Main recommendations: Small-bowel capsule endoscopy (SBCE) 1 ESGE recommends that prior to SBCE patients ingest a purgative (2 L of polyethylene glycol [PEG]) for better visualization.Strong recommendation, high quality evidence.However, the optimal timing for taking purgatives is yet to be established. 2 ESGE recommends that SBCE should be performed as an outpatient procedure if possible, since completion rates are higher in outpatients than in inpatients.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 3 ESGE recommends that patients with pacemakers can safely undergo SBCE without special precautions.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 4 ESGE suggests that SBCE can also be safely performed in patients with implantable cardioverter defibrillators and left ventricular assist devices.Weak recommendation, low quality evidence. 5 ESGE recommends the acceptance of qualified nurses and trained technicians as prereaders of capsule endoscopy studies as their competency in identifying pathology is similar to that of medically qualified readers. The responsibility of establishing a diagnosis must however remain with the attending physician.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 6 ESGE recommends observation in cases of asymptomatic capsule retention.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence.In cases where capsule retrieval is indicated, ESGE recommends the use of device-assisted enteroscopy as the method of choice.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. Device-assisted enteroscopy (DAE) 1 ESGE recommends performing diagnostic DAE as a day-case procedure in patients without significant underlying co-morbidities; in patients with co-morbidities and/or those undergoing a therapeutic procedure, an inpatient stay is recommended.Strong recommendation, low quality evidenceThe choice between different settings also depends on sedation protocols.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 2 ESGE suggests that conscious sedation, deep sedation, and general anesthesia are all acceptable alternatives: the choice between them should be governed by procedure complexity, clinical factors, and local organizational protocols.Weak recommendation, low quality evidence. 3 ESGE recommends that the findings of previous diagnostic investigations should guide the choice of insertion route.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence.If the location of the small-bowel lesion is unknown or uncertain, ESGE recommends that the antegrade route should be generally preferred.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence.In the setting of massive overt bleeding, ESGE recommends an initial antegrade approach.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 4 ESGE recommends that, for balloon-assisted enteroscopy (i. e., single-balloon enteroscopy [SBE] and double-balloon enteroscopy [DBE]), small-bowel insertion depth should be estimated by counting net advancement of the enteroscope during the insertion phase, with confirmation of this estimate during withdrawal.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence.ESGE recommends that, for spiral enteroscopy, insertion depth should be estimated during withdrawal.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. Since the calculated insertion depth is only a rough estimate, ESGE recommends placing a tattoo to mark the identified lesion and/or the deepest point of insertion.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 5 ESGE recommends that all endoscopic therapeutic procedures can be undertaken at the time of DAE.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence.Moreover, when therapeutic interventions are performed, additional specific safety measures are needed to prevent complications.Strong recommendation, high quality evidence.

Main Recommendations: MR1 ESGE recommends small-bowel capsule endoscopy as the first-line examination, before consideration of other endoscopic and radiological diagnostic tests for suspected small-bowel bleeding, given the excellent safety profile of capsule endoscopy, its patient tolerability, and its potential to visualize the entire small-bowel mucosa.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. MR2 ESGE recommends small-bowel capsule endoscopy in patients with overt suspected small-bowel bleeding as soon as possible after the bleeding episode, ideally within 48 hours, to maximize the diagnostic and subsequent therapeutic yield.Strong recommendation, high quality evidence. MR3 ESGE does not recommend routine second-look endoscopy prior to small-bowel capsule endoscopy in patients with suspected small-bowel bleeding or iron-deficiency anemia.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. MR4 ESGE recommends conservative management in those patients with suspected small-bowel bleeding and high quality negative small-bowel capsule endoscopy.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. MR5 ESGE recommends device-assisted enteroscopy to confirm and possibly treat lesions identified by small-bowel capsule endoscopy.Strong recommendation, high quality evidence. MR6 ESGE recommends the performance of small-bowel capsule endoscopy as a first-line examination in patients with iron-deficiency anemia when small bowel evaluation is indicated.Strong recommendation, high quality evidence. MR7 ESGE recommends small-bowel capsule endoscopy in patients with suspected Crohn’s disease and negative ileocolonoscopy findings as the initial diagnostic modality for investigating the small bowel, in the absence of obstructive symptoms or known bowel stenosis.Strong recommendation, high quality evidence. MR8 ESGE recommends, in patients with unremarkable or nondiagnostic findings from dedicated small-bowel cross-sectional imaging, small-bowel capsule endoscopy as a subsequent investigation if deemed likely to influence patient management.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. MR9 ESGE recommends, in patients with established Crohn’s disease, the use of a patency capsule before small-bowel capsule endoscopy to decrease the capsule retention rate.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. MR10 ESGE recommends device-assisted enteroscopy (DAE) as an alternative to surgery for foreign bodies retained in the small bowel requiring retrieval in patients without acute intestinal obstruction.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. MR11 ESGE recommends DAE-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (DAE-ERCP) as a first-line endoscopic approach to treat pancreaticobiliary diseases in patients with surgically altered anatomy (except for Billroth II patients).Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence.

Introduction: Microscopic colitis is a chronic inflammatory bowel disease characterised by normal or almost normal endoscopic appearance of the colon, chronic watery, nonbloody diarrhoea and distinct histological abnormalities, which identify three histological subtypes, the collagenous colitis, the lymphocytic colitis and the incomplete microscopic colitis. With ongoing uncertainties and new developments in the clinical management of microscopic colitis, there is a need for evidence‐based guidelines to improve the medical care of patients suffering from this disorder.Methods: Guidelines were developed by members from the European Microscopic Colitis Group and United European Gastroenterology in accordance with the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II instrument. Following a systematic literature review, the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation methodology was used to assess the certainty of the evidence. Statements and recommendations were developed by working groups consisting of gastroenterologists, pathologists and basic scientists, and voted upon using the Delphi method.Results: These guidelines provide information on epidemiology and risk factors of microscopic colitis, as well as evidence‐based statements and recommendations on diagnostic criteria and treatment options, including oral budesonide, bile acid binders, immunomodulators and biologics. Recommendations on the clinical management of microscopic colitis are provided based on evidence, expert opinion and best clinical practice.Conclusion: These guidelines may support clinicians worldwide to improve the clinical management of patients with microscopic colitis.

This study aimed to examine the global burden, risk factors, and trends of esophageal cancer based on age, sex, and histological subtype. The data were retrieved from cancer registries database from 48 countries in the period 1980–2017. Temporal patterns of incidence and mortality were evaluated by average annual percent change (AAPC) using joinpoint regression. Associations with risk factors were examined by linear regression. The highest incidence of esophageal cancer was observed in Eastern Asia. The highest incidence of adenocarcinoma (AC) was found in the Netherlands, the United Kingdom, and Ireland. A higher AC/squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) incidence ratio was associated with a higher prevalence of obesity and elevated cholesterol. We observed an incidence increase (including AC and SCC) in some countries, with the Czech Republic (female: AAPC 4.66), Spain (female: 3.41), Norway (male: 3.10), Japan (female: 2.18), Thailand (male: 2.17), the Netherlands (male: 2.11; female: 1.88), and Canada (male: 1.51) showing the most significant increase. Countries with increasing mortality included Thailand (male: 5.24), Austria (female: 3.67), Latvia (male: 2.33), and Portugal (male: 1.12). Although the incidence of esophageal cancer showed an overall decreasing trend, an increasing trend was observed in some countries with high AC/SCC incidence ratios. More preventive measures are needed for these countries.

This paper proposes a novel methodology for automatic detection and localization of gastrointestinal (GI) anomalies in endoscopic video frame sequences. Training is performed with weakly annotated images, using only image-level, semantic labels instead of detailed, pixel-level annotations. This makes it a cost-effective approach for the analysis of large videoendoscopy repositories. Other advantages of the proposed methodology include its capability to suggest possible locations of GI anomalies within the video frames, and its generality, in the sense that abnormal frame detection is based on automatically derived image features. It is implemented in three phases: a) It classifies the video frames into abnormal or normal using a Weakly Supervised Convolutional Neural Network (WCNN) architecture; b) detects salient points from deeper WCNN layers, using a Deep Saliency Detection (DSD) algorithm; and c) localizes GI anomalies using an Iterative Cluster Unification (ICU) algorithm. ICU is based on a Pointwise Cross-Feature-Map (PCFM) descriptor extracted locally from the detected salient points using information derived from the WCNN. Results from extensive experimentation using publicly available collections of gastrointestinal endoscopy video frames, are presented. The datasets used include a variety of GI anomalies. Both the anomaly detection and the localization performance achieved, in terms of the Area Under receiver operating Characteristic (AUC), were >80%. The highest AUC for anomaly detection was obtained on conventional gastroscopy images, reaching 96%, and the highest AUC for anomaly localization was obtained on wireless capsule endoscopy images, reaching 88%.