Abstract

Objectives

Videofluoroscopic swallowing studies (VFSS) remain the gold standard for the instrumental assessment of oropharyngeal swallowing disorders alongside flexible endoscopic evaluation of swallowing (FEES), requiring a high standard of quality and correct implementation. The current best practice position statements aim to guide the clinical practice of VFSS in individuals experiencing swallowing disorders.

Materials and methods

An international expert consensus panel with expertise in oropharyngeal dysphagia, comprised of radiologists, speech-language therapists, otolaryngologists, and other professionals in the field, convened by the European Society of Swallowing Disorders (ESSD) and the European Society of Gastrointestinal and Abdominal Radiology (ESGAR), developed best practice position statements. They were established using an online Delphi methodology involving an online panel discussion and item preparation and three consecutive rounds. Consensus was reached when ≥ 80% of the participants agreed on a specific recommendation.

Results

Eighteen best practice position statements were formulated, thereby establishing standard recommendations on the technical performance of VFSS. They cover VFSS planning, correct implementation, documentation, radiation protection, equipment and maintenance, and education and training.

Conclusion

These position statements summarise the panel’s deliberations and recommendations in performing VFSS, representing the agreed consensus of experts from ESSD and ESGAR. They provide a structured framework for optimising and standardising the performance of VFSS in patients with swallowing disorders.

Key Points

Question Significant regional and national differences in clinical practice when performing VFSS highlight the need for interdisciplinary recommendations to optimise patient care.

Findings Eighteen statements were developed by representatives of the ESSD and the ESGAR.

Clinical relevance These best practice position statements on the technical performance of VFSS may serve as a basis for standardising the procedure and ensuring high-quality service.

Abstract

Abstract

Pelvic exenteration (PE) is a radical surgical approach designed for the curative treatment of advanced pelvic malignancies, requiring en-bloc resection of multiple pelvic organs. While the procedure is radical, it has shown promise in enhancing long-term survival and is now comparable in surgical mortality to elective resections for primary pelvic cancers. Imaging plays a crucial role in preoperative planning, with MRI, CT, and PET/CT being pivotal in assessing the extent of cancer and formulating a surgical roadmap. This paper presents clinical practice guidelines for imaging in the context of PE, developed jointly by ESGAR, SAR, ESUR, and the PelvEx Collaborative. These guidelines aim to standardise imaging protocols and reporting to improve the preoperative assessment and facilitate decision-making in the multidisciplinary treatment of pelvic cancers. Our recommendations underscore the importance of a multidisciplinary approach and the need for clear and precise imaging reports to optimise patient care.

Clinical relevance statement

Our recommendations underscore the importance of a multidisciplinary approach and the need for clear and precise imaging reports to optimise patient care.

Key Points

• MRI is mandatory for local staging in pelvic exenteration.

• Structured reporting (using the template provided in this guide) is recommended.

• Multidisciplinary review of imaging is critical for surgical planning.

Abstract

Objectives

The aim of the study was to review the evidence regarding the clinical use and value of fecal calprotectin (FC) measurements in different gastrointestinal disorders in children.

Methods

A literature search was conducted in the PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases until October 31, 2019. Subtopics were identified and each assigned to individual authors.

Results

A total of 28 recommendations were voted on using the nominal voting technique. Recommendations are given related to sampling, measurement methods, and results interpretation. The 14 authors anonymously voted on each recommendation using a 9-point scale (1 strongly disagree to 9 fully agree). Consensus was considered achieved if at least 75% of the authors voted 6, 7, 8, or 9.

Conclusions

Consensus was reached for all recommendations. Limitations for the use of FC in clinical practice include variability in extraction methodology, performance of test kits as well as the need to establish local reference ranges because of the influence of individual factors, such as age, diet, microbiota, and drugs. The main utility of FC measurement at present is in the diagnosis and monitoring of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) as well as to differentiate it from functional gastrointestinal disorders (FAPDs). FC, however, has neither utility in the diagnosis of infantile colic nor to differentiate between functional and organic constipation. A rise in FC concentration, may alert to the risk of developing necrotizing enterocolitis and help identifying gastrointestinal involvement in children with Henoch-Schönlein purpura. FC measurement is of little value in Cow's Milk Protein Allergy, coeliac disease (CD), and cystic fibrosis. FC does neither help to distinguish bacterial from viral acute gastroenteritis (AGE), nor to diagnose Helicobacter Pylori infection, small intestinal bacterial overgrowth (SIBO), acute appendicitis (AA), or intestinal polyps.

Abstract

Background

Hereditary adenomatous polyposis syndromes, including familial adenomatous polyposis and other rare adenomatous polyposis syndromes, increase the lifetime risk of colorectal and other cancers.

Methods

A team of 38 experts convened to update the 2008 European recommendations for the clinical management of patients with adenomatous polyposis syndromes. Additionally, other rare monogenic adenomatous polyposis syndromes were reviewed and added. Eighty-nine clinically relevant questions were answered after a systematic review of the existing literature with grading of the evidence according to Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation methodology. Two levels of consensus were identified: consensus threshold (≥67% of voting guideline committee members voting either ‘Strongly agree’ or ‘Agree’ during the Delphi rounds) and high threshold (consensus ≥ 80%).

Results

One hundred and forty statements reached a high level of consensus concerning the management of hereditary adenomatous polyposis syndromes.

Conclusion

These updated guidelines provide current, comprehensive, and evidence-based practical recommendations for the management of surveillance and treatment of familial adenomatous polyposis patients, encompassing additionally MUTYH-associated polyposis, gastric adenocarcinoma and proximal polyposis of the stomach and other recently identified polyposis syndromes based on pathogenic variants in other genes than APC or MUTYH. Due to the rarity of these diseases, patients should be managed at specialized centres.