Journal of hepato-biliary-pancreatic sciences · 2020
Clinical practice guidelines for the management of biliary tract cancers 2019: The 3rd English edition.
СтатьяКлинические рекомендацииНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Nagino Masato, Hirano Satoshi, Yoshitomi Hideyuki, Aoki Taku, Uesaka Katsuhiko, Unno Michiaki, Ebata Tomoki, Konishi Masaru, Sano Keiji, Shimada Kazuaki, Shimizu Hiroaki, Higuchi Ryota, Wakai Toshifumi, Isayama Hiroyuki, Okusaka Takuji, Tsuyuguchi Toshio, Hirooka Yoshiki, Furuse Junji, Maguchi Hiroyuki, Suzuki Kojiro, Yamazaki Hideya, Kijima Hiroshi, Yanagisawa Akio, Yoshida Masahiro, Yokoyama Yukihiro, Mizuno Takashi, Endo Itaru
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: The Japanese Society of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic Surgery launched the clinical practice guidelines for the management of biliary tract cancers (cholangiocarcinoma, gallbladder cancer, and ampullary cancer) in 2007, then published the 2nd version in 2014.
METHODS: In this 3rd version, clinical questions (CQs) were proposed on six topics. The recommendation, grade for recommendation, and statement for each CQ were discussed and finalized by an evidence-based approach. Recommendations were graded as Grade 1 (strong) or Grade 2 (weak) according to the concepts of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system.
RESULTS: The 31 CQs covered the six topics: (a) prophylactic treatment, (b) diagnosis, (c) biliary drainage, (d) surgical treatment, (e) chemotherapy, and (f) radiation therapy. In the 31 CQs, 14 recommendations were rated strong and 14 recommendations weak. The remaining three CQs had no recommendation. Each CQ includes a statement of how the recommendations were graded.
CONCLUSIONS: This latest guideline provides recommendations for important clinical aspects based on evidence. Future collaboration with the cancer registry will be key for assessing the guidelines and establishing new evidence.
METHODS: In this 3rd version, clinical questions (CQs) were proposed on six topics. The recommendation, grade for recommendation, and statement for each CQ were discussed and finalized by an evidence-based approach. Recommendations were graded as Grade 1 (strong) or Grade 2 (weak) according to the concepts of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system.
RESULTS: The 31 CQs covered the six topics: (a) prophylactic treatment, (b) diagnosis, (c) biliary drainage, (d) surgical treatment, (e) chemotherapy, and (f) radiation therapy. In the 31 CQs, 14 recommendations were rated strong and 14 recommendations weak. The remaining three CQs had no recommendation. Each CQ includes a statement of how the recommendations were graded.
CONCLUSIONS: This latest guideline provides recommendations for important clinical aspects based on evidence. Future collaboration with the cancer registry will be key for assessing the guidelines and establishing new evidence.