Background
Patients with chronic gastrointestinal (GI) disease such as inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), irritable bowel syndrome (IBS), celiac disease, gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), pancreatitis, and chronic liver disease (CLD) often suffer from obesity because of coincidence (IBD, IBS, celiac disease) or related pathophysiology (GERD, pancreatitis and CLD). It is unclear if such patients need a particular diagnostic and treatment that differs from the needs of lean GI patients. The present guideline addresses this question according to current knowledge and evidence.

Objective
The objective of the guideline is to give advice to all professionals working in the field of gastroenterology care including physicians, surgeons, dietitians and others how to handle patients with GI disease and obesity.

Methods
The present guideline was developed according to the standard operating procedure for European Society for Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism guidelines, following the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network grading system (A, B, 0, and good practice point [GPP]). The procedure included an online voting (Delphi) and a final consensus conference.

Results
In 100 recommendations (3x A, 33x B, 24x 0, 40x GPP, all with a consensus grade of 90% or more) care of GI patients with obesity – including sarcopenic obesity – is addressed in a multidisciplinary way. A particular emphasis is on CLD, especially fatty liver disease, since such diseases are closely related to obesity, whereas liver cirrhosis is rather associated with sarcopenic obesity. A special chapter is dedicated to obesity care in patients undergoing bariatric surgery. The guideline focuses on adults, not on children, for whom data are scarce. Whether some of the recommendations apply to children must be left to the judgment of the experienced pediatrician.

Conclusion
The present guideline offers for the first time evidence-based advice how to care for patients with chronic GI diseases and concomitant obesity, an increasingly frequent constellation in clinical practice.

Keywords: bariatric surgery, celiac disease, cirrhosis, gastroesophageal reflux disease, inflammatory bowel disease, irritable bowel syndrome, non-alcoholic fatty liver disease, obesity, pancreatitis, sarcopenic obesity

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

In hospitals through Europe and worldwide, the practices regarding hospital diets are very heterogeneous. Hospital diets are rarely prescribed by physicians, and sometimes the choices of diets are based on arbitrary reasons. Often prescriptions are made independently from the evaluation of nutritional status, and without taking into account the nutritional status. Therapeutic diets (low salt, gluten-free, texture and consistency modified, …) are associated with decreased energy delivery (i.e. underfeeding) and increased risk of malnutrition. The European Society for Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism (ESPEN) proposes here evidence-based recommendations regarding the organization of food catering, the prescriptions and indications of diets, as well as monitoring of food intake at hospital, rehabilitation center, and nursing home, all of these by taking into account the patient perspectives. We propose a systematic approach to adapt the hospital food to the nutritional status and potential food allergy or intolerances. Particular conditions such as patients with dysphagia, older patients, gastrointestinal diseases, abdominal surgery, diabetes, and obesity, are discussed to guide the practitioner toward the best evidence based therapy. The terminology of the different useful diets is defined. The general objectives are to increase the awareness of physicians, dietitians, nurses, kitchen managers, and stakeholders towards the pivotal role of hospital food in hospital care, to contribute to patient safety within nutritional care, to improve coverage of nutritional needs by hospital food, and reduce the risk of malnutrition and its related complications.

Keywords: Acute care; Diets; Food intake; Malnutrition; Monitoring.

Introduction
The goal of this project was to create an up-to-date joint European clinical practice guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of faecal incontinence (FI), using the best available evidence. These guidelines are intended to help guide all medical professionals treating adult patients with FI (e.g., general practitioners, surgeons, gastroenterologists, other healthcare workers) and any patients who are interested in information regarding the diagnosis and management of FI.

Methods
These guidelines have been created in cooperation with members from the United European Gastroenterology (UEG), European Society of Coloproctology (ESCP), European Society of Neurogastroenterology and Motility (ESNM) and the European Society for Primary Care Gastroenterology (ESPCG). These members made up the guideline development group (GDG). Additionally, a patient advisory board (PAB) was created to reflect and comment on the draft guidelines from a patient perspective. Relevant review questions were established by the GDG along with a set of outcomes most important for decision making. A systematic literature search was performed using these review questions and outcomes as a framework. For each predefined review question, the study or studies with the highest level of study design were included. If evidence of a higher-level study design was available, no lower level of evidence was sought or included. Data from the studies were extracted by two reviewers for each predefined important outcome within each review question. Where possible, forest plots were created. After summarising the results for each review question, a systematic quality assessment using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations) approach was performed. For each review question, we assessed the quality of evidence for every predetermined important outcome. After evidence review and quality assessment were completed, recommendations could be formulated. The wording used for each recommendation was dependent on the level of quality of evidence. Lower levels of evidence resulted in weaker recommendations and higher levels of evidence resulted in stronger recommendations. Recommendations were discussed within the GDG to reach consensus.

Results
These guidelines contain 45 recommendations on the classification, diagnosis and management of FI in adult patients.

Conclusion
These multidisciplinary European guidelines provide an up-to-date comprehensive evidence-based framework with recommendations on the diagnosis and management of adult patients who suffer from FI.

Keywords: clinical guidelines, diagnosis, faecal incontinence, fecal incontinence, GRADE, guidelines, ptns, treatment, Sacral neuromodulation, unwanted loss of feces