Search

The aim of the interdisciplinary S2k guideline "Acute infectious gastroenteritis in infants, children and adolescents" is to summarise the current state of knowledge on the clinical presentation, diagnosis, treatment, prevention and hygiene of acute infectious gastroenteritis, including nosocomial gastrointestinal infections, in infants, children and adolescents on the basis of scientific evidence, to evaluate it by expert consensus and to derive practice-relevant recommendations from it. The guideline provides a corridor for action for frequent decisions. It also serves the purpose of evidence-based further education and training and is thus intended to improve the medical care of children with acute gastroenteritis. In particular, the guideline aims to avoid unnecessary hospitalisation of children with AGE and to take preventive measures to avoid and spread infection., Competing Interests: Die Interessenkonflikterklärungen aller Expert*innen sind im Leitlinienreport aufgeführt und finden sich im Supplementary Material 1., (Thieme. All rights reserved.)

Competing Interests: Die Übersicht über die Interessenkonflikte der Autorinnen und Autoren sind im Leitlinienreport veröffentlicht.

Competing Interests: Die Übersicht über die Interessenkonflikte der Autorinnen und Autoren sind im Anhang veröffentlicht.

This position paper deals with an expert consensus on diagnosis and management of eosinophilic esophagitis and esophageal food impaction issued by the Austrian Eosinophilic Esophagitis Network, a working group under the patronage of the Austrian Society of Gastroenterology and Hepatology (ÖGGH). In need of a standardized approach on the management of EoE, recommendations were made based on international guidelines and landmark studies., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Introduction: The treatment of gastroparesis can be difficult in everyday clinical practice. The aim of this anonymous survey of members of the Arbeitsgemeinschaft Leitender Gastroenterologischer Krankenhausärzte e.V. (ALGK) was to investigate the management of gastroparesis care in Germany., Material and Methods: The ALGK conducted a member survey using a standardized anonymous questionnaire including 11 questions from 14.04.2023 to 29.04.2023. The questions covered diagnostic and therapeutic procedures as well as various aspects of the management of gastroparesis., Results: The response rate was 21.4% (62 members). Only 6.56% of all respondents assessed the prevalence of gastroparesis correctly as estimated by current epidemiological publications. 68.85 % of all respondents used gastric emptying scintigraphy for diagnosis. 51.61% regarded an individualized therapy as the most important treatment goal, taking into account etiology and impact of symptoms, compared to symptomatic treatment of leading clinical symptom in 43,55 %. First choice treatment was medical treatment in 41.94%, dietary recommendations in 27.42% and endoscopic interventions in 24.2%. 100% of respondents used prokinetics, 40.32% used antiemetics while only 4.84% used analgesics. Insufficient availability of medical treatment options represents a need of action for 85.48%, compared to lacking official approval of available drugs for this indication for 48,39% of all respondents. Treatment options with little evidence were used quite frequently (e.g. use of herbal therapies in 43.55%)., Discussion: Overall, the frequency of gastroparesis was underestimated in the current survey. Endoscopic options are quite often used as first-line treatment. Although symptom-guided treatment is important for the majority of respondents, prokinetics are predominantly used., Competing Interests: Die Autorinnen/Autoren geben an, dass kein Interessenkonflikt besteht., (Thieme. All rights reserved.)

Background: Management of ampullary tumors (AT) is challenging because of a low level of scientific evidence. This document is a summary of the French intergroup guidelines regarding the management of AT, either adenoma (AA) or carcinoma (AC), published in July 2023, available on the website of the French Society of Gastroenterology (SNFGE) (www.tncd.org)., Methods: A collaborative work was conducted under the auspices of French medical, endoscopic, oncological and surgical societies involved in the management of AT. Recommendations are based on recent literature review and expert opinions and graded in three categories (A, B, C), according to quality of evidence., Results: Accurate diagnosis of AT requires at least duodenoscopy and EUS. All patients should be discussed in multidisciplinary tumor board before treatment. Surveillance may only be proposed for small AA in familial adenomatous polyposis. For AA, endoscopic papillectomy is the preferred option only if R0 resection can be achieved. When not possible, surgical papillectomy should be considered. For AC beyond pT1a N0, pancreaticoduodenectomy is the procedure of choice. Adjuvant monochemotherapy (gemcitabine, 5FU) may be proposed. For aggressive tumors (pT3/T4, pN+, R1, poorly differentiated AC, pancreatobiliary differentiation) with high risk of recurrence, 6 months polychemotherapy (CAPOX/FOLFOX for the intestinal subtype and mFOLFIRINOX for the pancreatobiliary or the mixed subtype) may be a valid alternative. Clinical and radiological follow up is recommended for 5 years., Conclusions: These guidelines help to homogenize and highlight unmet needs in the management of AA and AC. Each individual case should be discussed by a multidisciplinary team., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest VH: AAA, Amgen, Esteve, Ipsen, Deciphera, Merck, Pierre Fabre, Servier AT: personal fees from Servier, Viatris, Incyte Bioscience, BMS, Merck and grants from AstraZeneca and MSD outside the submitted work MC: Medtronic, Boston Scientific, Cook Medical, AMBU CN: Honoraria / consulting: Amgen, AstraZeneca, Baxter, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Fresenius Kabi, Incyte Biosciences, Merck, MSD, Mundipharma, Novartis, Nutricia, OSE Immunotherapeutics, Pierre Fabre, Roche, Sanofi, Servier, Viatris. Research funding / clinical trials: AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Fresenius Kabi, Nutricia, OSE Immunotherapeutics, Roche, Servier, Viatris. ALB declares consulting for Astra Zeneca , Servier, Ipsen and accomodations or congress registration support for Merck and Ipsen DS: Honoraria / consulting: Amgen, Bayer, Deciphera Pharmaceutical, Ipsen, Pierre fabre, Roche, Servier, Viatris, Travel accomodations: AstraZeneca, Ipsen, Novartis, Pfizer, Pierre Fabre, Roche, Sandoz, Servier GP: honoraria from Servier, Roche and Sanofi OB: honoraria from Amgen, Apmonia Therapeutics, Bayer, Deciphera, Merck KGaA, MSD, Pierre Fabre, Servier. SG: Mylan, IPSEN All other authors declare no conflict of interest related to this article., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: Society guidelines on colorectal dysplasia screening, surveillance, and endoscopic management in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) are complex, and physician adherence to them is suboptimal. We aimed to evaluate the use of ChatGPT, a large language model, in generating accurate guideline-based recommendations for colorectal dysplasia screening, surveillance, and endoscopic management in IBD in line with European Crohn's and Colitis Organization (ECCO) guidelines., Methods: 30 clinical scenarios in the form of free text were prepared and presented to three separate sessions of ChatGPT and to eight gastroenterologists (four IBD specialists and four non-IBD gastroenterologists). Two additional IBD specialists subsequently assessed all responses provided by ChatGPT and the eight gastroenterologists, judging their accuracy according to ECCO guidelines., Results: ChatGPT had a mean correct response rate of 87.8%. Among the eight gastroenterologists, the mean correct response rates were 85.8% for IBD experts and 89.2% for non-IBD experts. No statistically significant differences in accuracy were observed between ChatGPT and all gastroenterologists ( P =0.95), or between ChatGPT and the IBD experts and non-IBD expert gastroenterologists, respectively ( P =0.82)., Conclusions: This study highlights the potential of language models in enhancing guideline adherence regarding colorectal dysplasia in IBD. Further investigation of additional resources and prospective evaluation in real-world settings are warranted., Competing Interests: The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest., (Thieme. All rights reserved.)

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography [ERCP] is a complex procedure with a flat learning curve. It is associated with the risk of serious complications such as pancreatitis, bleeding, cholangitis and perforation. Endosonography should therefore also be offered for the precise indication of the higher-risk ERCP. Numerous factors influence the success of ERCP. In addition to structured training for the initial acquisition of skills and a minimum number of ERCPs of varying degrees of difficulty, maintaining a good quality of ERCP also requires a regular minimum number of examinations performed per year. There is extensive evidence that shows a significant correlation between ERCP volumes and primary success rates, lower lengths of hospital stay, fewer unwanted readmissions and fewer complications. The cut-offs for differentiating between high-volume and low-volume centers were chosen inconsistently in the studies, with the highest evidence for a cut-off value of 200 ERCPs/year. The question of specialization in ERCP has been given a relevance by the current developments in german hospital reform. Here, a minimum number of ERCPs should be defined for groups of different specialization. However, a minimum number alone will not be able to achieve good treatment quality. In terms of high-quality patient care, it is necessary to offer ERCPs in specialized gastroenterology center, which, in addition to a sufficient number of ERCPs for training and to maintain competence, offer an on-call service and complementary procedures such as EUS and which are embedded in appropriately accessible clinics that have the necessary resources for complication management., Competing Interests: Alle Autoren und Autorinnen sind Mitglieder der DGVS. Die Autoren und Autorinnen 1–6 und 8–12 arbeiten in leitenden Funktionen in Gastroenterologien in denen auch ERCPs durchgeführt werden., (Thieme. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a chronic inflammatory disease of the esophagus characterized by symptoms of esophageal dysfunction and histologically by predominantly eosinophilic infiltration of the squamous epithelium. European Society for Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition (ESPGHAN) published a guideline in 2014; however, the rapid evolution of knowledge about pathophysiology, diagnostic criteria, and therapeutic options have made an update necessary., Methods: A consensus group of pediatric gastroenterologists from the ESPGHAN Working Group on Eosinophilic Gastrointestinal Diseases (ESPGHAN EGID WG) reviewed the recent literature and proposed statements and recommendations on 28 relevant questions about EoE. A comprehensive electronic literature search was performed in MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases from 2014 to 2022. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation system was used to assess the quality of evidence and formulate recommendations., Results: A total of 52 statements based on the available evidence and 44 consensus-based recommendations are available. A revision of the diagnostic protocol, options for initial drug treatment, and the new concept of simplified empiric elimination diets are now available. Biologics are becoming a part of the potential armamentarium for refractory EoE, and systemic steroids may be considered as the initial treatment for esophageal strictures before esophageal dilation. The importance and assessment of quality of life and a planned transition to adult medical care are new areas addressed in this guideline., Conclusion: Research in recent years has led to a better understanding of childhood EoE. This guideline incorporates the new findings and provides a practical guide for clinicians treating children diagnosed with EoE., (© 2024 European Society for Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Nutrition and North American Society for Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Nutrition.)

Genetic cholestatic liver diseases are caused by (often rare) mutations in a multitude of different genes. While these diseases differ in pathobiology, clinical presentation and prognosis, they do have several commonalities due to their cholestatic nature. These Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPGs) offer a general approach to genetic testing and management of cholestatic pruritus, while exploring diagnostic and treatment approaches for a subset of genetic cholestatic liver diseases in depth. An expert panel appointed by the European Association for the Study of the Liver has created recommendations regarding diagnosis and treatment, based on the best evidence currently available in the fields of paediatric and adult hepatology, as well as genetics. The management of these diseases generally takes place in a tertiary referral centre, in order to provide up-to-date approaches and expertise. These CPGs are intended to support hepatologists (for paediatric and adult patients), residents and other healthcare professionals involved in the management of these patients with concrete recommendations based on currently available evidence or, if not available, on expert opinion., (Copyright © 2024 European Association for the Study of the Liver. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Competing Interests: Die Übersicht über die Interessenkonflikte der Autorinnen und Autoren sind im Anhang veröffentlicht.

Competing Interests: Die Übersicht über die Interessenkonflikte der Autorinnen und Autoren sind im Leitlinienreport veröffentlicht.

In 2023, Chinese Society of Hepatology of Chinese Medical Association convened a panel of experts to update the Chinese guidelines on the management of ascites and associated complications in cirrhosis which was launched in 2017 and renamed this guidelines as "Guidelines on the Management of Ascites in Cirrhosis." This comprehensive resource offers essential recommendations for the diagnosis and treatment of cirrhotic ascites, spontaneous bacterial peritonitis, and hepatorenal syndrome., (© 2024. Asian Pacific Association for the Study of the Liver.)

Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is rapidly emerging in the Asia Pacific region. However, there are many challenges in the diagnosis and management of this condition. The Asian Pacific Association of Gastroenterology (APAGE) Working Group on IBD conducted a round table meeting to identify 10 common mistakes in the management of IBD in Asia. To summarize, many physicians still over rely on a definitive histological diagnosis before starting treatment and do not fully establish disease extent such as perianal and proximal gastrointestinal involvement in Crohn's disease (CD) or extent of involvement in ulcerative colitis (UC). It is also essential to actively look for evidence of extra-intestinal manifestations, which may influence choice of therapy. In terms of conventional therapy, underuse of topical 5 aminosalicylates (5-ASAs) in UC and inappropriate dosing of corticosteroids are also important considerations. Acute severe UC remains a life-threatening condition and delay in starting rescue therapy after inadequate response to intravenous steroids is still common. Anti-tumor necrosis factors should be considered first line in all cases of complex perianal fistulizing CD. Most patients with IBD are on potent immunosuppressive therapy and should be screened for latent infections and offered vaccinations according to guidelines. Under-recognition and management of significant complications such as anemia, osteoporosis, malnutrition, and thromboembolism should also be addressed. Colonoscopy is still not properly performed for dysplasia/cancer surveillance and for evaluating post-op recurrence of CD. Another common misstep is inappropriate withdrawal of medications during pregnancy leading to increased complications for the mother and the newborn., (© 2024 The Authors. Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology published by Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology Foundation and John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd.)

Anemia is one of the most frequent extra-intestinal manifestations of inflammatory bowel disease. Insidious onset, variability of symptoms and lack of standardized screening practices may increase the risk of underestimating its burden in children with IBD. Despite its relevance and peculiarity in everyday clinical practice, this topic is only dealt with in a few documents specifically for the pediatric field. The aim of the current guidelines is therefore to provide pediatric gastroenterologists with a practical update to support the clinical and therapeutic management of children with IBD and anemia. A panel of 19 pediatric gastroenterologists and 1 pediatric hematologist with experience in the field of pediatric IBD was agreed by IBD Working group of the Italian Society of Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition (SIGENP) to produce the present article outlining practical clinical approaches to the pediatric patient with IBD and anemia. The levels of evidence and recommendations have been defined for each part of the statement according to the GRADE system., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors have no conflict of interests to declare with regards to this manuscript., (Copyright © 2024 Editrice Gastroenterologica Italiana S.r.l. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Deaths from the majority of cancers are falling globally, but the incidence and mortality from hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is increasing in the United Kingdom and in other Western countries. HCC is a highly fatal cancer, often diagnosed late, with an incidence to mortality ratio that approaches 1. Despite there being a number of treatment options, including those associated with good medium to long-term survival, 5-year survival from HCC in the UK remains below 20%. Sex, ethnicity and deprivation are important demographics for the incidence of, and/or survival from, HCC. These clinical practice guidelines will provide evidence-based advice for the assessment and management of patients with HCC. The clinical and scientific data underpinning the recommendations we make are summarised in detail. Much of the content will have broad relevance, but the treatment algorithms are based on therapies that are available in the UK and have regulatory approval for use in the National Health Service., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Competing Interests: Die Übersicht über die Interessenkonflikte der Autorinnen und Autoren ist im Anhang veröffentlicht.

Competing Interests: Die Interessenerklärungen aller Expert*innen sind im Anhang aufgeführt.

Competing Interests: Die Übersicht über die Interessenkonflikte der Autorinnen und Autoren ist im Anhang des Leitlinienreports veröffentlicht.

Focal liver lesions (FLLs) have become an increasingly common finding on abdominal imaging, especially asymptomatic and incidental liver lesions. Gastroenterologists and hepatologists often see these patients in consultation and make recommendations for management of multiple types of liver lesions, including hepatocellular adenoma, focal nodular hyperplasia, hemangioma, and hepatic cystic lesions including polycystic liver disease. Malignancy is important to consider in the differential diagnosis of FLLs, and healthcare providers must be familiar with the diagnosis and management of FLLs. This American College of Gastroenterology practice guideline uses the best evidence available to make diagnosis and management recommendations for the most common FLLs., (Copyright © 2024 by The American College of Gastroenterology.)

Prediction models are everywhere in clinical medicine. We use them to assign a diagnosis or a prognosis, and there have been continuous efforts to develop better prediction models. It is important to understand the fundamentals of prediction modelling, thus, we herein describe nine steps to develop and validate a clinical prediction model with the intention of implementing it in clinical practice: Determine if there is a need for a new prediction model; define the purpose and intended use of the model; assess the quality and quantity of the data you wish to develop the model on; develop the model using sound statistical methods; generate risk predictions on the probability scale (0-100%); evaluate the performance of the model in terms of discrimination, calibration, and clinical utility; validate the model using bootstrapping to correct for the apparent optimism in performance; validate the model on external datasets to assess the generalisability and transportability of the model; and finally publish the model so that it can be implemented or validated by others., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

The Asociación Española de Pancreatología (AESPANC), Asociación Española de Gastroenterología (AEG), and Sociedad Española de Patología Digestiva (SEPD) have developed a consensus document on the standards and recommendations they consider essential for the organization of pancreas units (PUs) within gastroenterology services (GSs) in order to conduct their activities in an efficient, high-quality manner. The consensus document defines PUs and lays down standards relating to their organization, structure, service portfolio, processes, and teaching and research activities. Standards have been categorized as mandatory (requirements to be met to qualify for certification by the scientific societies responsible for the standards) or recommendations. Standards should be updated at most within five years based on the experience gained in Spanish PUs and the advance of knowledge regarding pancreas disease. Development of health outcome indicators, including patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), is considered a relevant challenge, as is evidence on the association of PU structure and activity standards with health outcomes.

The first British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) and Healthcare Infection Society (HIS)-endorsed faecal microbiota transplant (FMT) guidelines were published in 2018. Over the past 5 years, there has been considerable growth in the evidence base (including publication of outcomes from large national FMT registries), necessitating an updated critical review of the literature and a second edition of the BSG/HIS FMT guidelines. These have been produced in accordance with National Institute for Health and Care Excellence-accredited methodology, thus have particular relevance for UK-based clinicians, but are intended to be of pertinence internationally. This second edition of the guidelines have been divided into recommendations, good practice points and recommendations against certain practices. With respect to FMT for Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI), key focus areas centred around timing of administration, increasing clinical experience of encapsulated FMT preparations and optimising donor screening. The latter topic is of particular relevance given the COVID-19 pandemic, and cases of patient morbidity and mortality resulting from FMT-related pathogen transmission. The guidelines also considered emergent literature on the use of FMT in non-CDI settings (including both gastrointestinal and non-gastrointestinal indications), reviewing relevant randomised controlled trials. Recommendations are provided regarding special areas (including compassionate FMT use), and considerations regarding the evolving landscape of FMT and microbiome therapeutics., Competing Interests: Competing interests: BHM has received consultation honoraria from Ferring Pharmaceuticals, Finch Therapeutics, Summit Therapeutics and speaker fees from Yakult. BMerrick received speaker fees from New Scientist. MNQ received speaker fees from BMS, Parapharm, Tillotts, Janssen and Takeda. NTE has received speaker fees from a company not related to the topic of this guideline. JPS received speaker fees from Takeda, AbbVie, Pfizer and BMS. NS received consultancy fees for advisory board for Pharmacosmos. ALH received fees for consultancy and speaker for AbbVie, Arena, Atlantic, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Celltrion, Falk, Galapagos, Lilly, Janssen, MSD, Napp Pharmaceuticals, Pfizer, Pharmacosmos, Shire and Takeda; and also serves on the Global Steering Committee for Genentech. CS is a chair for the Healthcare Infection Society. JJK received consultancy fees from Vedanta Biosciences and Microviable Therapeutics and received a research grant from Vedanta Biosciences; and is a member of the scientific committee of European Helicobacter Microbiota Study group, member of the Scientific Advisory Board of 'Microviable Therapeutics', a member of a steering committee scientific study VE202 for ulcerative colitis (Vedanta Biosciences) and a founder and board member of Netherlands Donor Feces Bank (academic, non-profit). PH received consultancy and speaker fees from commercial companies and is a director of Modusmedica (since 2010 onwards). THI received consultancy fees from Ferring and speaker fees from Pharmacosmos and is a member of BSG/HIS microbiome for health expert panel and a director of University of Birmingham Microbiome Treatment Centre. SDG received consultancy honoraria from Enterobiotix and AstraZeneca, received speaker fees from Tillotts and has investments in biomedical company not related to the topic of this guideline. All other authors declared no conflicts of interest., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Fluoroscopy-guided gastrointestinal procedures, including gastrointestinal stenting, balloon-assisted endoscopy (BAE), endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), and endoscopic ultrasound (EUS), are essential for diagnosis and treatment in gastroenterology. Such procedures involve radiation exposure that necessitates strict safety measures to protect patients, doctors, and medical staff. The April 2020 update to Japan's Ionizing Radiation Injury Prevention Regulations for occupational exposure reduced the lens exposure dose limit to approximately one-seventh of its previous level. This change highlights the need for improved safety protocols. Without adaptation, the sustainability of fluoroscopy-based endoscopic techniques could be at risk due to the potential to exceed these new limits. This review examines the current state of medical radiation exposure in the field of gastroenterology in Japan and discusses the findings of the REX-GI study., (© 2024. Japanese Society of Gastroenterology.)

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a chronic type 2-mediated inflammatory disease of the esophagus that represents the most common eosinophilic gastrointestinal disease. Experts in the field of EoE across Italy (i.e., EoETALY Consensus Group) including gastroenterologists, endoscopists, allergologists/immunologists, and paediatricians conducted a Delphi process to develop updated consensus statements for the management of patients with EoE and update the previous position paper of the Italian Society of Gastroenterology (SIGE) in light of recent evidence. Grading of the strength and quality of the evidence of the recommendations was performed using accepted GRADE criteria. The guideline is divided in two documents: Part 1 includes three chapters, namely 1) definition, epidemiology, and pathogenesis; 2) clinical presentation and natural history, and 3) diagnosis, while Part 2 includes two chapters: 4) treatment and 5) monitoring and follow-up. This document has received the endorsement of three Italian national societies including the SIGE, the Italian Society of Neurogastroenterology and Motility (SINGEM), and the Italian Society of Allergology, Asthma, and Clinical Immunology (SIAAIC). With regards to patients' involvement, these guidelines involved the contribution of members of ESEO Italia, the Italian Association of Families Against EoE., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest Nicola de Bortoli: Advisory board member for: AlfaSigma, Sanofi Genzyme, Dr Falk; Lecture grants from Reckitt-Benkiser, Malesci, Dr. Flak, Sofar, Alfa-Sigma, Pharma-Line. Pierfrancesco Visaggi: Has served as speaker for Dr Falk, JB Pharmaceuticals, Malesci. Roberto Penagini: Has served as speaker for Dr Falk, Sanofi. Edda Battaglia: has served as consultant for NZP, GUNA Gaia Pellegatta has served as speaker for Dr Falk, Sanofi Genzyme, Malesci. Paola Iovino: Has served as consultant for Dr Falk Giovanni Marasco: Served as an advisory board member for AlfaSigma, EG Pharma, Monteresearch srl, Recordati, Cineca. Received lecture grants from Agave, AlfaSigma, Bromatech, Clorofilla, Echosens, Ferring, Mayoly Spindler, Menarini and Schwabe Pharma. Salvatore Oliva: Has served as speaker for Sanofi, Medtronic; Has served as consultant for: Sanofi, Medtronic, Brystol; Has received research support from Alfa Sigma, Medtronic. Francesca Racca: has served as speaker for Sanofi; has served as consultant for Dr Falk, Sanofi, GSK Erminia Ridolo: has served as consultant for Dr Falk Edoardo Vincenzo Savarino: has served as speaker for Abbvie, Agave, AGPharma, Alfasigma, Aurora Pharma, CaDiGroup, Celltrion, Dr Falk, EG Stada Group, Fenix Pharma, Fresenius Kabi, Galapagos, Janssen, JB Pharmaceuticals, Innovamedica/Adacyte, Malesci, Mayoly Biohealth, Omega Pharma, Pfizer, Reckitt Benckiser, Sandoz, SILA, Sofar, Takeda, Tillots, Unifarco; has served as consultant for Abbvie, Agave, Alfasigma, Biogen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celltrion, Diadema Farmaceutici, Dr. Falk, Fenix Pharma, Fresenius Kabi, Janssen, JB Pharmaceuticals, Merck & Co, Nestlè, Reckitt Benckiser, Regeneron, Sanofi, SILA, Sofar, Synformulas GmbH, Tssakeda, Unifarco; he received research support from Pfizer, Reckitt Benckiser, SILA, Sofar, Unifarco, Zeta Farmaceutici. Bruno Annibale, Federica Baiano Svizzero, Giovanni Barbara, Brigida Barberio, Ottavia Bartolo, Antonio Di Sabatino, Ludovico Docimo, Marzio Frazzoni, Manuele Furnari, Matteo Ghisa, Andrea Iori, Marco Vincenzo Lenti, Elisa Marabotto, Aurelio Mauro, Marcella Pesce, Antonino Carlo Privitera, Ilaria Puxeddu, Mentore Ribolsi, Salvatore Russo, Giovanni Sarnelli, Salvatore Tolone, Patrizia Zentilin, Fabiana Zingone: None., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background & Aims: Barrett's esophagus (BE) is the precursor to esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC). Endoscopic eradication therapy (EET) can be effective in eradicating BE and related neoplasia and has greater risk of harms and resource use than surveillance endoscopy. This clinical practice guideline aims to inform clinicians and patients by providing evidence-based practice recommendations for the use of EET in BE and related neoplasia., Methods: The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework was used to assess evidence and make recommendations. The panel prioritized clinical questions and outcomes according to their importance for clinicians and patients, conducted an evidence review, and used the Evidence-to-Decision Framework to develop recommendations regarding the use of EET in patients with BE under the following scenarios: presence of (1) high-grade dysplasia, (2) low-grade dysplasia, (3) no dysplasia, and (4) choice of stepwise endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) or focal EMR plus ablation, and (5) endoscopic submucosal dissection vs EMR. Clinical recommendations were based on the balance between desirable and undesirable effects, patient values, costs, and health equity considerations., Results: The panel agreed on 5 recommendations for the use of EET in BE and related neoplasia. Based on the available evidence, the panel made a strong recommendation in favor of EET in patients with BE high-grade dysplasia and conditional recommendation against EET in BE without dysplasia. The panel made a conditional recommendation in favor of EET in BE low-grade dysplasia; patients with BE low-grade dysplasia who place a higher value on the potential harms and lower value on the benefits (which are uncertain) regarding reduction of esophageal cancer mortality could reasonably select surveillance endoscopy. In patients with visible lesions, a conditional recommendation was made in favor of focal EMR plus ablation over stepwise EMR. In patients with visible neoplastic lesions undergoing resection, the use of either endoscopic mucosal resection or endoscopic submucosal dissection was suggested based on lesion characteristics., Conclusions: This document provides a comprehensive outline of the indications for EET in the management of BE and related neoplasia. Guidance is also provided regarding the considerations surrounding implementation of EET. Providers should engage in shared decision making based on patient preferences. Limitations and gaps in the evidence are highlighted to guide future research opportunities., (Copyright © 2024 AGA Institute. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Description: Pain is a common symptom among patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Although pain typically occurs during episodes of inflammation, it is also commonly experienced when intestinal inflammation is quiescent. Many gastroenterologists are at a loss how to approach pain symptoms when they occur in the absence of gut inflammation. We provide guidance in this area as to the evaluation, diagnosis, and treatment of pain among patients with IBD., Methods: This CPU was commissioned and approved by the AGA Institute Clinical Practice Updates Committee (CPUC) and the AGA Governing Board to provide timely guidance on a topic of high clinical importance to the AGA membership and underwent internal peer review by the CPUC and external peer review through standard procedures of Gastroenterology. This expert commentary incorporates important as well as recently published studies in this field, and it reflects the experiences of the authors. Formal ratings regarding the quality of evidence or strength of the presented considerations were not included because systematic reviews were not performed., (Copyright © 2024 AGA Institute. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Competing Interests: Die Übersicht über die Interessenkonflikte der Autorinnen und Autoren sind im Leitlinienreport veröffentlicht.

Background: Gender differences remain a serious issue in the gastroenterology field, which negatively affect the career success and academic advancement of female gastroenterologists. In this study, we aim to identify gender differences in the authors of global major Gastroenterology Society guidelines., Methods: We included six associations and collected guidelines published between 2003 and 2022. The genders of authors were determined and recorded for each guideline. Linear by linear association test was used to assess trends every 5 years., Results: We included 210 guidelines and 461 authors. The proportion of female first and senior authors was 11.3% and 9.8%, respectively. The number of female first and senior authors in most societies has improved over the past 20 years, with the largest increase in the AGA., Conclusions: Women are still underrepresented among the authors of guidelines. Although gender differences have gained more attention in recent years, there are many obstacles to achieving gender equality.

Competing Interests: Die Übersicht über die Interessenkonflikte der Autorinnen und Autoren sind im Anhang veröffentlicht.

Despite incredible growth in systems of care and rapidly expanding therapeutic options for people with inflammatory bowel disease, there are significant barriers that prevent patients from benefiting from these advances. These barriers include restrictions in the form of prior authorization, step therapy, and prescription drug coverage. Furthermore, inadequate use of multidisciplinary care and inflammatory bowel disease specialists limits patient access to high-quality care, particularly for medically vulnerable populations. However, there are opportunities to improve access to high-quality, patient-centered care. This position statement outlines the policy and advocacy goals that the American Gastroenterological Association will prioritize for collaborative efforts with patients, providers, and payors., (Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Description: The purpose of this American Gastroenterological Association (AGA) Institute Clinical Practice Update (CPU) is to review the available evidence and provide expert advice regarding diagnosis and management of cannabinoid hyperemesis syndrome., Methods: This CPU was commissioned and approved by the AGA Institute Clinical Practice Updates Committee (CPUC) and the AGA Governing Board to provide timely guidance on a topic of high clinical importance to the AGA membership and underwent internal peer review by the CPUC and external peer review through standard procedures of Gastroenterology. This expert commentary incorporates important as well as recently published studies in this field, and it reflects the experiences of the authors., (Copyright © 2024 AGA Institute. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding is the most common GI diagnosis leading to hospitalization within the United States. Prompt diagnosis and treatment of GI bleeding is critical to improving patient outcomes and reducing high healthcare utilization and costs. Radiologic techniques including computed tomography angiography, catheter angiography, computed tomography enterography, magnetic resonance enterography, nuclear medicine red blood cell scan, and technetium-99m pertechnetate scintigraphy (Meckel scan) are frequently used to evaluate patients with GI bleeding and are complementary to GI endoscopy. However, multiple management guidelines exist which differ in the recommended utilization of these radiologic examinations. This variability can lead to confusion as to how these tests should be used in the evaluation of GI bleeding. In this document, a panel of experts from the American College of Gastroenterology and Society of Abdominal Radiology provide a review of the radiologic examinations used to evaluate for GI bleeding including nomenclature, technique, performance, advantages, and limitations. A comparison of advantages and limitations relative to endoscopic examinations is also included. Finally, consensus statements and recommendations on technical parameters and utilization of radiologic techniques for GI bleeding are provided., (Copyright © 2024 by The American College of Gastroenterology and the Radiological Society of North America.)

Acute-on chronic liver failure (ACLF) has been an intensively debated topic mainly due to the lack of a unified definition and diagnostic criteria. The growing number of publications describing the mechanisms of ACLF development, the progression of the disease, outcomes and treatment has contributed to a better understanding of the disease, however, it has also sparked the debate about this condition. As an attempt to provide medical professionals with a more uniform definition that could be applied to our population, the first Mexican consensus was performed by a panel of experts in the area of hepatology in Mexico. We used the most relevant and impactful publications along with the clinical and research experience of the consensus participants. The consensus was led by 4 coordinators who provided the most relevant bibliography by doing an exhaustive search on the topic. The entire bibliography was made available to the members of the consensus for consultation at any time during the process and six working groups were formed to develop the following sections: 1.- Generalities, definitions, and criteria, 2.- Pathophysiology of cirrhosis, 3.- Genetics in ACLF, 4.- Clinical manifestations, 5.- Liver transplantation in ACLF, 6.- Other treatments., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests None., (Published by Elsevier España, S.L.U.)

Description: Exocrine pancreatic insufficiency (EPI) is a disorder caused by the failure of the pancreas to deliver a minimum/threshold level of specific pancreatic digestive enzymes to the intestine, leading to the maldigestion of nutrients and macronutrients, resulting in their variable deficiencies. EPI is frequently underdiagnosed and, as a result, patients are often not treated appropriately. There is an urgent need to increase awareness of and treatment for this condition. The aim of this American Gastroenterological Association (AGA) Clinical Practice Update Expert Review was to provide Best Practice Advice on the epidemiology, evaluation, and management of EPI., Methods: This Expert Review was commissioned and approved by the American Gastroenterological Association (AGA) Institute Clinical Practice Updates Committee (CPUC) and the AGA Governing Board to provide timely guidance on a topic of high clinical importance to the AGA membership, and underwent internal peer review by the CPUC and external peer review through standard procedures of Gastroenterology. These Best Practice Advice statements were drawn from a review of the published literature and from expert opinion. Because systematic reviews were not performed, these Best Practice Advice statements do not carry formal ratings regarding the quality of evidence or strength of the presented considerations. Best Practice Advice Statements BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 1: EPI should be suspected in patients with high-risk clinical conditions, such as chronic pancreatitis, relapsing acute pancreatitis, pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma, cystic fibrosis, and previous pancreatic surgery. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 2: EPI should be considered in patients with moderate-risk clinical conditions, such as duodenal diseases, including celiac and Crohn's disease; previous intestinal surgery; longstanding diabetes mellitus; and hypersecretory states (eg, Zollinger-Ellison syndrome). BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 3: Clinical features of EPI include steatorrhea with or without diarrhea, weight loss, bloating, excessive flatulence, fat-soluble vitamin deficiencies, and protein-calorie malnutrition. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 4: Fecal elastase test is the most appropriate initial test and must be performed on a semi-solid or solid stool specimen. A fecal elastase level <100 μg/g of stool provides good evidence of EPI, and levels of 100-200 μg/g are indeterminate for EPI. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 5: Fecal elastase testing can be performed while on pancreatic enzyme replacement therapy. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 6: Fecal fat testing is rarely needed and must be performed when on a high-fat diet. Quantitative testing is generally not practical for routine clinical use. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 7: Response to a therapeutic trial of pancreatic enzymes is unreliable for EPI diagnosis. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 8: Cross-sectional imaging methods (computed tomography scan, magnetic resonance imaging, and endoscopic ultrasound) cannot identify EPI, although they play an important role in the diagnosis of benign and malignant pancreatic disease. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 9: Breath tests and direct pancreatic function tests hold promise, but are not widely available in the United States. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 10: Once EPI is diagnosed, treatment with pancreatic enzyme replacement therapy (PERT) is required. If EPI is left untreated, it will result in complications related to fat malabsorption and malnutrition, having a negative impact on quality of life. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 11: PERT formulations are all derived from porcine sources and are equally effective at equivalent doses. There is a need for H2 or proton pump inhibitor therapy with non-enteric-coated preparations. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 12: PERT should be taken during the meal, with the initial treatment of at least 40,000 USP units of lipase during each meal in adults and one-half of that with snacks. The subsequent dosage can be adjusted based on the meal size and fat content. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 13: Routine supplementation and monitoring of fat-soluble vitamin levels are appropriate. Dietary modifications include a low-moderate fat diet with frequent smaller meals and avoiding very-low-fat diets. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 14: Measures of successful treatment with PERT include reduction in steatorrhea and associated gastrointestinal symptoms; a gain of weight, muscle mass, and muscle function; and improvement in fat-soluble vitamin levels. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 15: EPI should be monitored and baseline measurements of nutritional status should be obtained (body mass index, quality-of-life measure, and fat-soluble vitamin levels). A baseline dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry scan should be obtained and repeated every 1-2 years., (Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) have been available for over three decades and are among the most commonly prescribed medications. They are effective in treating a variety of gastric acid-related disorders. They are freely available and based on current evidence, use of PPIs for inappropriate indications and duration appears to be common. Over the years, concerns have been raised on the safety of PPIs as they have been associated with several adverse effects. Hence, there is a need for PPI stewardship to promote the use of PPIs for appropriate indication and duration. With this objective, the Indian Society of Gastroenterology has formulated guidelines on the rational use of PPIs. The guidelines were developed using a modified Delphi process. This paper presents these guidelines in detail, including the statements, review of literature, level of evidence and recommendations. This would help the clinicians in optimizing the use of PPIs in their practice and promote PPI stewardship., (© 2023. Indian Society of Gastroenterology.)

The European Association for the Study of Liver Diseases issued the "Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Management of Hepatic Encephalopathy" in 2022, which included recommendations for clinical diagnosis, assessment, treatment, management, and prevention. The Society's "Hepatic Encephalopathy Clinical Practice Guidelines in Chronic Liver Disease," which was last published in 2014, and the "Guidelines for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Hepatic Encephalopathy in Cirrhosis," which the Chinese Society of Hepatology, Chinese Medical Association, released in 2018, have certain differences and updates in terms of comparison to terminology, grading and classification, diagnosis, clinical evaluation and treatment, management, and prevention. Herein, the updated points of this guideline and the differences between it and our nation's guidelines are summarized in order to refine and understand the guiding role of the new version of the guideline for the clinical treatment of hepatic encephalopathy and provide aid for standardizing clinical diagnosis and treatment.

Background: Colonoscopy quality is a hot topic in gastroenterological communities, with several actual guidelines focusing on this aspect. Although the adenoma detection rate (ADR) is the single most important indicator, several other metrics are described and need reporting. Electronic medical reports are essential for the audit of quality indicators; nevertheless, they have proved not to be faultless. Aim: The aim of this study was to analyse and audit quality indicators (apart from ADR) using only our internal electronic endoscopy records as a starting point for improvement. Methods: An analysis of electronically recorded information of 8,851 total colonoscopies from a single tertiary centre from 2010 to 2015 was performed. Results: The mean patient age was 63.4 ± 8.5 years; 45.5% of them were female, and in 14.6% sedation was used. Photographic documentation was done in 98.4% with 10.7 photographs on average, and 37.4% reports had p p p = 0.002) and “adequate” bowel preparation (p = 0.004). Conclusions: There is much more to report than the ADR to ensure quality in colonoscopy practice. Better registry systematization and integrated software should be goals to achieve in the short term.

Background: Clinical practice guidelines assist healthcare professionals in providing evidence-based care. However, pharmaceutical companies' financial interests often influence guideline content. This study aimed to elucidate the magnitude of financial ties among Japanese gastroenterology guideline authors and the pharmaceutical industry., Methods: Using pharmaceutical company disclosed payment data, we evaluated financial conflicts of interest (COI) among Japanese Society of Gastroenterology guideline authors between 2016 and 2021. Additionally, we assessed the evidence quality supporting guideline recommendations and associations with financial COI. Finally, we evaluated author COI management during guideline development against global standards., Results: Overall, 88.2% (231/262) of guideline authors received a median of $12 968 (interquartile range [IQR]: $1839-$70 374) in payments between 2016 and 2019 for lectures, writings, and consulting. Chairpersons received significantly higher payments (median: $86 444 [IQR: $15 455-$165 679]). Notably, 41 (15.6%) authors had undeclared payments exceeding declaration requirements. Low or very low-quality evidence supported 41.0% of recommendations. There was a negative association between the median 4-year payment per author and the proportion of recommendations based on low-quality evidence (odds ratio: 0.966 [95% confidence interval [95% CI]: 0.945-0.987], P = 0.002) and positive association with moderate-quality evidence (odds ratio: 1.018 [95% CI: 1.011-1.025], P < 0.001). Still, the Japanese Society of Gastroenterology guideline development process remains less transparent, with insufficient COI policies relative to global standards., Conclusion: There were extensive financial COI between pharmaceutical companies and guideline authors, and more than 40% of recommendations were based on low-quality evidence. More rigorous and transparent COI policies for guideline development adhering to global standards are warranted., (© 2022 Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology Foundation and John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd.)

Objectives: This quality improvement project sought to enhance clinical information sharing for interhospital transfers to an inpatient hepatology service comprised of internal medicine resident frontline providers (housestaff) with the specific aims of making housestaff aware of 100% of incoming transfers and providing timely access to clinical summaries., Interventions: In February 2020, an email notification system to senior medicine residents responsible for patient triage shared planned arrival time for patients pending transfer. In July 2020, a clinical data repository ("Transfer Log") updated daily by accepting providers (attending physicians and subspecialty fellows) became available to senior medicine residents responsible for triage., Methods: Likert scale surveys were administered to housestaff before email intervention (pre) and after transfer log intervention (post). The time from patient arrival to team assignment (TTA) in the electronic medical record was used as a proxy for time to patient assessment and was measured pre- and postinterventions; >2 hours to TTA was considered an extreme delay., Results: Housestaff reported frequency of access to clinical information as follows: preinterventions 4/31 (13%) sometimes/very often and 27/31 (87%) never/rarely; postinterventions 11/26 (42%) sometimes/very often and 15/26 (58%) never/rarely ( p  = 0.02). Preinterventions 12/39 (31%) felt "not at all prepared" versus 27/39 (69%) "somewhat" or "adequately"; postinterventions 2/24 (8%) felt "not at all prepared" versus 22/24 (92%) somewhat/adequately prepared ( p  = 0.06). There was a significant difference in mean TTA between pre- and posttransfer log groups (62 vs. 40 minutes, p  = 0.01) and a significant reduction in patients with extreme delays in TTA post-email (18/180 pre-email vs. 7/174 post-email, p  = 0.04)., Conclusion: Early notification and increased access to clinical information were associated with better sense of preparedness for admitting housestaff, reduction in TTA, and reduced frequency of extreme delays in team assignment., Competing Interests: None declared., (Thieme. All rights reserved.)

Background and Aims: Patients with inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD) are exposed to drug-related nephrotoxicity and kidney-related extra-intestinal manifestations (EIMs). Patients should be monitored but guidance is lacking in current international recommendations. The objective of the Kidney Function Monitoring in Inflammatory Bowel Disease (MONITORED) initiative was to achieve an expert consensus about monitoring kidney function in IBD., Methods: A literature review was first conducted. Then, an expert consensus meeting, involving 28 attendees representing French-speaking gastroenterologists and nephrologists, was held as part of an academic initiative on May 28, 2021. An anonymous Delphi process was used to discuss and vote on statements. Agreement was defined as at least 75% of participants voting for any one statement., Results: Experts reached consensus on 11 criteria for referral to the nephrologist. Concerning kidney function monitoring, participants unanimously validated the use of serum creatinine with estimation of the glomerular filtration rate via the MDRD or CKD-EPI equations. A blood ionogram and a urine sample with measurement of a protein-to-creatinine ratio were also broadly agreed validated. Experts recommended performing this monitoring at IBD diagnosis, prior introducing a new treatment, and annually for EIMs screening and evaluation of treatment tolerance. An evaluation 3 months after starting mesalamine and then every 6 months was felt necessary, while for biologics an annually monitoring was deemed sufficient., Conclusion: The MONITORED consensus proposed guidelines on how to monitor kidney function in IBD. These recommendations should be considered in clinical practice to preserve kidney function and ensure the best approach to our patients., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest L Guillo declares consulting fees for Abbvie. A Amiot declares counseling, boards, lecture, transports or fees from Abbvie, Hospira, Takeda, Gilead, Biocodex, Janssen, Ferring and MSD. B Caron has received lecture and/or consulting fees from Abbvie, Amgen, Celltrion, Janssen, Takeda. G Boschetti has served as a speaker and advisory board member for Abbvie, Janssen, Ferring, Norgine, Tillotts, Pfizer, Celltrion, Takeda, Amgen, Sandoz. G Bouguen has received lecture fees from Abbvie, Ferring, MSD, Takeda, Otsuka, Amgen, Biogen, Celtrion, Janssen, Tillots and Pfizer and consultant fees from Takeda, Janssen, Mylan, Vifor Pharma and Gilead. JM Gornet has received personal fees from Amgen, Janssen Cilag, Sanofi, Takeda, Roche and Tillots Pharma. J Bonnet has received consulting fees for Amgen. L Vuitton has received lecture fees from Abbvie, MSD, Takeda, Ferring, Janssen and Pfizer, and research grants from MSD, Takeda and Pfizer. M Nachury received board membership, consultancy, or lecture fees from Abbvie, Adacyte, Amgen, Arena, CTMA, Celltrion, Ferring, Fresenius-Kabi, Janssen, Mayoli-Spindler, MSD, Pfizer, Takeda. M Uzzan has served as a speaker for Janssen and Abbvie. M Serrero declares lecture and consulting fees for Abbvie, Celltrion, Ferring, Janssen, MSD, Takeda and Tillotts. L Peyrin-Biroulet has served as a speaker, consultant and advisory board member for Merck, Abbvie, Janssen, Genentech, Mitsubishi, Ferring, Norgine, Tillotts, Vifor, Hospira/Pfizer, Celltrion, Takeda, Biogaran, Boerhinger-Ingelheim, Lilly, HAC- Pharma, Index Pharmaceuticals, Amgen, Sandoz, For- ward Pharma GmbH, Celgene, Biogen, Lycera, Samsung Bioepis, Theravance. The remaining authors declare no conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2021 Editrice Gastroenterologica Italiana S.r.l. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

This ESPEN practical guideline will inform physicians, nurses, dieticians, pharmacists, caregivers and other home enteral nutrition (HEN) providers in a concise way about the indications and contraindications for HEN, as well as its implementation and monitoring. This guideline will also inform interested patients requiring HEN. Home parenteral nutrition is not included but will be addressed in a separate ESPEN guideline. The guideline is based on the ESPEN scientific guideline published before, which consists of 61 recommendations that have been reproduced and renumbered, along with the associated commentaries that have been shorted compared to the scientific guideline. Evidence grades and consensus levels are indicated. The guideline was commissioned and financially supported by ESPEN and the members of the guideline group were selected by ESPEN., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest The expert members of the working group were accredited by the ESPEN Guidelines Group, the ESPEN Education and Clinical Practice Committee, and the ESPEN executive. All expert members have declared their individual conflicts of interest according to the rules of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE). If potential conflicts were indicated, they were reviewed by the ESPEN guideline officers and, in cases of doubts, by the ESPEN executive. None of the expert panel had to be excluded from the working group or from co-authorship because of serious conflicts. The conflict of interest forms are stored at the ESPEN guideline office and can be reviewed with legitimate interest upon request to the ESPEN executive., (Copyright © 2021 European Society for Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: This document is a summary of the French Intergroup guidelines regarding the management of appendicular epithelial tumors (AT) and pseudomyxoma peritonei (PMP) published in March 2020, available on the website of the French Society of Gastroenterology (SNFGE) (www.tncd.org)., Methods: All French medical societies specialized in the management of AT and PMP collaboratively established these recommendations based on literature until December 2019 and the results of a Delphi vote carried out by the Peritoneal Surface Oncology Group International experts, and graded into 4 categories (A, B, C, Expert Agreement) according to their level of evidence., Results: AT and PMP are rare but represent a wide range of clinico-pathological entities with several pathological classification systems and different biological behaviors. Their treatment modalities may vary accordingly and range from simple surveillance or laparoscopic appendectomy to complete cytoreductive surgery (CRS) with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) and / or systemic chemotherapy. The prognosis of these neoplasms may also largely vary according to their pathological grade and spreading at diagnosis or during the follow-up. Given the rarity of certain situations, the therapeutic strategy adapted to each patient, must be discussed in a specialized multidisciplinary meeting after a specialized pathological and radiological pre-therapeutic assessment and a clinical examination by a surgeon specializing in the management of rare peritoneal malignancies., Conclusion: These recommendations are proposed to achieve the most beneficial strategy in a daily practice as the wide range and the rareness of these entities renders their management challenging. These guidelines are permanently being reviewed., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest No potential competing interest was reported by the authors., (Copyright © 2021. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Introduction: The pandemic caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus has had a serious impact on the functioning of gastrointestinal endoscopy Units. The Asociación Española de Gastroenterología (AEG) and the Sociedad Española de Endoscopia Digestiva (SEED) have proposed the EPAGE guidelines for managing postponed colonoscopies., Objective: To evaluate the EPAGE guidelines as a management tool compared to the immunologic faecal occult blood test (iFOBT) and compared to risk score (RS) that combines age, sex and the iFOBT for the detection of colorectal cancer (CRC) and significant bowel disease (SBD)., Methods: A prospective, single-centre study enrolling 743 symptomatic patients referred for a diagnostic colonoscopy. Each order was classified according to the EPAGE guidelines as appropriate, indeterminate or inappropriate. Patients underwent an iFOBT and had their RS calculated., Results: The iFOBT (p<0.001), but not the EPAGE guidelines (p = 0.742), was an independent predictive factor of risk of CRC. The ROC AUCs for the EPAGE guidelines, the iFOBT and the RS were 0.61 (95% CI 0.49-0.75), 0.95 (0.93-0.97) and 0.90 (0.87-0.93) for CRC, and 0.55 (0.49-0.61), 0.75 (0.69-0.813) and 0.78 (0.73-0.83) for SBD, respectively. The numbers of colonoscopies needed to detect a case of CRC and a case of SBD were 38 and seven for the EPAGE guidelines, seven and two for the iFOBT, and 19 and four for a RS ≥5 points, respectively., Conclusion: The EPAGE guidelines, unlike the iFOBT, is not suitable for screening candidate patients for a diagnostic colonoscopy to detect CRC. The iFOBT, in combination with age and sex, is the most suitable strategy for managing demand for endoscopy in a restricted-access situation., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier España, S.L.U. All rights reserved.)