Search

Background: Standardized outcome reporting is crucial for trial evidence synthesis and translation of findings into clinical decision‐making. The OMERACT 2.0 Filter and COMET outcome domain taxonomy propose frameworks for consistent reporting of outcomes. There is an absence of a uniform dermatology‐specific reporting strategy that uses precise and consistent outcome definitions. Objectives: Our aim was to map efficacy/effectiveness outcomes assessed in dermatological trials to the OMERACT 2.0 Filter as a starting point for developing an outcome taxonomy in dermatology. Methods: We critically appraised 10 Cochrane Skin Reviews randomly selected from all 69 Cochrane Skin Reviews published until 01/2015 and the 220 trials included covering a broad spectrum of dermatological conditions and interventions. Efficacy/effectiveness outcomes were mapped to core areas and domains according to the OMERACT 2.0 Filter. The extracted trial outcomes were used for critical appraisal of outcome reporting in dermatology trials and for the preliminary development of a dermatology‐specific outcome taxonomy. Results: The allocation of 1086 extracted efficacy/effectiveness outcomes to the OMERACT 2.0 Filter resulted in a hierarchically structured dermatology‐specific outcome classification. In 506 outcomes (47%), the outcome concept to be measured was insufficiently described, hindering meaningful evidence synthesis. Although the core areas assessed in different dermatology trials of the same condition overlap considerably, quantitative evidence synthesis usually failed due to imprecise outcome definitions, non‐comparable outcome measurement instruments, metrics and reporting. Conclusions: We present an efficacy/effectiveness outcome classification as a starting point for a dermatology‐specific taxonomy to provide trialists and reviewers with the opportunity to better synthesize and compare evidence. Linked Commentary: A. Ragamin et al. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol 2021; 35: 276‐277. https://doi.org/10.1111/jdv.17103. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Medical data sciences receive attention as digitalization and artificial intelligence (AI) pose new challenges and opportunities in health care. Specific methods and skills derived from the data sciences have been driving essential developments in almost if not all areas of health care and medical research over many years. For example, evidence-based medicine is now a pillar of medical practice, combined with a stronger focus on reproducible and valid research and an improved understanding of scientific methods. The increased role of the data sciences in medical research and practice is reflected in the revised national competency-based learning objectives catalog for medicine (NKLM 2.0). Digitalization, research skills, evidence medicine and health promotion and prevention are integral parts of the curriculum from start to end. They relate to all subjects and topics in an interprofessional manner. This increase in relevance of the data sciences clearly calls for improved competencies in the clinico-theoretical disciplines previously combined as interdisciplinary domain 1 (Q1). Epidemiology, medical biometry and medical informatics will now contribute expertise throughout the whole course of studying medicine. These disciplines deal with digitalization, medical research competence, evidence-based medicine, and prevention. In addition, disease-related learning and many aspects of therapy, diagnostics, communication, and management benefit from cooperation with dedicated instruction in the medical data sciences by didactically trained experts. This article aims to support faculties and subject representatives during the implementation period of the NKLM 2.0 and beyond regarding data science skills. Tables provide an overview of essential learning objectives in epidemiology, biometry, and medical informatics across the different phases of the curriculum. In addition, we give recommendations for cooperation with other subject representatives. By this we wish to contribute to improving the medical curriculum based on graduate profile-oriented interdisciplinary-integrative teaching.

It is unclear how dermatology should be optimally taught to medical students. Therefore, this scoping review was conducted aiming to identify and structure all published interventional studies that investigated dermatological teaching approaches with medical students. The methodology of this scoping review followed the PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews. The databases Medline and Embase were searched without restriction until 30.06.2020. A categorization and a descriptive analysis of the studies published as full articles were performed. The database search yielded 36,627 hits. 114 studies met all inclusion criteria. These came from 19 countries, were mainly published since 2010 and were distributed across 64 different journals. 32 randomized controlled trials were identified. A wide variety of teaching approaches was found, including both E-learning and conventional teaching formats. The results of the studies are presented in structured tables. This scoping review documents a large number of studies published worldwide on teaching dermatology to medical students. The teaching of dermatology appears to be successful with numerous teaching approaches, whereby interventions that incorporate didactic principles were verifiably more successful. This literature review can serve as an aid for evidence-based teaching design in dermatology as well as a basis for future research approaches., (© 2022 The Authors. Journal der Deutschen Dermatologischen Gesellschaft published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Deutsche Dermatologische Gesellschaft.)

Background: Mycosis fungoides (MF) is the most common type of cutaneous T-cell lymphoma, a malignant, chronic disease initially affecting the skin. Several therapies are available, which may induce clinical remission for a time. This is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2012: we wanted to assess new trials, some of which investigated new interventions., Objectives: To assess the effects of interventions for MF in all stages of the disease., Search Methods: We updated our searches of the following databases to May 2019: the Cochrane Skin Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and LILACS. We searched 2 trials registries for additional references. For adverse event outcomes, we undertook separate searches in MEDLINE in April, July and November 2017., Selection Criteria: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of local or systemic interventions for MF in adults with any stage of the disease compared with either another local or systemic intervention or with placebo., Data Collection and Analysis: We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. The primary outcomes were improvement in health-related quality of life as defined by participants, and common adverse effects of the treatments. Key secondary outcomes were complete response (CR), defined as complete disappearance of all clinical evidence of disease, and objective response rate (ORR), defined as proportion of patients with a partial or complete response. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence and considered comparisons of psoralen plus ultraviolet A (PUVA) light treatment as most important because this is first-line treatment for MF in most guidelines., Main Results: This review includes 20 RCTs (1369 participants) covering a wide range of interventions. The following were assessed as either treatments or comparators: imiquimod, peldesine, hypericin, mechlorethamine, nitrogen mustard and intralesional injections of interferon-α (IFN-α) (topical applications); PUVA, extracorporeal photopheresis (ECP: photochemotherapy), and visible light (light applications); acitretin, bexarotene, lenalidomide, methotrexate and vorinostat (oral agents); brentuximab vedotin; denileukin diftitox; mogamulizumab; chemotherapy with cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, etoposide, and vincristine; a combination of chemotherapy with electron beam radiation; subcutaneous injection of IFN-α; and intramuscular injections of active transfer factor (parenteral systemics). Thirteen trials used an active comparator, five were placebo-controlled, and two compared an active operator to observation only. In 14 trials, participants had MF in clinical stages IA to IIB. All participants were treated in secondary and tertiary care settings, mainly in Europe, North America or Australia. Trials recruited both men and women, with more male participants overall. Trial duration varied from four weeks to 12 months, with one longer-term study lasting more than six years. We judged 16 trials as at high risk of bias in at least one domain, most commonly performance bias (blinding of participants and investigators), attrition bias and reporting bias. None of our key comparisons measured quality of life, and the two studies that did presented no usable data. Eighteen studies reported common adverse effects of the treatments. Adverse effects ranged from mild symptoms to lethal complications depending upon the treatment type. More aggressive treatments like systemic chemotherapy generally resulted in more severe adverse effects. In the included studies, CR rates ranged from 0% to 83% (median 31%), and ORR ranged from 0% to 88% (median 47%). Five trials assessed PUVA treatment, alone or combined, summarised below. There may be little to no difference between intralesional IFN-α and PUVA compared with PUVA alone for 24 to 52 weeks in CR (risk ratio (RR) 1.07, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.87 to 1.31; 2 trials; 122 participants; low-certainty evidence). Common adverse events and ORR were not measured. One small cross-over trial found once-monthly ECP for six months may be less effective than twice-weekly PUVA for three months, reporting CR in two of eight participants and ORR in six of eight participants after PUVA, compared with no CR or ORR after ECP (very low-certainty evidence). Some participants reported mild nausea after PUVA but no numerical data were given. One participant in the ECP group withdrew due to hypotension. However, we are unsure of the results due to very low-certainty evidence. One trial comparing bexarotene plus PUVA versus PUVA alone for up to 16 weeks reported one case of photosensitivity in the bexarotene plus PUVA group compared to none in the PUVA-alone group (87 participants; low-certainty evidence). There may be little to no difference between bexarotene plus PUVA and PUVA alone in CR (RR 1.41, 95% CI 0.71 to 2.80) and ORR (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.61 to 1.44) (93 participants; low-certainty evidence). One trial comparing subcutaneous IFN-α injections combined with either acitretin or PUVA for up to 48 weeks or until CR indicated there may be little to no difference in the common IFN-α adverse effect of flu-like symptoms (RR 1.32, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.88; 82 participants). There may be lower CR with IFN-α and acitretin compared with IFN-α and PUVA (RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.35 to 0.84; 82 participants) (both outcomes: low-certainty evidence). This trial did not measure ORR. One trial comparing PUVA maintenance treatment to no maintenance treatment, in participants who had already had CR, did report common adverse effects. However, the distribution was not evaluable. CR and OR were not assessable. The range of treatment options meant that rare adverse effects consequently occurred in a variety of organs., Authors' Conclusions: ​​There is a lack of high-certainty evidence to support decision making in the treatment of MF. Because of substantial heterogeneity in design, missing data, small sample sizes, and low methodological quality, the comparative safety and efficacy of these interventions cannot be reliably established on the basis of the included RCTs. PUVA is commonly recommended as first-line treatment for MF, and we did not find evidence to challenge this recommendation. There was an absence of evidence to support the use of intralesional IFN-α or bexarotene in people receiving PUVA and an absence of evidence to support the use of acitretin or ECP for treating MF. Future trials should compare the safety and efficacy of treatments to PUVA, as the current standard of care, and should measure quality of life and common adverse effects., (Copyright © 2020 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.)

Background: The purpose of this pilot study was to create a valid and reliable set of assessment questions for examining Evidence-based Dentistry (EbD) knowledge. For this reason, we adapted and validated for dental students the Berlin Questionnaire (BQ), which assesses Evidence-based Medicine (EbM) abilities., Methods: The Berlin Questionnaire was validated with medical residents. We adapted it for use in a dentistry setting. An expert panel reviewed the adapted BQ for content validity. A cross-sectional cohort representing four training levels (EbD-novice dental students, EbD-trained dental students, dentists, and EbM-/EbD-expert faculty) completed the questionnaire. A total of 140 participants comprised the validation set. Internal reliability, item difficulty and item discrimination were assessed. Construct validity was assessed by comparing the mean total scores of students to faculty and comparing proportions of students and faculty who passed each item., Results: Among the 133 participants (52 EbD-novice dental students, 53 EbD-trained dental students, 12 dentists, and 16 EbM-/ EbD-expert faculty), a statistically significant (p < 0.001) difference was evident in the total score corresponding to the training level. The total score reliability and psychometric properties of items modified for discipline-specific content were acceptable. Cronbach's alpha was 0.648., Conclusion: The adapted Berlin Questionnaire is a reliable and valid instrument to assess competence in Evidence-based Dentistry in dental students. Future research will focus on refining the instrument further.

Treatment-related infertility is a common problem in cancer survivors. Semen cryopreservation is the most established option for male oncological patients wishing to preserve their fertility. We conducted a systematic review to analyse the existing literature regarding the frequency of offers and attempts of semen cryopreservation. We systematically searched MEDLINE and EMBASE for eligible literature without restrictions to language, study type or year of publication. Two authors independently screened and evaluated the citations for eligibility. Studies were included if they reported on pubertal or post-pubertal patients at risk of fertility impairment prior to their cancer therapy. We excluded studies neither reporting the prevalence of offer nor attempt of semen cryopreservation. Possible factors for heterogeneity between the studies were examined by meta-regression analyses. Out of 6,105 returned citations, 42 studies were included in the analysis. The prevalence of offer varied from 8% to 100% and corresponding attempts ranged from 3% to 79%, showing a vast heterogeneity with inconsistent reporting of influencing variables. Measured by the number of scientific publications, the awareness for fertility preservation is increasing while actual prevalences are diverse. In order to identify variables influencing offer and attempt prevalences, consistent reporting of a core set of factors is required., (© 2019 Blackwell Verlag GmbH.)

The present guidelines are aimed at residents and board-certified physicians in the fields of dermatology, pediatrics, pediatric dermatology and pediatric rheumatology as well as policymakers and insurance funds. They were developed by dermatologists and pediatric dermatologists in collaboration with pediatric rheumatologists using a formal consensus process (S2k). The guidelines highlight topics such as disease severity, quality of life, treatment goals as well as problems associated with off-label drug therapy in children. Trigger factors and diagnostic aspects are discussed. The primary focus is on the various topical, systemic and UV-based treatment options available and includes recommendations for use and treatment algorithms. Other aspects addressed herein include vaccinations in children and adolescents with psoriasis as well as various disease subtypes such as guttate psoriasis, diaper psoriasis, pustular psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis. Finally, we also provide recommendations for imaging studies and the diagnostic workup to rule out tuberculosis prior to initiating systemic treatment. Note: This article constitutes part 2 of the Sk2 guidelines for the treatment of psoriasis in children and adolescents. Part 1 was published in last month's issue. It contained introductory remarks and addressed aspects of diagnosis and topical treatment., (© 2019 The Authors | Journal compilation © Blackwell Verlag GmbH, Berlin.)

The present guidelines are aimed at residents and board-certified physicians in the fields of dermatology, pediatrics, pediatric dermatology and pediatric rheumatology as well as policymakers and insurance funds. They were developed by dermatologists and pediatric dermatologists in collaboration with pediatric rheumatologists using a formal consensus process (S2k). The guidelines highlight topics such as disease severity, quality of life, treatment goals as well as problems associated with off-label drug therapy in children. Trigger factors and diagnostic aspects are discussed. The primary focus is on the various topical, systemic and UV-based treatment options available and includes recommendations for use and treatment algorithms. Other aspects addressed herein include vaccinations in children and adolescents with psoriasis as well as various disease subtypes such as guttate psoriasis, diaper psoriasis, pustular psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis. Finally, we also provide recommendations for imaging studies and the diagnostic workup to rule out tuberculosis prior to initiating systemic treatment. Note: This article constitutes part 1 of the Sk2 guidelines for the treatment of psoriasis in children and adolescents. Part 2 will be published in the next issue. It contains chapters on UV therapy, systemic treatment, tonsillectomy and antibiotics, vaccinations, guttate psoriasis, psoriatic arthritis, complementary medicine, as well as imaging studies and diagnostic workup to rule out tuberculosis prior to systemic treatment., (© 2019 The Authors | Journal compilation © Blackwell Verlag GmbH, Berlin.)

Background: In recent years, emergency consultations have become more common in all medical disciplines. In Germany, dermatological out-of-hours consultations are handled by emergency practices, emergency departments and tertiary care providers. Little information is available on the reasons for these dermatological consultations., Objectives: The aim of this study was to analyze patient characteristics, diagnoses and admission rates resulting from these consultations., Methods: We conducted a retrospective study covering two years of out-of-hours consultations at a dermatological tertiary referral center., Results: A total of 3635 patients presented at the referral center. The most frequent outpatient diagnoses were acute urticaria (13.8 %) and bacterial infections (12.3 %). 83 % of the outpatient diagnoses required the most advanced competence level according to the new German curriculum for undergraduate education of medical students. 405 (11.01 %) patients did not require dermatological treatment, and 430 patients (13.6 %) were admitted to hospital. Most admissions were due to bacterial infections and herpes zoster. Advanced age, pain and fever were associated with a relatively high risk of admission., Conclusions: Admission rates at the dermatological tertiary referral center were substantially lower than at interdisciplinary emergency departments. A few diagnoses accounted for more than half of all consultations. These diagnoses are well represented within the new German curriculum., (© 2019 Deutsche Dermatologische Gesellschaft (DDG). Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Evidence-based health care requires that relevant outcomes for patients are included in clinical trials investigating treatment effects, allowing subsequent systematic reviews to summarize all relevant evidence to guide clinical practice. Currently, no gold standard of outcome choice for dermatology trials and reviews exists. We systematically assessed concordance between efficacy outcomes in a random sample of 10 Cochrane Skin systematic reviews and the 220 dermatology trials included. Reviews did not include 742 (68%) of the 1,086 trial outcomes. Of the 60 outcomes the reviews sought, 17 (28%) were not reported in any trial, while 12 were assessed in <50% of trials. For 11 of 23 (48%) primary review outcomes, meta-analysis was impossible, because trial outcomes were absent or unclear. This small overlap of review/trial outcomes could suggest that trials are not measuring the outcomes perceived to be the most important by patients, clinicians, systematic reviewers, and trialists. The lack of standardized outcome measures, poor reporting of outcomes in trials, and low concordance of outcomes between reviews and primary studies could be improved by the development and implementation of Core Outcome Sets. These are an agreed-upon minimum set of key outcomes, for specified conditions, to be reported in all trials., (Copyright © 2018 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy (PDT) is one of the most common bedside surgical procedures performed in critically ill adults, on intensive care units (ICUs), who require long-term ventilation. PDT is associated with relevant life-threatening complications: Cuff rupture or accidental extubation may lead to hypoxia, aspiration or loss of airway. Puncture of the oesophagus, or creating a false passage during dilatation or replacement of the tracheostomy tube, can lead to pneumothorax or emphysema. Wound infections may occur which can cause mediastinits, especially after creation of false passage or in early tracheotomized post-sternotomy patients after cardiac surgery. During the procedure, the patient's airway can be secured with an endotracheal tube (ETT) or a laryngeal mask airway (LMA). This is an updated version of the review first published in 2014., Objectives: To assess the safety and effectiveness of LMA versus ETT in critically ill adults undergoing PDT on the ICU., Search Methods: We searched the following databases to 9 January 2018: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE and Embase. We searched for reports of ongoing trials in the metaRegister of Controlled Trials (mRCT). We handsearched for relevant studies in conference proceedings of five relevant annual congresses. We contacted study authors and experts concerning unpublished data and ongoing trials. We searched for further relevant studies in the reference lists of all included trials and of relevant systematic reviews., Selection Criteria: We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared use of laryngeal mask airways versus endotracheal tubes in critically ill adults undergoing elective PDT in the ICU, without injuries to or diseases of the face or neck. We imposed no restrictions with regard to language, timing or technique of PDT performed., Data Collection and Analysis: Two review authors independently assessed the eligibility and methodological quality of each study and carried out data extraction. Our primary outcomes were all-cause mortality, procedure-related mortality and tally of participants with one or more serious adverse events. Where possible, we combined homogeneous studies for meta-analysis. We used Cochrane's 'Risk of bias' tool and used GRADE to assess the quality of evidence for key outcomes., Main Results: We included nine RCTs in this review involving 517 participants.Studies had a high or unclear risk of bias. The main reason for this was low methodological quality or missing data, even after study authors were contacted. Study size was generally small, with a minimum of 40, and a maximum of 73 participants.In one study (40 participants), three deaths in the LMA group and two deaths in the ETT group were reported, although none of the deaths were related to the procedure (very low-quality evidence).Five studies (281 participants) reported on procedure-related deaths, stating that no procedure-related death occurred at all (very low-quality evidence).It is uncertain whether there is a difference in the number of people experiencing one or more serious adverse event(s) between LMA and ETT (risk ratio (RR) 0.86, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.41 to 1.80; 467 participants, 8 studies, very low-quality evidence).The duration of the procedure may be shorter in the LMA group (mean difference (MD) -1.46 minutes, 95% CI -1.92 to -1.01 minutes; 6 studies, 324 participants, low-quality evidence).However failure of procedure, as allocated by randomization, requiring conversion to any other procedure, may be higher in the LMA group (RR 2.82, 95% CI 1.22 to 6.52; 8 studies, 439 participants, low-quality evidence).We did not find any clear evidence of a difference between ETT and LMA groups for all other outcomes. Only one study provided follow-up data for late complications related to the intervention, showing no clear evidence of benefit for any treatment group., Authors' Conclusions: Evidence on the safety of LMA for PDT is too limited to allow conclusions to be drawn on either its efficacy or safety compared with ETT. Although the LMA procedure may shorten the period during which the airway is insecure, it may also lead to higher conversion rates. Also, late complications have not been investigated sufficiently. These results are primarily based on single-centre trials with small sample sizes, and therefore the level of evidence remains low. Studies with low risk of bias focusing on late complications and relevant patient-related outcomes are necessary for definitive conclusions on safety issues related to this procedure. The dependency of the successful placement of a LMA on the type of LMA used should also be further assessed.There are two studies awaiting classification that may alter the conclusions once assessed.

Study Objective: General anesthesia is commonly used in pediatric inpatient surgery. It can be induced and maintained by either intravenous or volatile anesthetic agents. We aimed to elucidate whether intravenous or volatile anesthetic agents are superior with regards to preventing anesthesia-related complications., Design: Using a predefined standardized study protocol we conducted a systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with meta-analysis where appropriate searching the following data bases: CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, metaRegister of Controlled Trials (until June 2016)., Setting and Patients: We included any RCT comparing the adverse effects of intravenous or volatile anesthetic agents in pediatric inpatients. More specifically, primary endpoints were the appearance of cardiopulmonary complications or postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) or any cognitive dysfunction within 24 h following general anesthesia. Secondary endpoints were any other complication besides the aforementioned primary endpoints., Measurements and Main Results: In total, nine RCTs (762 children) were analyzed. Regarding primary endpoints, the use of propofol during strabismus surgery significantly increased the relative risk (RR) of oculocardiac reflex (RR 4.96, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 3.13-7.87, p < 0.00001; two studies, 257 children). PONV was significantly less frequent after general anesthesia with intravenous than with volatile anesthetic agents (RR 0.68, 95% CI: 0.48-0.98, p = 0.04; five studies, 563 children). We did not find identify any further difference with regards to the predefined primary or secondary endpoints due to clinical or statistical heterogeneity., Conclusions: Taken together, propofol increased the risk of oculocardiac reflex whereas PONV was less frequent following intravenous anesthetics compared to volatile anesthetics. The study results may help tailoring the use of either intravenous of volatile anesthetics onto the needs of pediatric inpatients. Given the clinical or statistical heterogeneity among the studies, we call for a scientific effort to increase the body of evidence on anesthetic agents in pediatric general anesthesia., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The German guideline for the treatment of psoriasis vulgaris was updated using GRADE methodology. The guideline is based on a systematic literature review completed on December 1, 2016, and on a formal consensus and approval process. The second part of this short version of the guideline covers the following special patient populations and treatment situations: tuberculosis screening before and during psoriasis treatment, choice of psoriasis treatment for individuals wishing to have children, as well as during pregnancy and breast-feeding, and patients with joint involvement and vaccinations. In addition, recommendations on the choice of treatment are presented for patients with the following comorbidities: hepatitis and other hepatic impairment, HIV, malignancies, neurological and psychiatric disorders, ischemic heart disease and congestive heart failure, diabetes mellitus, renal impairment and inflammatory bowel disease., (© 2018 The Authors | Journal compilation © Blackwell Verlag GmbH, Berlin.)

Die deutsche Psoriasis-Leitlinie zur Behandlung der Psoriasis vulgaris wurde unter Verwendung der GRADE-Methodik aktualisiert. Die Leitlinie wurde aufbauend auf einer systematischen Literaturrecherche (letzte Update-Recherche am 01.12.2016) entwickelt und in einem formalen Konsensus- und Freigabeverfahren verabschiedet. Der zweite Teil dieser Kurzfassung stellt die Empfehlungen zum Tuberkulose-Screening vor und unter Therapie, zur Therapieauswahl bei Kinderwunsch, Schwangerschaft und Stillzeit, vorliegender Gelenkbeteiligung sowie zum Umgang mit Impfungen dar. Zudem werden die Empfehlungen zur Therapieauswahl bei Komorbidität mit Hepatitis und Leberfunktionseinschränkungen, HIV, Tumorerkrankungen, Erkrankungen aus dem neurologischen und psychiatrischen Formenkreis, koronarer Herzkrankheit und Herzinsuffizienz, Diabetes mellitus, Niereninsuffizienz sowie chronisch entzündlicher Darmerkrankung dargestellt., (© 2018 The Authors | Journal compilation © Blackwell Verlag GmbH, Berlin.)