This article outlines the systematic radiological approach preoperative evaluation of perihilar cholangiocarcinoma (pCCA) using CT and MRI to provide key information regarding the suitability for curative surgical resection. It discusses older classification systems (BismuthCorlette, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center T staging) and follows the Korean Society of Abdomi­nal Radiology 2019 consensus recommendations for step-by-step assessment.The correlation between radiological, surgical, and pathological findings is illustrated through a pictorial review of pathologically proven cases. Benign and malignant mimics of pCCA are included to provide a comprehensive overview.

This article outlines the systematic radiological approach preoperative evaluation of perihilar cholangiocarcinoma (pCCA) using CT and MRI to provide key information regarding the suitability for curative surgical resection. It discusses older classification systems (BismuthCorlette, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center T staging) and follows the Korean Society of Abdomi­nal Radiology 2019 consensus recommendations for step-by-step assessment.The correlation between radiological, surgical, and pathological findings is illustrated through a pictorial review of pathologically proven cases. Benign and malignant mimics of pCCA are included to provide a comprehensive overview.

This article outlines the systematic radiological approach preoperative evaluation of perihilar cholangiocarcinoma (pCCA) using CT and MRI to provide key information regarding the suitability for curative surgical resection. It discusses older classification systems (BismuthCorlette, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center T staging) and follows the Korean Society of Abdomi­nal Radiology 2019 consensus recommendations for step-by-step assessment.The correlation between radiological, surgical, and pathological findings is illustrated through a pictorial review of pathologically proven cases. Benign and malignant mimics of pCCA are included to provide a comprehensive overview.

Objective: Bariatric surgery effectively treats non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD). The glutamate-serine-glycine (GSG) index has emerged as a non-invasive diagnostic marker for NAFLD, but its ability to monitor treatment response remains unclear. This study investigates the GSG index's ability to monitor NAFLD's response to bariatric surgery. Methodology: Ten NAFLD participants were studied at baseline and 6 months post-bariatric surgery. Blood samples were collected for serum biomarkers and metabolomic profiling. Hepatic steatosis [proton density fat fraction (PDFF)] and fibroinflammation (cT1) were quantified with multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI), and hepatic stiffness with magnetic resonance elastography (MRE). Amino acids and acylcarnitines were measured with mass spectrometry. Statistical analyses included paired Student’s t-test, Wilcoxon-signed rank test, and Pearson’s correlation. Results: Eight participants provided complete data. At baseline, all had hepatic steatosis (BMI 39.3 ± 5.6 kg/m2, PDFF ≥ 5%). Post-surgery reductions in PDFF (from 12.4 ± 6.7% to 6.2 ± 2.8%, p = 0.013) and cT1 (from 823.3 ± 85.4ms to 757.5 ± 41.6ms, p = 0.039) were significant, along with the GSG index (from 0.272 ± 0.03 to 0.157 ± 0.05, p = 0.001). Conclusion The GSG index can potentially be developed as a marker for monitoring the response of patients with NAFLD to bariatric surgery.
Non-alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease ; Amino Acids ; Metabolomics

Purpose: This study aimed to compare cognitive, non-cognitive, and overall learning outcomes for sepsis and trauma resuscitation skills in novices with virtual patient simulation (VPS) versus in-person simulation (IPS). Methods: A randomized controlled trial was conducted on junior doctors in 1 emergency department from January to December 2022, comparing 70 minutes of VPS (n=19) versus IPS (n=21) in sepsis and trauma resuscitation. Using the nominal group technique, we created skills assessment checklists and determined Bloom’s taxonomy domains for each checklist item. Two blinded raters observed participants leading 1 sepsis and 1 trauma resuscitation simulation. Satisfaction was measured using the Student Satisfaction with Learning Scale (SSLS). The SSLS and checklist scores were analyzed using the Wilcoxon rank sum test and 2-tailed t-test respectively. Results: For sepsis, there was no significant difference between VPS and IPS in overall scores (2.0; 95% confidence interval [CI], -1.4 to 5.4; Cohen’s d=0.38), as well as in items that were cognitive (1.1; 95% CI, -1.5 to 3.7) and not only cognitive (0.9; 95% CI, -0.4 to 2.2). Likewise, for trauma, there was no significant difference in overall scores (-0.9; 95% CI, -4.1 to 2.3; Cohen’s d=0.19), as well as in items that were cognitive (-0.3; 95% CI, -2.8 to 2.1) and not only cognitive (-0.6; 95% CI, -2.4 to 1.3). The median SSLS scores were lower with VPS than with IPS (-3.0; 95% CI, -1.0 to -5.0). Conclusion For novices, there were no major differences in overall and non-cognitive learning outcomes for sepsis and trauma resuscitation between VPS and IPS. Learners were more satisfied with IPS than with VPS (clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT05201950).

Purpose: This study aimed to compare cognitive, non-cognitive, and overall learning outcomes for sepsis and trauma resuscitation skills in novices with virtual patient simulation (VPS) versus in-person simulation (IPS). Methods: A randomized controlled trial was conducted on junior doctors in 1 emergency department from January to December 2022, comparing 70 minutes of VPS (n=19) versus IPS (n=21) in sepsis and trauma resuscitation. Using the nominal group technique, we created skills assessment checklists and determined Bloom’s taxonomy domains for each checklist item. Two blinded raters observed participants leading 1 sepsis and 1 trauma resuscitation simulation. Satisfaction was measured using the Student Satisfaction with Learning Scale (SSLS). The SSLS and checklist scores were analyzed using the Wilcoxon rank sum test and 2-tailed t-test respectively. Results: For sepsis, there was no significant difference between VPS and IPS in overall scores (2.0; 95% confidence interval [CI], -1.4 to 5.4; Cohen’s d=0.38), as well as in items that were cognitive (1.1; 95% CI, -1.5 to 3.7) and not only cognitive (0.9; 95% CI, -0.4 to 2.2). Likewise, for trauma, there was no significant difference in overall scores (-0.9; 95% CI, -4.1 to 2.3; Cohen’s d=0.19), as well as in items that were cognitive (-0.3; 95% CI, -2.8 to 2.1) and not only cognitive (-0.6; 95% CI, -2.4 to 1.3). The median SSLS scores were lower with VPS than with IPS (-3.0; 95% CI, -1.0 to -5.0). Conclusion For novices, there were no major differences in overall and non-cognitive learning outcomes for sepsis and trauma resuscitation between VPS and IPS. Learners were more satisfied with IPS than with VPS (clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT05201950).