Objective: To establish comprehensive recommendations on the management of perihilar cholangiocarcinoma (pCCA) and to identify areas in need of future investigation. Summary Background Data: The lack of consensus in management of pCCA across institutions worldwide impairs optimal patient care and best-achievable oncological outcome. A holistic and critical assessment of the body of evidence and collaborative guidance are required. Methods: The Consensus4pCCA conference developed unbiased consensus using the Zurich-Danish model. An impartial and multidisciplinary jury adopted comprehensive recommendations grounded on the work of eight expert panels answering predefined clinical questions and considering the best-quality evidence through a systematic review. The development of recommendations complied with GRADE and SIGN50 methodologies. Results: Seventy-one international experts considered 570 studies. Ten jury members concluded 71 recommendations covering definition and diagnosis, preoperative assessment and optimization, surgical resection, liver transplantation, and outcome reporting for pCCA patients. The consensus underscored that making patients amenable to high-quality curative resection and reducing its associated morbidity must be of highest priority. As such, multidisciplinary expertise and centralized care at all stages of disease management are critical to ensure both safety and oncological adequacy. To overcome the evidence-gap for rare diseases like pCCA, the jury urged large-scale registries to address open questions across the disease continuum and highlighted priorities for future investigation. Conclusion: The Consensus4pCCA represents an unprecedented commitment to collectively harmonize global treatment strategies for pCCA. This collective effort bridges the gap between expert opinions and clinical evidence and holds great promise to improve patient outcomes in the future.
Recommendations on Perihilar Cholangiocarcinoma. the Milan Jury-Based Consensus / Pfister, M.; Ratti, F.; Gores, G. J.; Lesurtel, M.; Chiche, L.; Ebata, T.; Ardiles, V.; Valle, J. W.; Heimbach, J. K.; Braconi, C.; Bruix, J.; Aldrighetti, L.; Clavien, P. -A.; Caiazzo, R.; De Manzini, N.; Hincapie, C.; Hoelscher, A.; Hurst, S.; Iannacone, M.; Kim, L.; Sano, T.; Sileri, P.; Banales, J. M.; Sparrelid, E.; Carpino, G.; Rubbia-Brandt, L.; Weber, A.; Giuliante, F.; Schmelzle, M.; Arcidiacono, P. G.; De Oliveira, M. L.; Lesurtel, M.; Brown, K. T.; Jarnagin, W. R.; Muellhaupt, B.; Chapman, W. C.; Lang, H.; Nagino, M.; Balci, D.; Guiu, B.; Reddi, N. D.; Koerkamp, B. G.; Serrablo, A.; Dong, J.; Krissat, J.; Vauthey, J. -N.; Erdmann, J.; De Santibanes, E.; Hasegawa, K.; Pratschke, J.; Marques, H. P.; Soubrane, O.; Ferrone, C.; Pinna, A. D.; Sucandy, I.; Abbassi, F.; De Cobelli, F.; Schnitzbauer, A.; Raptis, D. A.; Wei, A.; Cherqui, D.; Robles-Campos, R.; Gardini, A. C.; Ghassan, A. -A.; Primrose, J.; Chiang, C. L.; Ikeda, M.; D'Angelica, M.; Man, N. K.; Wo, J.; Fritsch, R.; Chan, A.; Strazzabosco, M.; Cillo, U.; Hibi, T.; Dutkowski, P.; Rela, M.; Bachini, M.; Griffith, P.; Montalvo, E. E.; Lleo, A.; Sangro, B.; Bridgewater, J.; Lodge, P.; Toso, C.; Domenghino, A.; Berardi, G.; Lanari, J.; Moeckli, B.; Conticchio, M.; Liu, J.; Mueller, P.; Hobeika, C.; Lopez Lopez, V.; Sng, Y. P.; Juana, C.; Serenari, M.; Lai, Q.; Mazzotta, A.; Li, Z.; Marino, R.. - In: ANNALS OF SURGERY. - ISSN 0003-4932. - (2025). [10.1097/SLA.0000000000006773]
Recommendations on Perihilar Cholangiocarcinoma. the Milan Jury-Based Consensus
De Manzini N.Membro del Collaboration Group
;Banales J. M.Membro del Collaboration Group
;Erdmann J.Membro del Collaboration Group
;Lai Q.Membro del Collaboration Group
;Mazzotta A.Membro del Collaboration Group
;
2025
Abstract
Objective: To establish comprehensive recommendations on the management of perihilar cholangiocarcinoma (pCCA) and to identify areas in need of future investigation. Summary Background Data: The lack of consensus in management of pCCA across institutions worldwide impairs optimal patient care and best-achievable oncological outcome. A holistic and critical assessment of the body of evidence and collaborative guidance are required. Methods: The Consensus4pCCA conference developed unbiased consensus using the Zurich-Danish model. An impartial and multidisciplinary jury adopted comprehensive recommendations grounded on the work of eight expert panels answering predefined clinical questions and considering the best-quality evidence through a systematic review. The development of recommendations complied with GRADE and SIGN50 methodologies. Results: Seventy-one international experts considered 570 studies. Ten jury members concluded 71 recommendations covering definition and diagnosis, preoperative assessment and optimization, surgical resection, liver transplantation, and outcome reporting for pCCA patients. The consensus underscored that making patients amenable to high-quality curative resection and reducing its associated morbidity must be of highest priority. As such, multidisciplinary expertise and centralized care at all stages of disease management are critical to ensure both safety and oncological adequacy. To overcome the evidence-gap for rare diseases like pCCA, the jury urged large-scale registries to address open questions across the disease continuum and highlighted priorities for future investigation. Conclusion: The Consensus4pCCA represents an unprecedented commitment to collectively harmonize global treatment strategies for pCCA. This collective effort bridges the gap between expert opinions and clinical evidence and holds great promise to improve patient outcomes in the future.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
