Liver function tests (LFTs) are routinely used to screen for liver disease. A correct interpretation of LFT abnormalities may suggest the cause, severity, and prognosis of an underlying disease. Once the diagnosis has been established, sequential LFT assessment can be used to assess treatment efficacy. Abnormal LFTs are frequently encountered in clinical practice, since elevation of at least one LFT occurs in more than 20% of the population.1 Many patients with abnormal LFTs, however,  do not suffer from structural liver disease, since these tests can be influenced by factors unrelated to significant liver damage or liver function loss. During normal pregnancy, for example, serum albumin levels fall due to plasma volume expansion, and alkaline phosphatase (ALP) levels rise due to placental influx. Patients who have elevated transaminase levels may not suffer from liver disease, but rather from cardiac or skeletal muscle damage. Conversely, patients who suffer from advanced liver disease, such as chronic hepatitis or compensated liver cirrhosis, may have normal LFTs.

Abdominal distension and bloating are among the most frequently misunderstood complaints in gastroenterology. They are often used as interchangeable terms, a conceptual mistake that continues to drive diagnostic errors and ineffective treatment. According to Rome IV, bloating and distension may represent either a primary disorder of gut–brain interaction (DGBI) or occur as symptoms with other DGBIs, such as irritable bowel syndrome (IBS), functional dyspepsia (FD) or functional constipation (FC).

The term ‘gastroparesis’ was first coined by Kassander in 1958 to describe the fact that barium did not leave the stomach of patients with diabetes for over 24 hours — so-called ‘gastroparesis diabeticorum’. Nowadays it refers to a delay in gastric emptying that is associated with symptoms primarily of nausea and vomiting as well as the absence of mechanical obstruction. In 1958, 21 cases were described, but in 2019, 5 million US individuals were diagnosed as having gastroparesis. This rapid increase in prevalence is likely to have occurred because it has become much easier to measure gastric emptying and to attribute symptoms to this without necessarily thinking through differentials. The incidence of hospital admissions for patients labelled as having gastroparesis is rapidly rising, increasing at a much faster rate than admissions for patients with nausea and vomiting, gastro-oesophageal reflux disease, gastritis or gastric ulcers, which are all remaining relatively static. Gastroparesis therefore represents a major healthcare burden. Gastroparesis can be idiopathic or is most frequently caused by diabetes (type 1 more than type 2) or surgical procedures that can disrupt the vagus nerve (e.g. Billroth gastrectomy, oesophagectomy, gastric bypass surgery and fundoplication). In this article, I describe the mistakes most frequently made in patients who have a suspected diagnosis of gastroparesis. I base my discussion on the available evidence as well as clinical experience in the field. 

Biological therapy has revolutionised the treatment of moderate to severe inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), namely Crohn’s disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC). However, up to one-third of patients with IBD are primary non-responders, and up to half can lose response over time.These unwanted outcomes can be explained by either pharmacodynamic (mechanistic failure) or pharmacokinetic (PK) issues with or without the development of anti-drug antibodies (ADA), so-called immunogenicity.1 Reactive therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM), defined as the measurement of drug concentrations and anti-drug antibody (ADA) levels in the setting of primary non-response (PNR) or secondary loss of response (SLR), can help to explain better and manage these unwanted outcomes. However, it would make sense to try to prevent PNR and SLR by routinely measuring drug concentrations and ADA to achieve and maintain a targeted therapeutic drug concentration, the so-called proactive TDM. Here we discuss some common mistakes and significant errors to avoid when utilising TDM of biologics in patients with IBD. The discussion is based on evidence, whenever possible, and our clinical experience and perception of the field.

Chronic diarrhoea, lasting more than 3 or 4 weeks, is a common condition with a wide variety of different possible causes. Estimates suggest 5% of the population have experienced chronic diarrhoea and sought medical advice about it. All gastroenterologists see many patients whose principal complaint is frequent, loose stools, and will be aware of investigations that are needed to diagnose serious conditions such as inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) or colorectal cancer (CRC). Most people who present with chronic diarrhoea will not have these conditions and, if less common disorders are not considered, may be given a diagnosis of diarrhoea-predominant irritable bowel syndrome (IBS-D) or perhaps functional diarrhoea. Many different treatments are used for IBS-D and often benefit only a small proportion of patients, leaving many with unmet needs, seeking further investigation, advice and treatment.

Children and adolescents with chronic diseases requiring lifelong care face unique challenges that affect their daily lives and those of their families. Initially, these patients receive specialized care in pediatric facilities, where parents play a key role in treatment decisions. However, transitioning to adult healthcare facilities is inevitable, and this process, recognized as crucial years ago, involves moving adolescents with chronic conditions from child-centered to adult-oriented care. This transition can be complicated by varying age limits for pediatric care and the scarcity of adult care centers with specific expertise. The transition often requires cooperation between different centers or even countries due to patient mobility. The transition phase is critical, as it can lead to loss of follow-up, treatment suspension, and increased risks of complications or disease relapse. Beyond medical management, various factors influence the long-term prognosis of chronic conditions, making a well-organized transition program essential. While many hospitals have implemented transition models with mixed results in satisfaction, disease control, and follow-up adherence, there are frequent shortcomings in the process. This Mistakes In article will outline eight common mistakes made during the transition from pediatric to adult care, supported by literature and professional experience.