Browsing by Author "Tiniakos, Dina"

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    A multisociety Delphi consensus statement on new fatty liver disease nomenclature
    (Wolters Kluwer, 2023) Rinella, Mary E.; Lazarus, Jeffrey V.; Ratziu, Vlad; Francque, Sven M.; Sanyal, Arun J.; Kanwal, Fasiha; Romero, Diana; Abdelmalek, Manal F.; Anstee, Quentin M.; Arab, Juan Pablo; Arrese, Marco; Bataller, Ramon; Beuers, Ulrich; Boursier, Jerome; Bugianesi, Elisabetta; Byrne, Christopher D.; Castro Narro, Graciela E.; Chowdhury, Abhijit; Cortez-Pinto, Helena; Cryer, Donna R.; Cusi, Kenneth; El-Kassas, Mohamed; Klein, Samuel; Eskridge, Wayne; Fan, Jiangao; Gawrieh, Samer; Guy, Cynthia D.; Harrison, Stephen A.; Kim, Seung Up; Koot, Bart G.; Korenjak, Marko; Kowdley, Kris V.; Lacaille, Florence; Loomba, Rohit; Mitchell-Thain, Robert; Morgan, Timothy R.; Powell, Elisabeth E.; Roden, Michael; Romero-Gómez, Manuel; Silva, Marcelo; Singh, Shivaram Prasad; Sookoian, Silvia C.; Spearman, C. Wendy; Tiniakos, Dina; Valenti, Luca; Vos, Miriam B.; Wong, Vincent Wai-Sun; Xanthakos, Stavra; Yilmaz, Yusuf; Younossi, Zobair; Hobbs, Ansley; Villota-Rivas, Marcela; Newsome, Philip N.; NAFLD Nomenclature consensus group; Medicine, School of Medicine
    The principal limitations of the terms NAFLD and NASH are the reliance on exclusionary confounder terms and the use of potentially stigmatising language. This study set out to determine if content experts and patient advocates were in favor of a change in nomenclature and/or definition. A modified Delphi process was led by three large pan-national liver associations. The consensus was defined a priori as a supermajority (67%) vote. An independent committee of experts external to the nomenclature process made the final recommendation on the acronym and its diagnostic criteria. A total of 236 panelists from 56 countries participated in 4 online surveys and 2 hybrid meetings. Response rates across the 4 survey rounds were 87%, 83%, 83%, and 78%, respectively. Seventy-four percent of respondents felt that the current nomenclature was sufficiently flawed to consider a name change. The terms "nonalcoholic" and "fatty" were felt to be stigmatising by 61% and 66% of respondents, respectively. Steatotic liver disease was chosen as an overarching term to encompass the various aetiologies of steatosis. The term steatohepatitis was felt to be an important pathophysiological concept that should be retained. The name chosen to replace NAFLD was metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease. There was consensus to change the definition to include the presence of at least 1 of 5 cardiometabolic risk factors. Those with no metabolic parameters and no known cause were deemed to have cryptogenic steatotic liver disease. A new category, outside pure metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease, termed metabolic and alcohol related/associated liver disease (MetALD), was selected to describe those with metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease, who consume greater amounts of alcohol per week (140-350 g/wk and 210-420 g/wk for females and males, respectively). The new nomenclature and diagnostic criteria are widely supported and nonstigmatising, and can improve awareness and patient identification.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Consensus Recommendations for Histological Criteria of Autoimmune Hepatitis from the International AIH Pathology Group
    (Wiley, 2022-05) Lohse, Ansgar W.; Sebode, Marcial; Bhathal, Prithi S.; Clouston, Andrew D.; Dienes, Hans P.; Jain, Dhanpat; Gouw, Annette S. H.; Guindi, Maha; Kakar, Sanjay; Kleiner, David E.; Krech, Till; Lackner, Carolin; Longerich, Thomas; Saxena, Romil; Terracciano, Luigi; Washington, Kay; Weidemann, Sören; Hübscher, Stefan G.; Tiniakos, Dina; Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, School of Medicine
    Background & Aims Diagnostic histological criteria for autoimmune hepatitis (AIH) have not been clearly established. Previously published criteria focused mainly on chronic AIH, in which inflammatory changes mainly occur in portal/periportal regions and may not be applicable to acute presentation of AIH, in which inflammatory changes are typically predominantly lobular in location. International consensus criteria for the diagnosis and assessment of disease severity in both acute and chronic AIH are thus urgently needed. Methods Seventeen expert liver pathologists convened at an international workshop and subsequently used a modified Delphi panel approach to establish consensus criteria for the histopathological diagnosis of AIH. Results The consensus view is that liver biopsy should remain standard for diagnosing AIH. AIH is considered likely, if there is a predominantly portal lymphoplasmacytic hepatitis with more than mild interface activity and/or more than mild lobular hepatitis in the absence of histological features suggestive of another liver disease. AIH is also considered likely if there is predominantly lobular hepatitis with or without centrilobular necroinflammation and at least one of the following features: portal lymphoplasmacytic hepatitis, interface hepatitis or portal-based fibrosis, in the absence of histological features suggestive of another liver disease. Emperipolesis and hepatocellular rosettes are not regarded as being specific for AIH. Conclusions The criteria proposed in this consensus statement provide a uniform approach to the histological diagnosis of AIH, which is relevant for patients with an acute as well as a chronic presentation and to more accurately reflect the current understanding of liver pathology in AIH.