Citations

Introduction: Although the role of cardiometabolic risk factors (CMRF) has been characterized in steatotic liver disease, their role in the severity of alcohol-associated hepatitis (AH) remains unclear. We aimed to evaluate the impact of CMRF on mortality. Methods: Multinational prospective cohort study (2015–2024) including hospitalized patients with severe AH across 32 centers in 14 countries. Diagnosis of AH was made using the NIAAA criteria. Analyses included adjusted competing-risk models by age, sex, ethnicity, history of cirrhosis, CMRF, corticosteroid use, MELD, and ACLF grade, with liver transplantation as a competing risk. Results: 936 participants were included; mean age 48±11.2 years, and 88.9% were male. At least one CMRF was present in 46.6%; median body mass index (BMI) was 24.2 kg/m 2 [IQR: 22.8–28.2], prevalence of diabetes 17.6%, hypertension 16.5%, and dyslipidemia 5.8%. Median MELD was 24.4 [19.3–31.4], 86.7% had severe AH, and 180-day survival was 72.9%. Survival did not differ by CMRF status (log-rank p =0.453). In adjusted competing-risk models, higher age (sHR 1.02; 95%CI:1.01–1.04), greater alcohol intake (per g/day; sHR 1.001; 95%CI:1.000–1.002), MELD (sHR 1.04; 95%CI:1.01–1.06), and ACLF grade 2–3 (sHR 2.34 and 4.34) predicted mortality. However, no individual CMRF independently increased mortality. A prespecified non-linear BMI analysis showed modestly lower mortality between 25–40 kg/m², with a higher risk above 40 kg/m². Conclusion: Among patients with severe AH, metabolic dysfunction was not associated with increased mortality. Although a higher BMI was associated with slightly lower mortality in AH, this may reflect better nutritional status rather than a true protective effect.

Background: Agentic artificial intelligence (AI) systems, characterized by autonomous goal-directed behavior, multi-step reasoning, task decomposition, and tool use, are increasingly proposed for healthcare applications. However, their autonomy raises concerns regarding transparency, accountability, and human oversight. While explainable AI (XAI) has been widely studied in traditional predictive models, less is known about how explainability is implemented within agentic architectures. Objective: To map the emerging literature on explainable agentic AI (XAAI) in healthcare and characterize the types, scope, and forms of explainability used in these systems. Methods: A scoping review was conducted following PRISMA-ScR guidelines. PubMed, Embase, IEEE Xplore, and ACM Digital Library were searched through November 2025. Eligible studies described healthcare-related agentic AI systems incorporating explicit explainability mechanisms. Data were extracted on system architecture, explainability type (intrinsic, post hoc, hybrid), explanation scope (local, global), explanation form, and reported clinical outcomes. Results: Nine studies met the inclusion criteria. All systems demonstrated core agentic features, including autonomy, task decomposition, and tool integration, often within multi-agent frameworks. Explainability was predominantly intrinsic and workflow-native, typically delivered through textual reasoning traces and example-based grounding in retrieved clinical evidence. Feature-based and global explanations were comparatively rare and largely confined to hybrid architectures. Across domains including radiology, neurology, psychiatry, and biomedical research, XAAI systems were reported to improve performance and interpretability relative to baseline models in the included studies. However, these findings were derived from heterogeneous, predominantly experimental or retrospective studies, and structured human-in-the-loop oversight was infrequently described. Conclusions: Current XAAI systems appear to emphasize process transparency and evidence grounding rather than mechanistic model-level attribution. The available evidence remains limited and heterogeneous, and findings should be interpreted as early trends rather than established characteristics. Further progress will require standardized evaluation frameworks, clearer reporting of oversight mechanisms, and validation in real-world clinical settings to support safe and trustworthy integration of agentic AI into healthcare practice.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Perioperative protocols facilitate earlier discharge without compromising safety in nonfunctioning pituitary adenomas, but no large multicenter studies in the United States have investigated protocols regarding Cushing disease (CD). We sought to characterize perioperative protocols and how their implementation influences clinical outcomes in patients with CD. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was conducted using data from the Registry of Adenomas of the Pituitary and Related Disorders consortium comprising 13 US academic pituitary centers. Institutions were surveyed regarding perioperative procedures for patients undergoing transsphenoidal tumor resection for CD. The impacts of institutional procedures and approaches to implementation on length of stay (LOS) and unplanned 90-day readmission were evaluated. RESULTS: Thirteen institutions contributed survey responses and clinical data for a total of 832 patients meeting inclusion criteria. Ten (76.9%) institutions reported having a postoperative protocol, 9 (69.2%) used a formal document to outline their protocol, and 3 (23.1%) had protocols implemented into hospital policy. Mean LOS was significantly reduced in centers with an established protocol (3.14 vs 3.42 days, P = .032), and more so with a formal document (3.10 vs 3.48 days, P = .001) or hospital policy (2.72 vs 3.36 days, P < .001). Patients treated after protocol implementation experienced shorter LOS ( P < .001). Other factors associated with reduced LOS were presence of a separate CD pathway, intraoperative checklist specific to pituitary surgery, non-narcotic pain regimen, Foley removal order, dedicated outpatient advanced practice provider follow-up, and target discharge date ≤2 days. Intraoperative checklist ( P = .045), non-narcotic pain regimen ( P = .048), nasal packing ( P = .005), and 1-day target discharge date ( P = .032) were important factors against readmission. Compared with microscopic surgery, endoscopic surgery was associated with shorter LOS but increased readmission odds. CONCLUSION: This is the first multicenter study to illustrate that implementation of perioperative protocols is associated with a reduction in LOS and readmission risk in patients with CD.

Abstract Introduction Revascularization to prevent limb loss is not feasible or represents a very high risk in a significant proportion of patients with chronic limb-threatening ischaemia (CLTI). No standard definition currently exists to define this population of patients. The aim of this study was to develop a consensus-based, multidomain definition to improve clinical assessment and reporting of studies in people with ‘no option’ (NO) or ‘poor option’ (PO) CLTI. Methods A modified Delphi process was conducted with 164 specialists from 30 countries. Two iterative survey rounds were used to reach consensus, defined as ≥70% agreement with a score of ≥7 on a nine-point scale. Results Some 164 international vascular specialists participated in the study, averaging 19 years of experience. A multidomain framework including arterial disease anatomy, biology, risk, function, and context (ABRFC) achieved 83% consensus. A ‘desert foot’ was defined as the absence of distal arterial revascularization targets on advanced non-invasive imaging, invasive digital subtraction angiography, and at least one failed endovascular revascularization attempt (81.6% agreement). Inadequate autogenous bypass conduit was defined as the lack of usable autologous vein across all four limbs (85% agreement). Patients were classified as NO for revascularization if they present with ‘desert foot’, prohibitive medical risk, a non-functional limb, or in those patients who refused arterial revascularization. PO revascularization patients combined factors such as severe infection, lack of autologous vein, or treatment non-compliance (72.1% agreement). Conclusion This consensus study established a structured, expert-validated definition of no option or poor option for revascularisation of patients with CLTI. The multidomain ABRFC framework provides a foundation for standardized clinical assessment, trial design, and future guideline development.

BACKGROUND: Subtotal cholecystectomy is increasingly recommended as a bailout strategy for the difficult gallbladder, yet its long-term durability and the risk profile of subsequent completion cholecystectomy remain incompletely defined. STUDY DESIGN: We performed a population-based retrospective cohort study of adults undergoing laparoscopic or open subtotal cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis from 2012 to 2021 using Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project state databases from New York and Florida. The primary endpoint was remnant cholecystitis, defined as a postoperative emergency, inpatient, or outpatient diagnosis of cholecystitis or need for subsequent cholecystectomy. Kaplan–Meier analysis estimated cumulative incidence. Secondary outcomes included completion cholecystectomy and bile duct injury requiring surgical repair. RESULTS: Among 2,682 patients (98.7% laparoscopic), the cumulative incidence of remnant cholecystitis was 13.3% during a median follow-up of 2 years (interquartile range [IQR] 0.7 to 4.1). The median time to developing remnant cholecystitis was 28 days (IQR 13 to 91), with 79.7% occurring within 6 months. Only 70 patients (2.6%) underwent completion cholecystectomy at a median of 103 days (IQR 43 to 202). Completion cholecystectomy was performed via open surgery in 47.1% of patients and was associated with a 7.1% bile duct injury rate and median length of stay of 3 days (IQR 1 to 7), compared with a 0.9% bile duct injury rate for subtotal cholecystectomy overall. CONCLUSIONS: Although remnant cholecystitis occurred in 13.3% of patients after subtotal cholecystectomy, few required completion cholecystectomy. When necessary, completion cholecystectomy was frequently open and associated with a substantially higher bile duct injury rate, supporting referral to experienced hepatobiliary centers for reoperation.

ABSTRACT BACKGROUND Increasing evidence suggests that accurate prediction of Alzheimer’s disease (AD) symptom onset requires more than amyloid- and tau-centric biomarkers such as cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) Aβ42/40, total tau and p-tau181 and plasma p-tau217. Autosomal dominant AD (ADAD), caused by pathogenic PSEN1, PSEN2 and APP mutations with predictable age at symptom onset, presents a unique opportunity to characterize the chronological changes in proteins beyond amyloid and tau and clarify them as early biomarkers of disease onset or as biomarkers related to disease staging and progression monitoring. METHODS We measured 972 CSF samples corresponding to 484 participants of the Dominantly Inherited Alzheimer Disease Network (DIAN) using the NULISASeq 120 CNS Disease Panel. We first benchmarked the technology against gold-standard measurements followed by the identification of proteins that were differentially abundant in relation to mutation status and symptomatology. Next, we determined the chronological emergence of protein changes in relation to the estimated years to onset (EYO). Finally, we assessed whether specific protein measures improved the prediction of EYO in the ADAD. FINDINGS NULISA measurements were comparable to those previously published. We demonstrated that known early alterations in CSF amyloid and tau were followed by inflammatory and neurodegenerative responses suggesting that clinical manifestation of AD happens before the inflammatory processes is fully developed. Finally, we found a multi-protein composite approach for predicting EYO that outperformed single biomarker values. INTERPRETATION Our results suggest that the main CSF proteomic landscape changes in ADAD are due to the presence of a pathogenic mutation and occur prior to symptom onset. Improved performance of multi-protein composite to predict EYO compared to single biomarker values highlights the added value of multiplex proteomic signatures for biomarker panel development. FUNDING National Institute on Aging, Alzheimer’s Association, German Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases, Raul Carrea Institute for Neurological Research, Japan Agency for Medical Research and Development, Ministry of Health & Welfare and Ministry of Science and ICT, Republic of Korea, Spanish Institute of Health Carlos III.