Introduction

13C-breath tests are valuable, noninvasive diagnostic tests that can be widely applied for the assessment of gastroenterological symptoms and diseases. Currently, the potential of these tests is compromised by a lack of standardization regarding performance and interpretation among expert centers.

Methods

This consensus-based clinical practice guideline defines the clinical indications, performance, and interpretation of 13C-breath tests in adult and pediatric patients. A balance between scientific evidence and clinical experience was achieved by a Delphi consensus that involved 43 experts from 18 European countries. Consensus on individual statements and recommendations was established if >= 80% of reviewers agreed and <10% disagreed.

Results

The guideline gives an overview over general methodology of 13C-breath testing and provides recommendations for the use of 13C-breath tests to diagnose Helicobacter pylori infection, measure gastric emptying time, and monitor pancreatic exocrine and liver function in adult and pediatric patients. Other potential applications of 13C-breath testing are summarized briefly. The recommendations specifically detail when and how individual 13C-breath tests should be performed including examples for well-established test protocols, patient preparation, and reporting of test results.

Conclusion

This clinical practice guideline should improve pan-European harmonization of diagnostic approaches to symptoms and disorders, which are very common in specialist and primary care gastroenterology practice, both in adult and pediatric patients. In addition, this guideline identifies areas of future clinical research involving the use of 13C-breath tests.

Keywords: breath test, diagnosis, gastroenterology, gastroparesis, helicobacter pylori, liver cirrhosis, motility, pancreatic exocrine insufficiency, pancreatitis

Background: The European Association for Endoscopic Surgery Bariatric Guidelines Group identified a gap in bariatric surgery recommendations with a structured, contextualized consideration of multiple bariatric interventions.

Objective: To provide evidence-informed, transparent and trustworthy recommendations on the use of sleeve gastrectomy, Roux-en-Y gastric bypass, adjustable gastric banding, gastric plication, biliopancreatic diversion with duodenal switch, one anastomosis gastric bypass, and single anastomosis duodeno-ileal bypass with sleeve gastrectomy in patients with severe obesity and metabolic diseases. Only laparoscopic procedures in adults were considered.

Methods: A European interdisciplinary panel including general surgeons, obesity physicians, anesthetists, a psychologist and a patient representative informed outcome importance and minimal important differences. We conducted a systematic review and frequentist fixed and random-effects network meta-analysis of randomized-controlled trials (RCTs) using the graph theory approach for each outcome. We calculated the odds ratio or the (standardized) mean differences with 95% confidence intervals for binary and continuous outcomes, respectively. We assessed the certainty of evidence using the CINeMA and GRADE methodologies. We considered the risk/benefit outcomes within a GRADE evidence to decision framework to arrive at recommendations, which were validated through an anonymous Delphi process of the panel.

Results: We identified 43 records reporting on 24 RCTs. Most network information surrounded sleeve gastrectomy and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass. Under consideration of the certainty of the evidence and evidence to decision parameters, we suggest sleeve gastrectomy or laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass over adjustable gastric banding, biliopancreatic diversion with duodenal switch and gastric plication for the management of severe obesity and associated metabolic diseases. One anastomosis gastric bypass and single anastomosis duodeno-ileal bypass with sleeve gastrectomy are suggested as alternatives, although evidence on benefits and harms, and specific selection criteria is limited compared to sleeve gastrectomy and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass. The guideline, with recommendations, evidence summaries and decision aids in user friendly formats can also be accessed in MAGICapp: https://app.magicapp.org/#/guideline/Lpv2kE

Conclusions: This rapid guideline provides evidence-informed, pertinent recommendations on the use of bariatric and metabolic surgery for the management of severe obesity and metabolic diseases. The guideline replaces relevant recommendations published in the EAES Bariatric Guidelines 2020.

Keywords: Bariatric surgery · Metabolic surgery · Severe obesity · EAES · Guidelines · CINeMA · GRADE · AGREE II

An interdisciplinary task force of European experts summarizes the value of gastrointestinal ultrasound (GIUS) in the management of acute appendicitis and diverticulitis. Based on an extensive literature review, clinical recommendations for these highly common diseases in visceral medicine are presented.

In patients with acute appendicitis, preoperative sonography has been established as a routine procedure in most European countries for medical and legal reasons. Routine sonography in these patients may reduce the rate of unnecessary surgery by half. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of ultrasound reach values above 90 % and are equivalent to CT and MRI. However, the high operator dependence may be a problem, for example in point-of-care ultrasound in emergency departments. Structured training programs, quality controls and standardized ultrasound reporting should be increasingly implemented.

In the case of suspected acute diverticulitis, “ultrasound first” should also be a basic element in the approach to all patients. Sonography can confirm the diagnosis and allows early risk stratification. As treatment strategies have become less aggressive and more tailored to the stage of diverticulitis, accurate staging has become increasingly important. GIUS and CT have proven to have similar sensitivity and specificity. Especially in cases of uncomplicated diverticulitis, GIUS will be the one and only imaging procedure. CT may work as a backup and has particular advantages for diverticulitis located in the distal sigmoid, inflammation deep in the small pelvis and insufficient ultrasound scanning conditions. This step-up approach (ultrasound first and CT only in case of a negative or inconclusive ultrasound result) has proven to yield the best accuracy.

Keywords: appendicitis - diverticulitis - guideline - ultrasound - gastrointestinal tract

Background: Evidence and practice recommendations on the use of transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) for rectal cancer are conflicting.

Objective: We aimed to summarize best evidence and develop a rapid guideline using transparent, trustworthy, and standardized methodology.

Methods: We developed a rapid guideline in accordance with GRADE, G-I-N, and AGREE II standards. The steering group consisted of general surgeons, members of the EAES Research Committee/Guidelines Subcommittee with expertise and experience in guideline development, advanced medical statistics and evidence synthesis, biostatisticians, and a guideline methodologist. The guideline panel consisted of four general surgeons practicing colorectal surgery, a radiologist with expertise in rectal cancer, a radiation oncologist, a pathologist, and a patient representative. We conducted a systematic review and the results of evidence synthesis by means of meta-analyses were summarized in evidence tables. Recommendations were authored and published through an online authoring and publication platform (MAGICapp), with the guideline panel making use of an evidence-to-decision framework and a Delphi process to arrive at consensus.

Results: This rapid guideline provides a weak recommendation for the use of TaTME over laparoscopic or robotic TME for low rectal cancer when expertise is available. Furthermore, it details evidence gaps to be addressed by future research and discusses policy considerations. The guideline, with recommendations, evidence summaries, and decision aids in user-friendly formats can also be accessed in MAGICapp: https://app.magicapp.org/#/guideline/4494.

Conclusions: This rapid guideline provides evidence-informed trustworthy recommendations on the use of TaTME for rectal cancer.

Keywords: Rectal cancer · TaTME · Transanal TME · Clinical practice guideline · GRADE · EAES

Additional resource: https://app.magicapp.org/#/guideline/LGm87E