Online content viewable at: https://www.thieme-connect.com/

This article is part of a combined publication that expresses the current view of the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy about endoscopic biliary stenting. The present Clinical Guideline describes short-term and long-term results of biliary stenting depending on indications and stent models; it makes recommendations on when, how, and with which stent to perform biliary drainage in most common clinical settings, including in patients with a potentially resectable malignant biliary obstruction and in those who require palliative drainage of common bile duct or hilar strictures. Treatment of benign conditions (strictures related to chronic pancreatitis, liver transplantation, or cholecystectomy, and leaks and failed biliary stone extraction) and management of complications (including stent revision) are also discussed. A two-page executive summary of evidence statements and recommendations is provided. A separate Technology Review describes the models of biliary stents available and the stenting techniques, including advanced techniques such as insertion of multiple plastic stents, drainage of hilar strictures, retrieval of migrated stents and combined stenting in malignant biliary and duodenal obstructions. The target readership for the Clinical Guideline mostly includes digestive endoscopists, gastroenterologists, oncologists, radiologists, internists, and surgeons while the Technology Review should be most useful to endoscopists who perform biliary drainage.

This article is part of a combined publication that expresses the current view of the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) about endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided sampling in gastroenterology, including EUS-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) and EUS-guided trucut biopsy (EUS-TCB), of submucosal tumors, diffuse esophageal/gastric wall thickening, pancreatic solid masses and cystic-appearing lesions, mediastinal lesions unrelated to lung or esophageal cancer, cancer of the esophagus, stomach, and rectum, lymph nodes of unknown origin, adrenal gland masses, and focal liver lesions. False-positive cytopathological results and needle tract seeding are also discussed. The present Clinical Guideline describes the results of EUS-guided sampling in the different clinical settings, considers the role of this technique in patient management, and makes recommendations on circumstances that warrant its use. A two-page executive summary of evidence statements and recommendations is provided. A separate Technical Guideline describes the general technique of EUS-guided sampling, particular techniques to maximize the diagnostic yield depending on the nature of the target lesion, and sample processing. The target readership for the Clinical Guideline mostly includes gastroenterologists, oncologists, internists, and surgeons while the Technical Guideline should be most useful to endoscopists who perform EUS-guided sampling.

We confirm a significant miss rate for polyps or adenoma during colonoscopy. Detection of flat polyps is an issue that must be focused on to improve the quality of colonoscopy.

SUMMARY BackgroundThere are many published trials of colon cleansing regimens for colonoscopy but no clear consensus regarding relative performance.

! CAC cap-assisted colonoscopy CRC colorectal cancer EMR endoscopic mucosal resection ESGE European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy FAP familial adenomatous polyposis FICE Fujinon intelligent color enhancement, flexible spectral imaging enhancement FAP familial adenomatous polyposis GRADE grading of recommendations assessment, development and evaluation HD-WLE high definition white-light endoscopy i-SCAN Pentax virtual chromoendoscopy system MAP MUTYH-associated polyposis NBI narrow band imaging PICO population, intervention, comparator, outcome PIVI preservation and incorporation of valuable endoscopic innovations RCT randomized controlled trial SD-WLE standard definition white-light endoscopy TER third eye retroscope WLE white-light endoscopy

In patients with cirrhosis, the combination of sclerotherapy and octreotide is more effective than sclerotherapy alone in controlling acute variceal bleeding, but there is no difference between the overall mortality rates associated with the two approaches to treatment.

Background and aims: Following ileocolonic resection for Crohn's disease (CD), early endoscopic recurrence predicts recurrence of symptoms. The aim of the study was to compare ileocolonoscopy and wireless capsule endoscopy (WCE) for the detection of postoperative recurrence in CD. Methods: WCE and ileocolonoscopy were performed within six months following surgery in 32 prospectively enrolled patients. Two independent observers interpreted the results of WCE. Recurrence in the neoterminal ileum was defined by a Rutgeerts score >1. When observers at WCE did not concur, WCE results were considered as either true negative or true positive and sensitivity and specificity were calculated according to both assumptions. Results: Recurrence occurred in 21 patients (68%) and was detected by ileocolonoscopy in 19 patients. Sensitivity was 90% and specificity 100%. Sensitivity of WCE was 62% and 76% and specificity was 100% and 90%, respectively, depending on assumptions. There was a correlation between the severity of the lesions measured by both methods (p,0.05). Lesions located outside the scope of conventional endoscopy were detected by WCE in two thirds of patients with excellent interobserver agreement (kappa .0.9) for all lesions with the exception of ulceration (kappa = 0.7). Conclusions: The sensitivity of WCE in detecting recurrence in the neoterminal ileum was inferior to that of ileocolonoscopy. In contrast, WCE detected lesions outside the scope of ileocolonoscopy in more than two thirds of patients. Additional follow up studies are needed to assess the clinical relevance of such lesions. At the present time, it seems that WCE cannot systematically replace ileocolonoscopy in the regular management of patients after surgery.