Objective: The CT/MRI Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) demonstrates high specificity with relatively limited sensitivity for diagnosing hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in high-risk patients. This study aimed to explore the possibility of improving sensitivity by combining CT/MRI LI-RADS v2018 with second-line contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) LI-RADS v2017 using sulfur hexafluoride (SHF) or perfluorobutane (PFB). Materials and Methods: This retrospective analysis of prospectively collected multicenter data included high-risk patients with treatment-naive hepatic observations. The reference standard was pathological confirmation or a composite reference standard (only for benign lesions). Each participant underwent concurrent CT/MRI, SHF-enhanced US, and PFB-enhanced US examinations. The diagnostic performances for HCC of CT/MRI LI-RADS alone and three combination strategies (combining CT/ MRI LI-RADS with either LI-RADS SHF, LI-RADS PFB, or a modified algorithm incorporating the Kupffer-phase findings for PFB [modified PFB]) were evaluated. For the three combination strategies, apart from the CT/MRI LR-5 criteria, HCC was diagnosed if CT/MRI LR-3 or LR-4 observations met the LR-5 criteria using LI-RADS SHF, LI-RADS PFB, or modified PFB. Results: In total, 281 participants (237 males; mean age, 55 ± 11 years) with 306 observations (227 HCCs, 40 non-HCC malignancies, and 39 benign lesions) were included. Using LI-RADS SHF, LI-RADS PFB, and modified PFB, 20, 23, and 31 CT/MRI LR-3/4 observations, respectively, were reclassified as LR-5, and all were pathologically confirmed as HCCs. Compared to CT/MRI LI-RADS alone (74%, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 68%–79%), the three combination strategies combining CT/MRI LI-RADS with either LI-RADS SHF, LI-RADS PFB, or modified PFB increased sensitivity (83% [95% CI: 77%–87%], 84% [95% CI: 79%–89%], 88% [95% CI: 83%–92%], respectively; all P < 0.001), while maintaining the specificity at 92% (95% CI: 84%–97%). Conclusion The combination of CT/MRI LI-RADS with second-line CEUS using SHF or PFB improved the sensitivity of HCC diagnosis without compromising specificity.

Objective: The CT/MRI Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) demonstrates high specificity with relatively limited sensitivity for diagnosing hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in high-risk patients. This study aimed to explore the possibility of improving sensitivity by combining CT/MRI LI-RADS v2018 with second-line contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) LI-RADS v2017 using sulfur hexafluoride (SHF) or perfluorobutane (PFB). Materials and Methods: This retrospective analysis of prospectively collected multicenter data included high-risk patients with treatment-naive hepatic observations. The reference standard was pathological confirmation or a composite reference standard (only for benign lesions). Each participant underwent concurrent CT/MRI, SHF-enhanced US, and PFB-enhanced US examinations. The diagnostic performances for HCC of CT/MRI LI-RADS alone and three combination strategies (combining CT/ MRI LI-RADS with either LI-RADS SHF, LI-RADS PFB, or a modified algorithm incorporating the Kupffer-phase findings for PFB [modified PFB]) were evaluated. For the three combination strategies, apart from the CT/MRI LR-5 criteria, HCC was diagnosed if CT/MRI LR-3 or LR-4 observations met the LR-5 criteria using LI-RADS SHF, LI-RADS PFB, or modified PFB. Results: In total, 281 participants (237 males; mean age, 55 ± 11 years) with 306 observations (227 HCCs, 40 non-HCC malignancies, and 39 benign lesions) were included. Using LI-RADS SHF, LI-RADS PFB, and modified PFB, 20, 23, and 31 CT/MRI LR-3/4 observations, respectively, were reclassified as LR-5, and all were pathologically confirmed as HCCs. Compared to CT/MRI LI-RADS alone (74%, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 68%–79%), the three combination strategies combining CT/MRI LI-RADS with either LI-RADS SHF, LI-RADS PFB, or modified PFB increased sensitivity (83% [95% CI: 77%–87%], 84% [95% CI: 79%–89%], 88% [95% CI: 83%–92%], respectively; all P < 0.001), while maintaining the specificity at 92% (95% CI: 84%–97%). Conclusion The combination of CT/MRI LI-RADS with second-line CEUS using SHF or PFB improved the sensitivity of HCC diagnosis without compromising specificity.

Objective: The CT/MRI Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) demonstrates high specificity with relatively limited sensitivity for diagnosing hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in high-risk patients. This study aimed to explore the possibility of improving sensitivity by combining CT/MRI LI-RADS v2018 with second-line contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) LI-RADS v2017 using sulfur hexafluoride (SHF) or perfluorobutane (PFB). Materials and Methods: This retrospective analysis of prospectively collected multicenter data included high-risk patients with treatment-naive hepatic observations. The reference standard was pathological confirmation or a composite reference standard (only for benign lesions). Each participant underwent concurrent CT/MRI, SHF-enhanced US, and PFB-enhanced US examinations. The diagnostic performances for HCC of CT/MRI LI-RADS alone and three combination strategies (combining CT/ MRI LI-RADS with either LI-RADS SHF, LI-RADS PFB, or a modified algorithm incorporating the Kupffer-phase findings for PFB [modified PFB]) were evaluated. For the three combination strategies, apart from the CT/MRI LR-5 criteria, HCC was diagnosed if CT/MRI LR-3 or LR-4 observations met the LR-5 criteria using LI-RADS SHF, LI-RADS PFB, or modified PFB. Results: In total, 281 participants (237 males; mean age, 55 ± 11 years) with 306 observations (227 HCCs, 40 non-HCC malignancies, and 39 benign lesions) were included. Using LI-RADS SHF, LI-RADS PFB, and modified PFB, 20, 23, and 31 CT/MRI LR-3/4 observations, respectively, were reclassified as LR-5, and all were pathologically confirmed as HCCs. Compared to CT/MRI LI-RADS alone (74%, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 68%–79%), the three combination strategies combining CT/MRI LI-RADS with either LI-RADS SHF, LI-RADS PFB, or modified PFB increased sensitivity (83% [95% CI: 77%–87%], 84% [95% CI: 79%–89%], 88% [95% CI: 83%–92%], respectively; all P < 0.001), while maintaining the specificity at 92% (95% CI: 84%–97%). Conclusion The combination of CT/MRI LI-RADS with second-line CEUS using SHF or PFB improved the sensitivity of HCC diagnosis without compromising specificity.

Objective: The CT/MRI Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) demonstrates high specificity with relatively limited sensitivity for diagnosing hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in high-risk patients. This study aimed to explore the possibility of improving sensitivity by combining CT/MRI LI-RADS v2018 with second-line contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) LI-RADS v2017 using sulfur hexafluoride (SHF) or perfluorobutane (PFB). Materials and Methods: This retrospective analysis of prospectively collected multicenter data included high-risk patients with treatment-naive hepatic observations. The reference standard was pathological confirmation or a composite reference standard (only for benign lesions). Each participant underwent concurrent CT/MRI, SHF-enhanced US, and PFB-enhanced US examinations. The diagnostic performances for HCC of CT/MRI LI-RADS alone and three combination strategies (combining CT/ MRI LI-RADS with either LI-RADS SHF, LI-RADS PFB, or a modified algorithm incorporating the Kupffer-phase findings for PFB [modified PFB]) were evaluated. For the three combination strategies, apart from the CT/MRI LR-5 criteria, HCC was diagnosed if CT/MRI LR-3 or LR-4 observations met the LR-5 criteria using LI-RADS SHF, LI-RADS PFB, or modified PFB. Results: In total, 281 participants (237 males; mean age, 55 ± 11 years) with 306 observations (227 HCCs, 40 non-HCC malignancies, and 39 benign lesions) were included. Using LI-RADS SHF, LI-RADS PFB, and modified PFB, 20, 23, and 31 CT/MRI LR-3/4 observations, respectively, were reclassified as LR-5, and all were pathologically confirmed as HCCs. Compared to CT/MRI LI-RADS alone (74%, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 68%–79%), the three combination strategies combining CT/MRI LI-RADS with either LI-RADS SHF, LI-RADS PFB, or modified PFB increased sensitivity (83% [95% CI: 77%–87%], 84% [95% CI: 79%–89%], 88% [95% CI: 83%–92%], respectively; all P < 0.001), while maintaining the specificity at 92% (95% CI: 84%–97%). Conclusion The combination of CT/MRI LI-RADS with second-line CEUS using SHF or PFB improved the sensitivity of HCC diagnosis without compromising specificity.

Objective: The CT/MRI Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) demonstrates high specificity with relatively limited sensitivity for diagnosing hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in high-risk patients. This study aimed to explore the possibility of improving sensitivity by combining CT/MRI LI-RADS v2018 with second-line contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) LI-RADS v2017 using sulfur hexafluoride (SHF) or perfluorobutane (PFB). Materials and Methods: This retrospective analysis of prospectively collected multicenter data included high-risk patients with treatment-naive hepatic observations. The reference standard was pathological confirmation or a composite reference standard (only for benign lesions). Each participant underwent concurrent CT/MRI, SHF-enhanced US, and PFB-enhanced US examinations. The diagnostic performances for HCC of CT/MRI LI-RADS alone and three combination strategies (combining CT/ MRI LI-RADS with either LI-RADS SHF, LI-RADS PFB, or a modified algorithm incorporating the Kupffer-phase findings for PFB [modified PFB]) were evaluated. For the three combination strategies, apart from the CT/MRI LR-5 criteria, HCC was diagnosed if CT/MRI LR-3 or LR-4 observations met the LR-5 criteria using LI-RADS SHF, LI-RADS PFB, or modified PFB. Results: In total, 281 participants (237 males; mean age, 55 ± 11 years) with 306 observations (227 HCCs, 40 non-HCC malignancies, and 39 benign lesions) were included. Using LI-RADS SHF, LI-RADS PFB, and modified PFB, 20, 23, and 31 CT/MRI LR-3/4 observations, respectively, were reclassified as LR-5, and all were pathologically confirmed as HCCs. Compared to CT/MRI LI-RADS alone (74%, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 68%–79%), the three combination strategies combining CT/MRI LI-RADS with either LI-RADS SHF, LI-RADS PFB, or modified PFB increased sensitivity (83% [95% CI: 77%–87%], 84% [95% CI: 79%–89%], 88% [95% CI: 83%–92%], respectively; all P < 0.001), while maintaining the specificity at 92% (95% CI: 84%–97%). Conclusion The combination of CT/MRI LI-RADS with second-line CEUS using SHF or PFB improved the sensitivity of HCC diagnosis without compromising specificity.

Apical microsurgery is accurate and minimally invasive, produces few complications, and has a success rate of more than 90%. However, due to the lack of awareness and understanding of apical microsurgery by dental general practitioners and even endodontists, many clinical problems remain to be overcome. The consensus has gathered well-known domestic experts to hold a series of special discussions and reached the consensus. This document specifies the indications, contraindications, preoperative preparations, operational procedures, complication prevention measures, and efficacy evaluation of apical microsurgery and is applicable to dentists who perform apical microsurgery after systematic training.
Microsurgery/standards* ; Humans ; Apicoectomy ; Contraindications, Procedure ; Tooth Apex/diagnostic imaging* ; Postoperative Complications/prevention & control* ; Consensus ; Treatment Outcome

Pulpotomy, which belongs to vital pulp therapy, has become a strategy for managing pulpitis in recent decades. This minimally invasive treatment reflects the recognition of preserving healthy dental pulp and optimizing long-term patient-centered outcomes. Pulpotomy is categorized into partial pulpotomy (PP), the removal of a partial segment of the coronal pulp tissue, and full pulpotomy (FP), the removal of whole coronal pulp, which is followed by applying the biomaterials onto the remaining pulp tissue and ultimately restoring the tooth. Procedural decisions for the amount of pulp tissue removal or retention depend on the diagnostic of pulp vitality, the overall treatment plan, the patient's general health status, and pulp inflammation reassessment during operation. This statement represents the consensus of an expert committee convened by the Society of Cariology and Endodontics, Chinese Stomatological Association. It addresses the current evidence to support the application of pulpotomy as a potential alternative to root canal treatment (RCT) on mature permanent teeth with pulpitis from a biological basis, the development of capping biomaterial, and the diagnostic considerations to evidence-based medicine. This expert statement intends to provide a clinical protocol of pulpotomy, which facilitates practitioners in choosing the optimal procedure and increasing their confidence in this rapidly evolving field.
Humans ; Calcium Compounds/therapeutic use* ; Consensus ; Dental Pulp ; Dentition, Permanent ; Oxides/therapeutic use* ; Pulpitis/therapy* ; Pulpotomy/standards*

Intentional tooth replantation (ITR) is an advanced treatment modality and the procedure of last resort for preserving teeth with inaccessible endodontic or resorptive lesions. ITR is defined as the deliberate extraction of a tooth; evaluation of the root surface, endodontic manipulation, and repair; and placement of the tooth back into its original socket. Case reports, case series, cohort studies, and randomized controlled trials have demonstrated the efficacy of ITR in the retention of natural teeth that are untreatable or difficult to manage with root canal treatment or endodontic microsurgery. However, variations in clinical protocols for ITR exist due to the empirical nature of the original protocols and rapid advancements in the field of oral biology and dental materials. This heterogeneity in protocols may cause confusion among dental practitioners; therefore, guidelines and considerations for ITR should be explicated. This expert consensus discusses the biological foundation of ITR, the available clinical protocols and current status of ITR in treating teeth with refractory apical periodontitis or anatomical aberration, and the main complications of this treatment, aiming to refine the clinical management of ITR in accordance with the progress of basic research and clinical studies; the findings suggest that ITR may become a more consistent evidence-based option in dental treatment.
Humans ; Tooth Replantation/methods* ; Consensus ; Periapical Periodontitis/surgery*

Instrument separation is a critical complication during root canal therapy, impacting treatment success and long-term tooth preservation. The etiology of instrument separation is multifactorial, involving the intricate anatomy of the root canal system, instrument-related factors, and instrumentation techniques. Instrument separation can hinder thorough cleaning, shaping, and obturation of the root canal, posing challenges to successful treatment outcomes. Although retrieval of separated instrument is often feasible, it carries risks including perforation, excessive removal of tooth structure and root fractures. Effective management of separated instruments requires a comprehensive understanding of the contributing factors, meticulous preoperative assessment, and precise evaluation of the retrieval difficulty. The application of appropriate retrieval techniques is essential to minimize complications and optimize clinical outcomes. The current manuscript provides a framework for understanding the causes, risk factors, and clinical management principles of instrument separation. By integrating effective strategies, endodontists can enhance decision-making, improve endodontic treatment success and ensure the preservation of natural dentition.
Humans ; Root Canal Therapy/adverse effects* ; Consensus ; Root Canal Preparation/adverse effects*

This study aimed to comprehensively examine the association of gallstones, cholecystectomy, and cancer risk. Multivariable logistic regressions were performed to estimate the observational associations of gallstones and cholecystectomy with cancer risk, using data from a nationwide cohort involving 239 799 participants. General and gender-specific two-sample Mendelian randomization (MR) analysis was further conducted to assess the causalities of the observed associations. Observationally, a history of gallstones without cholecystectomy was associated with a high risk of stomach cancer (adjusted odds ratio (aOR)=2.54, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.50-4.28), liver and bile duct cancer (aOR=2.46, 95% CI 1.17-5.16), kidney cancer (aOR=2.04, 95% CI 1.05-3.94), and bladder cancer (aOR=2.23, 95% CI 1.01-5.13) in the general population, as well as cervical cancer (aOR=1.69, 95% CI 1.12-2.56) in women. Moreover, cholecystectomy was associated with high odds of stomach cancer (aOR=2.41, 95% CI 1.29-4.49), colorectal cancer (aOR=1.83, 95% CI 1.18-2.85), and cancer of liver and bile duct (aOR=2.58, 95% CI 1.11-6.02). MR analysis only supported the causal effect of gallstones on stomach, liver and bile duct, kidney, and bladder cancer. This study added evidence to the causal effect of gallstones on stomach, liver and bile duct, kidney, and bladder cancer, highlighting the importance of cancer screening in individuals with gallstones.
Humans ; Mendelian Randomization Analysis ; Gallstones/complications* ; Female ; Male ; Cholecystectomy/statistics & numerical data* ; Middle Aged ; Risk Factors ; Aged ; Adult ; Neoplasms/etiology* ; Stomach Neoplasms/epidemiology*