Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34918177›Full record

ArticleEuropean radiology2022

Management and follow-up of gallbladder polyps: updated joint guidelines between the ESGAR, EAES, EFISDS and ESGE.

Kieran G Foley, Max J Lahaye, Ruedi F Thoeni, Marek Soltes, Catherine Dewhurst, Sorin Traian Barbu, Yogesh K Vashist, Søren Rafael Rafaelsen, Marianna Arvanitakis, Julie Perinel and 2 more

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European radiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 65 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
65citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
13.6field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

65 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 118 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Guideline
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

5 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors at 11 institutions in 9 countries.

Kieran G FoleyDepartment of Clinical Radiology, Royal Glamorgan Hospital, Llantrisant, UK. Kieran.Foley@wales.nhs.uk.
Max J LahayeDepartment of Radiology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Ruedi F ThoeniDepartment of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California, San Francisco Medical School, San Francisco, CA, USA.
Marek Soltes1st Department of Surgery LF UPJS a UNLP, Kosice, Slovakia.
Catherine DewhurstDepartment of Radiology, Mercy University Hospital, Grenville Place, Cork, Ireland.
Sorin Traian Barbu4th Surgery Department, University of Medicine and Pharmacy "Iuliu Hatieganu", Cluj-Napoca, Romania.
Yogesh K VashistClinics of Surgery, Department General, Visceral and Thoracic Surgery, Asklepios Goslar, Germany.
Søren Rafael RafaelsenDepartment of Radiology, Clinical Cancer Centre, Vejle Hospital, University of Southern Denmark, Odense M, Denmark.
Marianna ArvanitakisDepartment of Gastroenterology, Erasme University Hospital ULB, Brussels, Belgium.
Julie PerinelDepartment of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Edouard Herriot Hospital, Lyon, France.
Rebecca WilesDepartment of Radiology, Liverpool University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Liverpool, UK.
Stuart Ashley RobertsDepartment of Radiology, University Hospital of Wales, Cardiff, UK.
Asklepios · DEErasmus Hospital · BEHôpital Edouard Herriot · FRIuliu Hațieganu University of Medicine and Pharmacy · ROMercy University Hospital · IERoyal Glamorgan Hospital · GBThe Netherlands Cancer Institute · NLUniversity Hospital of Wales · GBUniversity of California, San Francisco · USUniversity of Liverpool · GBUniversity of Southern Denmark · DK

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

main recommendations1. Primary investigation of polypoid lesions of the gallbladder should be with abdominal ultrasound. Routine use of other imaging modalities is not recommended presently, but further research is needed. In centres with appropriate expertise and resources, alternative imaging modalities (such as contrast-enhanced and endoscopic ultrasound) may be useful to aid decision-making in difficult cases. Strong recommendation, low-moderate quality evidence. 2. Cholecystectomy is recommended in patients with polypoid lesions of the gallbladder measuring 10 mm or more, providing the patient is fit for, and accepts, surgery. Multidisciplinary discussion may be employed to assess perceived individual risk of malignancy. Strong recommendation, low-quality evidence. 3. Cholecystectomy is suggested for patients with a polypoid lesion and symptoms potentially attributable to the gallbladder if no alternative cause for the patient's symptoms is demonstrated and the patient is fit for, and accepts, surgery. The patient should be counselled regarding the benefit of cholecystectomy versus the risk of persistent symptoms. Strong recommendation, low-quality evidence. 4. If the patient has a 6-9 mm polypoid lesion of the gallbladder and one or more risk factors for malignancy, cholecystectomy is recommended if the patient is fit for, and accepts, surgery. These risk factors are as follows: age more than 60 years, history of primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC), Asian ethnicity, sessile polypoid lesion (including focal gallbladder wall thickening > 4 mm). Strong recommendation, low-moderate quality evidence. 5. If the patient has either no risk factors for malignancy and a gallbladder polypoid lesion of 6-9 mm, or risk factors for malignancy and a gallbladder polypoid lesion 5 mm or less, follow-up ultrasound of the gallbladder is recommended at 6 months, 1 year and 2 years. Follow-up should be discontinued after 2 years in the absence of growth. Moderate strength recommendation, moderate-quality evidence. 6. If the patient has no risk factors for malignancy, and a gallbladder polypoid lesion of 5 mm or less, follow-up is not required. Strong recommendation, moderate-quality evidence. 7. If during follow-up the gallbladder polypoid lesion grows to 10 mm, then cholecystectomy is advised. If the polypoid lesion grows by 2 mm or more within the 2-year follow-up period, then the current size of the polypoid lesion should be considered along with patient risk factors. Multidisciplinary discussion may be employed to decide whether continuation of monitoring, or cholecystectomy, is necessary. Moderate strength recommendation, moderate-quality evidence. 8. If during follow-up the gallbladder polypoid lesion disappears, then monitoring can be discontinued. Strong recommendation, moderate-quality evidence. SOURCE AND SCOPE: These guidelines are an update of the 2017 recommendations developed between the European Society of Gastrointestinal and Abdominal Radiology (ESGAR), European Association for Endoscopic Surgery and other Interventional Techniques (EAES), International Society of Digestive Surgery-European Federation (EFISDS) and European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE). A targeted literature search was performed to discover recent evidence concerning the management and follow-up of gallbladder polyps. The changes within these updated guidelines were formulated after consideration of the latest evidence by a group of international experts. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system was adopted to define the strength of recommendations and the quality of evidence. KEY POINT: • These recommendations update the 2017 European guidelines regarding the management and follow-up of gallbladder polyps.

Indexed as

Gallbladder NeoplasmsGastrointestinal NeoplasmsPolypsEndoscopy, GastrointestinalFollow-Up StudiesGallbladderHumansMiddle AgedCholecystectomyGallbladderNeoplasmsPolypsUltrasonography

Identifiers

PMID34918177
PMCPMC9038818
OpenAlexW4200618142

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.