The Rome II pediatric criteria for functional gastrointestinal disorders (FGIDs) were defined in 1999 to be used as diagnostic tools and to advance empirical research. In this document, the Rome III Committee aimed to update and revise the pediatric criteria. The decision-making process to define Rome III criteria for children aged 4-18 years consisted of arriving at a consensus based on clinical experience and review of the literature. Whenever possible, changes in the criteria were evidence based. Otherwise, clinical experience was used when deemed necessary. Few publications addressing Rome II criteria were available to guide the committee. The clinical entities addressed include (1) cyclic vomiting syndrome, rumination, and aerophagia; 2) abdominal pain-related FGIDs including functional dyspepsia, irritable bowel syndrome, abdominal migraine, and functional abdominal pain; and (3) functional constipation and non-retentive fecal incontinence. Adolescent rumination and functional constipation are newly defined for this age group, and the previously designated functional fecal retention is now included in functional constipation. Other notable changes from Rome II to Rome III criteria include the decrease from 3 to 2 months in required symptom duration for noncyclic disorders and the modification of the criteria for functional abdominal pain. The Rome III child and adolescent criteria represent an evolution from Rome II and should prove useful for both clinicians and researchers dealing with childhood FGIDs. The future availability of additional evidence-based data will likely continue to modify pediatric criteria for FGIDs.

This document is intended to be used in daily practice and as a basis for further clinical research. Large well-designed clinical trials are necessary with regard to diagnostic evaluation and treatment.

is an expert in gastroesophageal reflux disease and aerodigestive disorders. Yvan Vandenplas MD, PhD: YV is an expert in gastroesophageal reflux disease. Maartje Singendonk MD: MS is an expert in esophageal physiology. Michael Cabana MD: MC is a pediatrician with expertise in consensus guideline Carlo Di Lorenzo MD: CD is an expert in pediatric motility disorders and gastroesophageal reflux disease Frederic Gottrand MD: FG is an expert in esophagitis and gastroesophageal reflux disease Sandeep Gupta MD: SG is an expert in esophageal diseases. Miranda Langendam PhD: ML is aguideline methodologist Annamaria Staiano MD: AS is an expert in pediatric motility disorders and gastroesophageal reflux disease. Nikhil Thapar MD: NT is an expert in pediatric motility disorders. Neelesh Tipnis MD: NT is an expert in pediatric motility disorders. Merit Tabbers MD, PhD: MT is an expert in gastroesophageal reflux disease.

This document serves as an update of the North American Society for Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Nutrition (NASPGHAN) and the European Society for Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Nutrition (ESPGHAN) 2009 clinical guidelines for the diagnosis and management of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) in infants and children and is intended to be applied in daily practice and as a basis for clinical trials. Eight clinical questions addressing diagnostic, therapeutic and prognostic topics were formulated. A systematic literature search was performed from October 1, 2008 (if the question was addressed by 2009 guidelines) or from inception to June 1, 2015 using Embase, MEDLINE, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Clinical Trials. The approach of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) was applied to define and prioritize outcomes. For therapeutic questions, the quality of evidence was also assessed using GRADE. Grading the quality of evidence for other questions was performed according to the Quality Assessment of Studies of Diagnostic Accuracy (QUADAS) and Quality in Prognostic Studies (QUIPS) tools. During a 3-day consensus meeting, all recommendations were discussed and finalized. In cases where no randomized controlled trials (RCT; therapeutic questions) or diagnostic accuracy studies were available to support the recommendations, expert opinion was used. The group members voted on each recommendation, using the nominal voting technique. With this approach, recommendations regarding evaluation and management of infants and children with GERD to standardize and improve quality of care were formulated. Additionally, 2 algorithms were developed, 1 for infants <12 months of age and the other for older infants and children.

No abstract

In breast-fed infants, the mother should start a strict CMP-free diet. Non-breast-fed infants with confirmed CMPA should receive an extensively hydrolyzed protein-based formula with proven efficacy in appropriate clinical trials; amino acids-based formulae are reserved for certain situations. Soy protein formula, if tolerated, is an option beyond 6 months of age. Nutritional counseling and regular monitoring of growth are mandatory in all age groups requiring CMP exclusion. REEVALUATION: Patients should be reevaluated every 6 to 12 months to assess whether they have developed tolerance to CMP. This is achieved in >75% by 3 years of age and >90% by 6 years of age. Inappropriate or overly long dietary eliminations should be avoided. Such restrictions may impair the quality of life of both child and family, induce improper growth, and incur unnecessary health care costs.

Background: The diagnosis of pediatric-onset inflammatory bowel disease (PIBD) can be challenging in choosing the most informative diagnostic tests and correctly classifying PIBD into its different subtypes. Recent advances in our understanding of the natural history and phenotype of PIBD, increasing availability of serological and fecal biomarkers, and the emergence of novel endoscopic and imaging technologies taken together have made the previous Porto criteria for the diagnosis of PIBD obsolete. Methods: We aimed to revise the original Porto criteria using an evidencebased approach and consensus process to yield specific practice recommendations for the diagnosis of PIBD. These revised criteria are based on the Paris classification of PIBD and the original Porto criteria while

No abstract