Purpose To identify factors associated with outcome after surgical management of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC) and examine the impact of lymph node (LN) assessment on survival. Patients and Methods From an international multi-institutional database, 449 patients who underwent surgery for ICC between 1973 and 2010 were identified. Clinical and pathologic data were evaluated using uni- and multivariate analyses. Results Median tumor size was 6.5 cm. Most patients had a solitary tumor (73%) and no vascular invasion (69%). Median survival was 27 months, and 5-year survival was 31%. Factors associated with adverse prognosis included positive margin status (hazard ratio [HR], 2.20; P < .001), multiple lesions (HR, 1.80; P = .001), and vascular invasion (HR, 1.59; P = .015). Tumor size was not a prognostic factor (HR, 1.03; P = .23). Patients were stratified using the American Joint Committee on Cancer/International Union Against Cancer T1, T2a, and T2b categories (seventh edition) in a discrete step-wise fashion (P < .001). Lymphadenectomy was performed in 248 patients (55%); 74 of these (30%) had LN metastasis. LN metastasis was associated with worse outcome (median survival: N0, 30 months v N1, 24 months; P = .03). Although patients with no LN metastasis were able to be stratified by tumor number and vascular invasion (N0; P < .001), among patients with N1 disease, multiple tumors and vascular invasion, either alone or together, failed to discriminate patients into discrete prognostic groups (P = .34). Conclusion Although tumor size provides no prognostic information, tumor number, vascular invasion, and LN metastasis were associated with survival. N1 status adversely affected overall survival and also influenced the relative effect of tumor number and vascular invasion on prognosis. Lymphadenectomy should be strongly considered for ICC, because up to 30% of patients will have LN metastasis.

Main RecommendationsESGE recommends offering stone extraction to all patients with common bile duct stones, symptomatic or not, who are fit enough to tolerate the intervention.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence.ESGE recommends liver function tests and abdominal ultrasonography as the initial diagnostic steps for suspected common bile duct stones. Combining these tests defines the probability of having common bile duct stones.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence.ESGE recommends endoscopic ultrasonography or magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography to diagnose common bile duct stones in patients with persistent clinical suspicion but insufficient evidence of stones on abdominal ultrasonography.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence.ESGE recommends the following timing for biliary drainage, preferably endoscopic, in patients with acute cholangitis, classified according to the 2018 revision of the Tokyo Guidelines:– severe, as soon as possible and within 12 hours for patients with septic shock– moderate, within 48 – 72 hours– mild, elective.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence.ESGE recommends endoscopic placement of a temporary biliary plastic stent in patients with irretrievable biliary stones that warrant biliary drainage.Strong recommendation, moderate quality of evidence.ESGE recommends limited sphincterotomy combined with endoscopic papillary large-balloon dilation as the first-line approach to remove difficult common bile duct stones. Strong recommendation, high quality evidence.ESGE recommends the use of cholangioscopy-assisted intraluminal lithotripsy (electrohydraulic or laser) as an effective and safe treatment of difficult bile duct stones.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence.ESGE recommends performing a laparoscopic cholecystectomy within 2 weeks from ERCP for patients treated for choledocholithiasis to reduce the conversion rate and the risk of recurrent biliary events. Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence.

On the basis of an Eastern and Western experience, a nomogram was developed to predict overall survival after resection for ICC. Validation revealed good discrimination and calibration, suggesting clinical utility to improve individualized predictions of survival for patients undergoing resection of ICC.

Despite a lack of level 1 evidence, LS is a safe and advantageous procedure in experienced hands that has displaced open surgery for almost all indications. To support the clinical evidence, further randomized controlled trials on different issues are mandatory.