extra‐articular procedures (LEAPs) performed adjunctively with anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Methods Fifty‐five knee surgeons from 17 countries on 5 continents completed a 3‐round modified Delphi process. In the final round, 16 statements on LEAP techniques and complications were scored on a 5‐point Likert scale; ≥75% “agree/strongly agree” constituted consensus. When appropriate, strength of recommendation was graded. Statements lacking support were revised until consensus or abandonment. Results Six statements achieved unanimous consensus (100%), 2 had strong consensus (90%‐99.9%), and 3 reached consensus (75%‐89.9%); 4 were removed. Key technical recommendations were as follows: (1) in iliotibial band procedures, the graft strip should pass beneath the lateral collateral ligament; (2) an anatomic technique is mandatory for anterolateral ligament reconstruction; and (3) no single LEAP is clinically superior to another. Unanimous agreement indicated that modern LEAPs do not increase lateral compartment osteoarthritis risk, carry a low complication rate, and do not necessitate changes to rehabilitation or return‐to‐play timelines. Conclusions Consensus defined core surgical principles and confirmed the safety of adding LEAPs to anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. When an iliotibial band graft is used, it should be routed deep to the lateral collateral ligament and fixed between 0° and 60° of knee flexion under low tension. For anterolateral ligament reconstruction, femoral fixation should be in full extension at a posterior‐proximal point relative to the lateral epicondyle. Although no single LEAP proved superiority, adherence to these principles permits safe, effective surgery without altering standard rehabilitation or return‐to‐sport protocols and without increasing osteoarthritis risk. Level of Evidence Level V, expert opinion.
Indications for Lateral Extra‐articular Procedures in the Anterior Cruciate Ligament–Reconstructed Knee: Part I of an International Consensus Statement
Sonnery‐Cottet, Bertrand , Carrozzo, Alessandro , Saithna, Adnan , Vieira, Thaïs Dutra , Musahl, Volker , Helito, Camilo Partezani , Panel, The International Experts, Bedi, Asheesh, Bryant, Dianne, Cavaignac, Etienne, Chahla, Jorge, Claes, Steven, Cordasco, Frank, Daggett, Matt, Devitt, Brian, Feller, Julian, Fink, Christian, Frank, Rachel, Geeslin, Andrew, Grassi, Alberto, Green, Daniel, Guenther, Daniel, Heard, Mark, Herbst, Elmar, Hopper, Graeme, Inderhaug, Eivind, Irrgang, James, Kaeding, Christopher, Kittl, Christopher, Kocher, Mininder, Koga, Hideyuki, Krych, Aaron J., LaPrade, Robert, Levy, Bruce, Litchfield, Robert Bruce, Lording, Tim, Lowe, Walter, MacDonald, Peter, Marx, Robert, Moatshe, Gilbert, Neri, Thomas, Ouanezar, Herve, Padua, Vitor Barion de Castro, Parker, David, Pioger, Charles, Servien, Elvire, Sherman, Seth, Smith, Patrick, Spalding, Tim, Tapasvi, Sachin, Verdonk, Peter, Williams, Andy, Xerogeanes, John, Young, Simon W., Sherman, Seth L. , Monaco, Edoardo , Getgood, Alan , Panel, The International Experts, Bedi, Asheesh, Bryant, Dianne, Cavaignac, Etienne, Chahla, Jorge, Claes, Steven, Cordasco, Frank, Daggett, Matt, Devitt, Brian, Feller, Julian, Fink, Christian, Frank, Rachel, Geeslin, Andrew, Grassi, Alberto, Green, Daniel, Guenther, Daniel, Heard, Mark, Herbst, Elmar, Hopper, Graeme, Inderhaug, Eivind, Irrgang, James, Kaeding, Christopher, Kittl, Christopher, Kocher, Mininder, Koga, Hideyuki, Krych, Aaron J., LaPrade, Robert, Levy, Bruce, Litchfield, Robert Bruce, Lording, Tim, Lowe, Walter, MacDonald, Peter, Marx, Robert, Moatshe, Gilbert, Neri, Thomas, Ouanezar, Herve, Padua, Vitor Barion de Castro, Parker, David, Pioger, Charles , Servien, Elvire, Sherman, Seth, Smith, Patrick, Spalding, Tim, Tapasvi, Sachin, Verdonk, Peter, Williams, Andy, Xerogeanes, John, Young, Simon W.

Arthroscopy | June 20, 2025 | Volume: 41 | Issue: 9 | Pages: 3303-3312

10.1016/j.arthro.2025.06.012 | PMID 40544926 Get It

Purpose To define expert consensus on whether and how lateral extra‐articular procedures (LEAPs) should accompany anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction to optimize outcomes in ACL‐deficient knees. Methods Fifty‐five knee surgeons from 17 countries on 5 continents completed a 3‐round modified Delphi process. Twenty‐one statements on patient selection for combined ACL reconstruction (ACLR) + LEAPs were graded on 5‐point Likert scales; ≥75% “agree/strongly agree” signified consensus. Strength of recommendation was ranked, and statements failing the threshold were revised or discarded after discussion. Results One statement achieved unanimous agreement (100%): it is strongly recommended to add a LEAP for active patients ≤25 years receiving hamstring‐autograft ACLR to reduce graft failure. Strong consensus (≥90%) supported LEAPs in primary ACLR when grade 3 pivot shift (97.9%), knee hyperextension (97.9%), skeletally immature status (79.5%), revision ACLR (91.5%), return to pivoting sports (93.2%), active patients ≤25 years using nonhamstring grafts (90.7%), grade 3 Lachman test (90%), and when multiple relative risk factors coexist (statement 36, 97.1%). Consensus (75%‐89.9%) favored LEAPs for chronic symptomatic ACL deficiency (86.1%), posterior tibial slope >12° (85.7%), and a history of contralateral ACL injury (88.9%). Eight statements did not reach consensus regarding small‐diameter autografts, female athletes, imaging signs of anterolateral injury (e.g., Segond fracture, lateral femoral‐notch sign), and concomitant meniscal procedures. One statement on LEAPs with primary ACL repair was withdrawn because the project focused on reconstruction. Conclusions International experts strongly recommend adding a LEAP in young active patients undergoing hamstring‐autograft ACLR and in cases of high‐grade rotational or anterior laxity, knee hyperextension, revision surgery, or returning to pivoting sports. Unresolved issues include small graft size, female athletes, imaging findings of rotational instability, and concurrent meniscal procedures, highlighting priorities for future research. Level of Evidence Level V, expert opinion.
A 10-Year Real-world Assessment of Longitudinal Outcomes Following Bailout Procedures for Severe Cholecystitis
Lim, Pei‐Wen , Tan, Po Hong, Lillemoe, Keith D. , Nelson, Megan H., Johnston, Pete F., Jorge, Irving , Motamed, Mehrdad, Stucky, Chee‐Chee , Wasif, Nabil , Madura, James A., Jorge, Irving A, Nelson, Megan H., Johnston, Pete F., Chang, Yu‐Hui , Fong, Zhi Ven

Annals of Surgery | June 18, 2025 | Volume: 282 | Issue: 4 | Pages: 553-562

10.1097/sla.0000000000006799 | PMID 40528741 Get It

Objective: We comparatively analyzed the longitudinal outcomes of conversion to open procedure, laparoscopic subtotal cholecystectomy (CCY), and laparoscopic cholecystostomy tube placement. Background: Severe cholecystitis often causes dense inflammation that distorts the hepatocystic anatomy and can make safe dissection during CCY challenging. However, controversy exists regarding the optimal bailout procedure in such situations. Methods: The New York and Florida State all-claims databases were queried for patients who underwent laparoscopic CCY for acute cholecystitis from 2012 to 2021. Hierarchical logistic regression models were used to obtain adjusted estimates, with fixed effects assigned to patient-level variables and random effects assigned to hospital identifiers to adjust for intraclass correlation. Results: Of 384,948 laparoscopic CCYs performed, 5448 (1.4%) were not completed laparoscopically; 1370 underwent conversion to open procedure, 2646 underwent laparoscopic subtotal CCY, and 1432 underwent laparoscopic cholecystostomy tube placement. The conversion to open rate decreased from 0.6% in 2012 to 0.3% in 2021, while the laparoscopic subtotal CCY rate increased from 0.2% in 2012 to 1.4% in 2021. The 1-year bile duct injury (BDI) rate was highest for the conversion to open group (4.4%), followed by the laparoscopic subtotal CCY (0.8%) and laparoscopic cholecystostomy tube groups (0.3%, P<0.001). On adjusted analyses with the conversion to open group as the control, laparoscopic subtotal CCY (OR: 0.17, P<0.001) and laparoscopic cholecystostomy tube were associated with lower BDI rates (OR: 0.08, P<0.001, Figure). The 1-year postoperative endoscopic biliary intervention rate was lowest for the conversion to open group (4.2%), followed by the laparoscopic subtotal CCY (8.4%) and the laparoscopic cholecystostomy tube groups (8.8%, P<0.001). The completion CCY rates for the laparoscopic subtotal CCY and laparoscopic cholecystostomy tube groups were 2.1% and 23.4%, respectively. Among completion CCYs, the open rates were 56.4% in the laparoscopic subtotal CCY group versus 24.5% in the laparoscopic cholecystostomy tube group (P<0.001). Conclusions: In patients with severe cholecystitis requiring a bailout procedure, the BDI rate was highest after conversion to open procedure. Laparoscopic subtotal CCY and laparoscopic cholecystostomy tube were associated with lower BDI rates at the cost of higher postoperative endoscopic biliary intervention rates. Completion CCYs were required in 2.1% and 23.4% of patients who underwent laparoscopic subtotal CCY and laparoscopic cholecystostomy tube placement, respectively, of which the former group’s CCY was more likely to require an open operation.
A Prognostic Index for Advanced Biliary Tract Cancer Treated With Cisplatin, Gemcitabine and Durvalumab: The MAGIC ‐D Index
Persano, Mara , Rimini, Margherita , Salani, Francesca , Prinzi, Federica Lo , Saborowski, Anna , Antonuzzo, Lorenzo , Passeri, Laura , Satake, Tomoyuki, Peeters, Frederik , Pressiani, Tiziana , Corallo, Salvatore , Finkelmeier, Fabian , Pircher, Chiara , Braconi, Chiara , Qaisar, Aitzaz, Pirrone, Chiara, Castet, Florian , Parisi, Alessandro , Scartozzi, Mario, Perkhofer, Lukas , Adeva, Jorge , Spinelli, Gian Paolo , Rodriquenz, Maria Grazia , Leo, Silvana, Alvim, Cecilia Melo, Roque, Ricardo , Rosa, Antonio De, Lanzetta, Irene, Balsano, Rita , Lavacchi, Daniele, Ikeda, Masafumi, Dekervel, Jeroen , Niger, Monica, Tesini, Giulia , Boccaccino, Alessandra , Himmelsbach, Vera, Vogel, Arndt, Rimassa, Lorenza , Casadei‐Gardini, Andrea, Vogel, Arndt , Casadei‐Gardini, Andrea , Kim, Jin Won , Abidoye, Oluseyi , Corallo, Salvatore , Rapposelli, Ilario Giovanni , Finkelmeier, Fabian , Pircher, Chiara , Pirrone, Chiara , Castet, Florian , Yoo, Changhoon , Oneda, Ester , Couto, Nuno , Adeva, Jorge , Tesini, Giulia , Djaballah, Selma Ahcene , Rimassa, Lorenza , Casadei-Gardini, Andrea , Antonuzzo, Lorenzo , Parisi, Alessandro , Casadei-Gardini, Andrea , Saborowski, Anna , Pressiani, Tiziana , Roque, Ricardo , Salani, Francesca , De Rosa, Antonio , Dekervel, Jeroen , Vogel, Arndt , Rimini, Margherita , Nichetti, Federico , Vivaldi, Caterina , Lucchetti, Jessica , Kim, Jin Won , Tamberi, Stefano , Giordano, Guido , Chon, Hong Jae , Tamburini, Emiliano , Diana, Anna , Scartozzi, Mario , Prager, Gerald W. , Avallone, Antonio , Schirripa, Marta , Kim, Il Hwan , Verrico, Monica , Chan, Stephen L. , Personeni, Nicola , Garajova, Ingrid , Farinea, Giovanni , Fornaro, Lorenzo , Camera, Silvia , Ikeda, Masafumi , Niger, Monica , Tonini, Giuseppe , Kang, Minsu , Bekaii‐Saab, Tanios , Esposito, Luca , Ferrara, Michele , Landriscina, Matteo , Masi, Gianluca , Lonardi, Sara

Liver International | June 17, 2025 | Volume: 45 | Issue: 7 | Pages: No page available

10.1111/liv.70181 | PMID 40525496 Get It

ABSTRACT Background Over the years, prognostic indexes have been developed to help clinicians stratify patients with biliary tract cancers (BTC) into risk groups. This study aims to identify a new prognostic index for patients with BTC treated with cisplatin, gemcitabine and durvalumab (CGD) in the first‐line setting. Patients and Methods The study population consisted of patients with BTC from 11 Eastern and Western Countries. Using multivariate analysis for overall survival (OS), we identified 5 baseline statistically significant variables: stage, carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) levels, albumin levels, gamma glutamyl transferase (GGT) levels, neutrophil‐to‐lymphocyte ratio (NLR). Metastatic disease is a prognostic factor with a superior weight considering the HR of 3.62, while all the others can be considered prognostic factors with equivalent weight as the HRs are quite similar (HRs between 1.55 and 1.92). Based on these reasons, we developed a prognostic model called the MAGIC‐D index by assigning a score of 2 for metastatic disease, and a score of 1 for CEA increased levels, albumin decreased levels, GGT increased levels, NLR ≥ 3. Patients were stratified into three risk groups as follows: low‐risk group (Score from 0 to 2), intermediate‐risk group (Score from 3 to 4) and high‐risk group (Score from 5 to 6). At the first data cutoff (April 2024), these data were available for 319 patients that composed the training cohort used for the analysis. At the second data cutoff (May 2025), 79 patients were further enrolled and composed the validation cohort. Results Median progression‐free survival was 11.7 months in low‐risk group (20.7%), 8.7 months in intermediate‐risk group (46.4%) and 5.4 months in high‐risk group (32.9%) [low‐risk hazard ratio (HR): 0.27, intermediate‐risk HR: 0.55, high‐risk HR: 1, p < 0.0001]. Median OS was 18.4 months in low‐risk group,15.9 months in intermediate‐risk group and 7.8 months in high‐risk group (low‐risk HR: 0.17, intermediate‐risk HR: 0.43, high‐risk HR: 1, p < 0.0001). There was no difference in overall response rate (low‐risk: 31.8%, intermediate‐risk: 36.5% and high‐risk: 25.7%; p = 0.0718), while disease control rate was significantly different across the three risk groups (low‐risk: 83.3%, intermediate‐risk: 70.9% and high‐risk: 60.9%; p < 0.0001) as well as the rate of patients receiving a second‐line therapy (low‐risk: 54.5%, intermediate‐risk: 48.6% and high‐risk: 25.7%; p = 0.0061). Finally, the prognostic role in terms of OS and PFS of the MAGIC‐D index was confirmed in a validation cohort of 79 patients. Conclusion The MAGIC‐D index is an easy‐to‐use tool able to stratify patients with BTC with different prognoses undergoing first‐line therapy with CGD.
Frequency and Clinical Outcomes Associated With Tau Positron Emission Tomography Positivity
Raghavan, Sheelakumari, Costoya‐Sánchez, Alejandro , Mainta, Ismini , Rodríguez-Fonseca, Omar Darío, Perissinotti, Andrés , Gu, Yuna , Yun, Jihwan, Peretti, Débora Elisa , Aguiar, Pablo , Bischof, Gérard N. , Seo, Sang Won , Villeneuve, Sylvia , O’Brien, John T. , Jagust, William, Frisoni, Giovanni B. , Soleimani‐Meigooni, David N. , Carrillo, Marı́a C., Joie, Renaud La , Rabinovici, Gil D. , Apostolova, Liana G. , Pontecorvo, Michael J. , Johnson, Keith A. , Weiner, Michael W. , Petersen, Ronald C., Jack, Clifford R. , Schöll, Michael , Labonté, Anne , Faubert, Anne‐Marie, Mathieu, Axel, Madjar, Cécile , Carrier, Charles Edouard, Kazazian, Christina, Lepage, Claude, Maillet, David , Michaud, Diane, Couture, Doris, Dea, Doris, Courcot, Blandine, Debacker, Clément , Fontaine, David, Knopman, David S. , Multhaup, Gerhard, Maltais, Jean‐Robert, Breitner, John C.S. , Poirier, Judes, Cheewakriengkrai, Laksanun, Sager, Mark A., Dauar‐Tedeschi, Marina, Rajah, Natasha, Aisen, Paul, Toussaint, Paule‐Joanne , Pierre, Bellec, Kostopoulos, Penelope, Étienne, Pierre , Tariot, Pierre N. , Orban, Pierre , Hoge, Rick, Thomas, Ronald J. , Gauthier, Serge , Craft, Suzanne , Montine, Thomas J. , Nair, Vasavan, Bohbot, Véronique D. , Venugopalan, Vinod, Ituria‐Medina, Yasser, Khachaturian, Zaven S., Teigner, Eduard, Anthal, Elena, Yu, Elsa, Ferdinand, Fabiola, Pogossova, Galina, Mayrand, Ginette, Duclair, Guerda, Gagné, Guylaine, Newbold‐Fox, Holly, Leppert, Illana, Tremblay‐Mercier, Jennifer , Frenette, Joanne, Frappier, Josée, Kat, Justin, Miron, Justin , Wan, Karen, Mahar, Laura, Carmo, Leopoldina, Théroux, Louise, Dufour, Marianne, Lafaille‐Magnan, Marie‐Élyse, Savard, Mélissa, Tuwaig, Miranda, Petkova, Mirela, Rioux, Pierre, Meyer, P.T., El‐Khoury, Rana, Gordon, Renee, Giles, Renuka, Das, Samir, Wang, Seqian, Tabrizi, Shirin , Mathotaarachchi, Sulantha , Dubuc, Sylvie, Lee, Tanya , Beaudry, Thomas, Gervais, Valérie, Pagé, Véronique, Desautels, René, Benbouhoud, Fatiha, Saint‐Fort, Eunice Farah, Verfaillie, Sander C.J. , Farzin, Sarah , Salaciak, Alyssa , Tullo, Stéphanie , Daoust, Leslie‐Ann, Köbe, Theresa , McSweeney, Melissa, Nilsson, Nathalie , Pishnamazi, Morteza, Bedetti, Christophe , Hudon, Louise, Greco, Claudia, Chapleau, Marianne , St‐Onge, Frédéric , Boutin, Sophie , Geddes, Maiya R. , Ducharme, Simon , Jean, Gabriel, Sylvain, Elisabeth, Élie, Marie‐Josee, Leblond‐Baccichet, Gloria, Soucy, Jean‐Paul , Ozlen, Hazal , Bailly, Julie, Mohammediyan, Béry, Chen, Yalin , Remz, Jordana, Rentz, Dorene M., Amariglio, Rebecca E. , Blacker, Deborah , Chhatwal, Jasmeer P. , Dickerson, Brad C., Donovan, Nancy J. , Farrell, Michelle E. , Gómez, Cristina Lois, Marshall, Gad A. , Oaoo, Kate, Price, Julie, Prokopiou, Prokopis C. , Reynolds, Gretchen , Skylar-Scott, Irina A., Vila‐Castelar, Clara , Yang, Hyun‐Sik , Trojanowki, John Q., Green, Robert C, Perrin, Richard J. , Shaw, Leslie M. , Potter, William Z. , Bernard, Marie , Jackson, Jonathan, Masliah, Eliezer , Masterman, Donna, Okonkwo, Ozioma, Ryan, Laurie, Silverberg, Nina, Fleisher, Adam , Fockler, Juliet , Conti, Cat, Jin, Chengshi , Nosheny, Rachel L. , Ashford, Mariam, Flenniken, Derek , Kormos, Adrienne, Montine, Tom, Rafii, Michael, Raman, Rema , Gessert, Devon, Salazar, Jennifer, Zimmerman, Caileigh, Cabrera, Yuliana, Walter, Sarah , Miller, Garrett, Coker, Godfrey, Clanton, Taylor, Hergesheimer, Lindsey, Smith, Stephanie , Adegoke, Olusegun, Mahboubi, Payam, Moore, Shelley, Pizzola, Jeremy, Shaffer, Elizabeth , Harvey, Danielle, Forghanian-Arani, Arvin, Borowski, Bret, Ward, Chad, Gunter, Jeff, Kantarci, Kejal, Thompson, Paul , Jahanshad, Neda , DeCarli, Charles , Knaack, Alexander , Fletcher, Evan, Chen, Stephanie R, Choe, Mark, Crawford, Karen , Yuschkevich, Paul A, Reiman, Eric M. , Mathis, Chet, Landau, Susan , Cairns, Nigel J. , Householder, Erin, Franklin, Erin , Bernhardt, Haley, Taylor‐Reinwald, Lisa, Korecka, Magdalena , Figurski, Michal, Neu, Scott, Nho, Kwangsik, Foroud, Tatiana M., Faber, Kelley , Wilmes, Kristi, Thal, Leon J., Dage, Jeffrey L. , Eloyan, Ani , Hammers, Dustin B. , Kirby, Kala, Kramer, Joel, Legarde, Julien, Murray, Melissa E., Newell, Kathy L. , Taurone, Alexander, Thangarajah, Maryanne, Touroutoglou, Alexandra , Clark, David , Day, Gregory S, Duara, Ranjan , Graff-Radford, Neill R, Grant, Ian , Masdeu, Joseph C. , Mendez, Mario F. , Onyike, Chiadi U. , Riddle, Meghan , Rogalskı, Emily , Salloway, Steven, Sha, Sharon J. , Carrillo, María C. , O'Brien, John Tiernan , Jack, Clifford R , Schöll, Michael , La Joie, Renaud , Rabinovici, Gil D , Dage, Jeffrey L , Rial, Alexis Moscoso , Heeman, Fiona , Raghavan, Sheelakumari , Essen, Martijn van , Camacho, Valle , Silva‐Rodríguez, Jesús , Ribaldi, Federica , Coomans, Emma M. , Brum, Wagner Scheeren , Grothe, Michel J. , Drzezga, Alexander E. , Malpetti, Maura , Rowe, James B. , Giessen, Elsmarieke van de , Ossenkoppele, Rik , Smith, Ruben , Hansson, Oskar , Garibotto, Valentina , Dickerson, Bradford Clark , LaMontagne, Pamela , Sperling, Reisa Anne , Vemuri, Prashanthi , Tam, Angela , Binette, Alexa Pichet , Dansereau, Christian , Picard, Cynthia , Michaud, Diane, Couture, Doris, Cuello, A. Claudio , Barkun, Alan , Evans, Alan Charles , Tardif, Christine Lucas , Knopman, David S. , Near, Jamie , Leoutsakos, Jeannie‐Marie , Brandt, Jason , Pruessner, Jens C. , Morris, John C. , Collins, D. Louis , Chakravarty, M. Mallar , Eisenberg, Mark Jeffrey , Rajah, Maria Natasha , Rosa-Neto, Pedro , Bellec, Pierre , Thomas, Ronald, Fonov, Vladimir , Vallee, Isabelle, Vogel, Jacob W. , Dadar, Mahsa , Appleby, Melissa , Meyer, Pierre‐François, Gonneaud, Julie , Pascoal, Tharick Ali , Vachon‐Presseau, Étienne , Spreng, R. Nathan , Rentz, Dorene M. , Buckley, Rachel F. , Gagliardi, Geoffroy Pierre , Gatchel, Jennifer R. , Guzmán‐Vélez, Edmarie , Jacobs, Heidi I.L. , Jutten, Roos J. , Pardilla‐Delgado, Enmanuelle , Price, Julie C. , Quiroz, Yakeel T. , Schultz, Aaron P. , Schultz, Stephanie A. , Sepulcre, Jorge , Vannini, Patrizia , Toga, Arthur W. , Beckett, Laurel , Saykin, Andrew J. , Potter, William, Barnes, Lisa L. , Gonzalez, Hector, Ho, Carole , Hsiao, John , Jackson, Jonathan , Veitch, Dallas P. , Neuhaus, John M , Rafii, Michael S. , Jimenez‐Maggiora, Gustavo Adolfo , Donohue, Michael , Arani, Arvin , Schwarz, Christopher G. , Jones, David T. , Kantarci, Kejal , Senjem, Matthew L. , Reid, Robert I. , Fox, Nick C. , Malone, Ian B. , Thomopoulos, Sophia I. , Nir, Talia M. , Tosun, Duygu , Das, Sandhitsu R. , Koeppe, Robert A. , Chen, Kewei , Risacher, Shannon L. , Shen, Li , Nudelman, Kelly , Ghetti, Bernardino , Grinberg, Lea T. , Hammers, Dustin B , Kirby, Kala, Kukull, Walter A. , Murray, Melissa E. , Polsinelli, Angelina J. , Atri, Alireza , Duara, Ranjan , Graff‐Radford, Neill R. , Honig, Lawrence S. , Johnson, Erik C. B. , Masdeu, Joseph C , Musiek, Erik , Salloway, Steve , Turner, Raymond Scott , Wingo, Thomas S , Wolk, S. J. , Womack, Kyle

JAMA | June 16, 2025 | Volume: 334 | Issue: 3 | Pages: 229

10.1001/jama.2025.7817 | PMID 40522652 Get It

Importance Tau positron emission tomography (PET) allows in vivo detection of neurofibrillary tangles, a core neuropathologic feature of Alzheimer disease (AD). Objective To provide estimates of the frequency of tau PET positivity and its associated risk of clinical outcomes. Design, Setting, and Participants Longitudinal study using data pooled from 21 cohorts, comprising a convenience sample of 6514 participants from 13 countries, collected between January 2013 and June 2024. Cognitively unimpaired individuals and patients with a clinical diagnosis of mild cognitive impairment (MCI), AD dementia, or other neurodegenerative disorders were included. Exposures Tau PET with flortaucipir F 18, amyloid-β (Aβ) PET, and clinical examinations. Tau PET scans were visually rated as positive according to a US Food and Drug Administration– and European Medicines Agency–approved method, designed to indicate the presence of advanced neurofibrillary tangle pathology (Braak stages V-VI). Main Outcomes and Measures Frequency of tau PET positivity and absolute risk of clinical progression (eg, progression to MCI or dementia). Results Among the 6514 participants (mean age, 69.5 years; 50.5% female), median follow-up time ranged from 1.5 to 4.0 years. Of 3487 cognitively unimpaired participants, 349 (9.8%) were tau PET positive; the estimated frequency of tau PET positivity was less than 1% in those aged younger than 50 years, and increased from 3% (95% CI, 2%-4%) at 60 years to 19% (95% CI, 16%-24%) at 90 years. Tau PET positivity frequency estimates increased across MCI and AD dementia clinical diagnoses (43% [95% CI, 41%-46%] and 79% [95% CI, 77%-82%] at 75 years, respectively). Most tau PET–positive individuals (92%) were also Aβ PET positive. Cognitively unimpaired participants who were positive for both Aβ PET and tau PET had a higher absolute risk of progression to MCI or dementia over the following 5 years (57% [95% CI, 45%-71%]) compared with both Aβ PET–positive/tau PET–negative (17% [95% CI, 13%-22%]) and Aβ PET–negative/tau PET–negative (6% [95% CI, 5%-8%]) individuals. Among participants with MCI at the time of the tau PET scan, an Aβ PET–positive/tau PET–positive profile was associated with a 5-year absolute risk of progression to dementia of 70% (95% CI, 59%-81%). Conclusions and Relevance In a large convenience sample, a positive tau PET scan occurred at a nonnegligible rate among cognitively unimpaired individuals, and the combination of Aβ PET positivity and tau PET positivity was associated with a high risk of clinical progression in both preclinical and symptomatic stages of AD. These findings underscore the potential of tau PET as a biomarker for staging AD pathology.