The Japanese Society of Gastroenterology first published evidence-based clinical practice guidelines for cholelithiasis in 2010, followed by a revision in 2016. Currently, the revised third edition was published to reflect recent evidence on the diagnosis, treatment, and prognosis of cholelithiasis conforming to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system. Following this revision, the present English version of the guidelines was updated and published herein. The clinical questions (CQ) in the previous version were reviewed and rearranged into three newly divided categories: background questions (BQ) dealing with basic background knowledge, CQ, and future research questions (FRQ), which refer to issues that require further accumulation of evidence. Finally, 52 questions (29 BQs, 19 CQs, and 4 FRQs) were adopted to cover the epidemiology, pathogenesis, diagnosis, treatment, complications, and prognosis. Based on a literature search using MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, and Igaku Chuo Zasshi databases for the period between 1983 and August 2019, along with a manual search of new information reported over the past 5 years, the level of evidence was evaluated for each CQ. The strengths of recommendations were determined using the Delphi method by the committee members considering the body of evidence, including benefits and harms, patient preference, and cost–benefit balance. A comprehensive flowchart was prepared for the diagnosis and treatment of gallbladder stones, common bile duct stones, and intrahepatic stones, respectively. The current revised guidelines are expected to be of great assistance to gastroenterologists and general physicians in making decisions on contemporary clinical management for cholelithiasis patients.

Background and study aims: Only a few large cohort studies have evaluated the efficacy and safety of endoscopic necrosectomy for infected walled-off pancreatic necrosis (WOPN). Therefore, a multicenter, large cohort study was conducted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of endoscopic necrosectomy and to examine the procedural details and follow-up after successful endoscopic necrosectomy. Patients and methods: A retrospective review was conducted in 16 leading Japanese institutions for patients who underwent endoscopic necrosectomy for infected WOPN between August 2005 and July 2011. The follow-up data were also reviewed to determine the long-term outcomes of the procedures. Results: Of 57 patients, 43 (75 %) experienced successful resolution after a median of 5 sessions of endoscopic necrosectomy and 21 days of treatment. Complications occurred in 19 patients (33 %) during the treatment period. Six patients died (11 %): two due to multiple organ failure and one patient each from air embolism, splenic aneurysm, hemorrhage from a Mallory – Weiss tear, and an unknown cause. Of 43 patients with successful endoscopic necrosectomy, recurrent cavity formation was observed in three patients during a median follow-up period of 27 months. Conclusions: Endoscopic necrosectomy can be an effective technique for infected WOPN and requires a relatively short treatment period. However, serious complications can arise, including death. Therefore, patients should be carefully selected, and knowledgeable, skilled, and experienced operators should perform the procedure. Further research into safer technologies is required in order to reduce the associated morbidity and mortality.

Background and study aims: The diagnosis of mediastinal and intra-abdominal lymphadenopathy is sometimes difficult, especially in patients who have no other primary lesions. Lymphoma is one of the main causes of this condition. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) is a safe and accurate diagnostic procedure for lesions surrounding the gastrointestinal tract. However, diagnosing lymphoma using the EUS-FNA technique remains a diagnostic challenge, due to limitations in the amount of material sampled. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the yield of EUS-FNA biopsy (EUS-FNAB) using a large-gauge needle in patients with mediastinal and intra-abdominal lymphadenopathy of unknown origin, especially in relation to subclassification of the lymphomas. Patients and methods: Consecutive patients with mediastinal and intra-abdominal lymphadenopathy of unknown origin who were referred between October 2003 and March 2005 were enrolled in the study. EUS-FNAB was carried out using a 19-gauge needle, passing through the esophageal, gastric, and duodenal walls. Pathological diagnoses were made on the basis of histological findings, including immunopathological staining. Results: A total of 104 patients were included in the study. The locations of the lymph nodes were mediastinal in 50 patients, intra-abdominal in 48 patients, and both mediastinal and intra-abdominal in six patients. The diagnoses made using EUS-FNAB were lymphoma (n = 48), metastasis (n = 16), and benign/reactive (n = 40). The overall accuracy of EUS-FNAB for unknown lymphadenopathy was 98 %, and it was possible to classify the lymphomas in accordance with the World Health Organization classifications in 88 % of cases. No serious complications occurred with the procedure. Conclusions: Open thoracic surgery, laparotomy, and other invasive diagnostic procedures such as mediastinoscopy and laparoscopy can now be avoided, as EUS-FNAB is potentially a safe and accurate tool for diagnosing unknown lymphadenopathy, including lymphoma.

Distal biliary strictures (DBS) are common and may be caused by both malignant and benign pathologies. While endoscopic procedures play a major role in their management, a comprehensive review of the subject is still lacking. Our consensus statements were formulated by a group of expert Asian pancreatico‐biliary interventional endoscopists, following a proposal from the Digestive Endoscopy Society of Taiwan, the Thai Association for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, and the Tokyo Conference of Asian Pancreato‐biliary Interventional Endoscopy. Based on a literature review utilizing Medline, Cochrane library, and Embase databases, a total of 19 consensus statements on DBS were made on diagnosis, endoscopic drainage, benign biliary stricture, malignant biliary stricture, and management of recurrent biliary obstruction and other complications. Our consensus statements provide comprehensive guidance for the endoscopic management of DBS.

Background and study aims: No prospective comparison of endoscopic ultrasonography-guided direct celiac ganglia neurolysis (EUS – CGN) vs. EUS-guided celiac plexus neurolysis (EUS – CPN) has been reported. The aim of the current study was to compare the effectiveness of EUS – CGN and EUS – CPN in providing pain relief from upper abdominal cancer pain in a multicenter randomized controlled trial. Patients and methods: Patients with upper abdominal cancer pain were randomly assigned to treatment using either EUS – CGN or EUS – CPN. Evaluation was performed at Day 7 postoperatively using a pain scale of 0 to 10. Patients for whom pain decreased to ≤ 3 were considered to have a positive response, and those experiencing a decrease in pain to ≤ 1 were considered to be completely responsive. Comparison between the two groups was performed using intention-to-treat analysis. The primary endpoint was the difference in treatment response rates between EUS – CGN and EUS – CPN at postoperative Day 7. Secondary endpoints included differences in complete response rates, pain scores, duration of pain relief, and incidence of adverse effects. Results: A total of 34 patients were assigned to each group. Visualization of ganglia was possible in 30 cases (88 %) in the EUS – CGN group. The positive response rate was significantly higher in the EUS – CGN group (73.5 %) than in the EUS – CPN group (45.5 %; P = 0.026). The complete response rate was also significantly higher in the EUS – CGN group (50.0 %) than in the EUS – CPN group (18.2 %; P = 0.010). There was no difference in adverse events or duration of pain relief between the two groups. Conclusions: EUS – CGN is significantly superior to conventional EUS – CPN in cancer pain relief. Clinical trial registration: http://www.umin.ac.jp/ctr/index.htm (ID: UMIN-000002536)