Explore the vast range of titles available.

This is the first UK national guideline to concentrate on acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding (LGIB) and has been commissioned by the Clinical Services and Standards Committee of the British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG). The Guidelines Development Group consisted of representatives from the BSG Endoscopy Committee, the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland, the British Society of Interventional Radiology, the Royal College of Radiologists, NHS Blood and Transplant and a patient representative. A systematic search of the literature was undertaken and the quality of evidence and grading of recommendations appraised according to the GRADE(Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) methodology. These guidelines focus on the diagnosis and management of acute LGIB in adults, including methods of risk assessment and interventions to diagnose and treat bleeding (colonoscopy, computed tomography, mesenteric angiography, endoscopic therapy, embolisation and surgery). Recommendations are included on the management of patients who develop LGIB while receiving anticoagulants (including direct oral anticoagulants) or antiplatelet drugs. The appropriate use of blood transfusion is also discussed, including haemoglobin triggers and targets.

Barrett's esophagus (BE) is a common premalignant lesion for which surveillance is recommended. This strategy is limited by considerable variations in clinical practice. We conducted an international, multidisciplinary, systematic search and evidence-based review of BE and provided consensus recommendations for clinical use in patients with nondysplastic, indefinite, and low-grade dysplasia (LGD). We defined the scope, proposed statements, and searched electronic databases, yielding 20,558 publications that were screened, selected online, and formed the evidence base. We used a Delphi consensus process, with an 80% agreement threshold, using GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) to categorize the quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. In total, 80% of respondents agreed with 55 of 127 statements in the final voting rounds. Population endoscopic screening is not recommended and screening should target only very high-risk cases of males aged over 60 years with chronic uncontrolled reflux. A new international definition of BE was agreed upon. For any degree of dysplasia, at least two specialist gastrointestinal (GI) pathologists are required. Risk factors for cancer include male gender, length of BE, and central obesity. Endoscopic resection should be used for visible, nodular areas. Surveillance is not recommended for <5 years of life expectancy. Management strategies for indefinite dysplasia (IND) and LGD were identified, including a de-escalation strategy for lower-risk patients and escalation to intervention with follow-up for higher-risk patients. In this uniquely large consensus process in gastroenterology, we made key clinical recommendations for the escalation/de-escalation of BE in clinical practice. We made strong recommendations for the prioritization of future research.

Large bowel obstruction can be caused by advanced colonic cancer, extracolonic obstruction or benign strictures. The technical success rate of colonic stents for the treatment of colorectal obstruction is about 87% with complications or technical failure at about 14%. Mortality associated with the procedure is <4% and perforation is 4.5%. This article will discuss who would benefit from colonic stents including bridge to surgery, palliation, benign strictures and who should be performing this procedure. The insertion of stents in the colon has been primarily studied in the left colon, although proximal obstruction will also be discussed. The timing of stent insertion, in relation to symptoms and chemotherapy, will be discussed.

The aim of this study was to evaluate the quality of feedback provided to specialty trainees (ST3 or higher) in medical specialties during their workplace-based assessments (WBAs). The feedback given in WBAs was examined in detail in a group of 50 ST3 or higher trainees randomly selected from those taking part in a pilot study of changes to the WBA system conducted by the Joint Royal Colleges of Physicians Training Board. They were based in Health Education Northeast (Northern Deanery) and Health Education East of England (Eastern Deanery). Thematic analysis was used to identify commonly occurring themes. Feedback was mainly positive but there were differences in quality between specialties. Problems with feedback included insufficient detail, such that it was not possible to map the progression of the trainee, insufficient action plans made and the timing of feedback not being contemporaneous (feedback not being given at the time of assessment). Recommendations included feedback should be more specific; there need to be more options in the feedback forms for the supervisor to compare the trainee’s performance to what is expected and action plans need to be made.

The formulation of guidelines are driven by a Guideline Development Group (GDG), include a writing committee, members of which are recognised authorities in the field, and others representing a range of relevant expertise, as well as patient representatives and those whose everyday practice will be influenced by the guidelines. All feedback is sent to the lead author for amendments to the guideline and if these are satisfactory, the guideline is then submitted to Gut for the usual peer review process by four to eight internationally renowned authorities.

Background Infliximab is usually administered by two monthly intravenous (iv) infusions, therefore requiring visits to hospital. Adalimumab is administered by self subcutaneous (sc) injections every other week. Both of these anti-TNF drugs appear to be equally efficacious in the treatment of Crohn's Disease and therefore the decision regarding which drug to choose will depend to some extent on patient choice, which may be based on the mode of administration. The aims of this study were to compare preferences in Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD) patients for two currently available anti-TNF agents and the reasons for their choices. Methods An anonymous questionnaire was distributed to IBD patients who had attended the Gastroenterology service (Ulster Hospital, Dundonald, Belfast, N. Ireland. UK) between January 2007 and December 2007. The patients were asked in a hypothetical situation if the following administering methods of anti-TNF drugs (intravenous or subcutaneous) were available, which drug route of administration would they choose. Results One hundred and twenty-five patients fulfilled the inclusion criteria and were issued questionnaires, of these 78 questionnaires were returned (62 percent response). The mean age of respondent was 44 years. Of the total number of respondents, 33 patients (42 percent) preferred infliximab and 19 patients (24 percent) preferred adalimumab (p = 0.07). Twenty-six patients (33 percent) did not indicate a preference for either biological therapy and were not included in the final analysis. The commonest reason cited for those who chose infliximab (iv) was: \"I do not like the idea of self-injecting,\" (67 percent). For those patients who preferred adalimumab (sc) the commonest reason cited was: \"I prefer the convenience of injecting at home,\" (79 percent). Of those patients who had previously been treated with an anti-TNF therapy (n = 10, all infliximab) six patients stated that they would prefer infliximab if given the choice in the future (p = 0.75). Conclusions There was a trend towards patient preference for infliximab (iv) treatment as opposed to adalimumab (sc) in patients with IBD. This difference may be due to the frequency of administration, mode of administration or differing 'times in the market-place', as infliximab had been approved for a longer period of time in Crohn's disease. Further studies are required in IBD patients to investigate whether patient choice will affect compliance, patient satisfaction and efficacy of treatment with anti-TNF therapies.

The introduction of capsule endoscopy in 2001 opened the last “black box” of the gastrointestinal tract enabling complete visualization of the small bowel. Since then, numerous new developments in the field of deep enteroscopy have emerged expanding the diagnostic and therapeutic armamentarium against small bowel diseases. The ability to achieve total enteroscopy and visualize the entire small bowel remains the holy grail in enteroscopy. Our journey in the small bowel started historically with sonde type enteroscopy and ropeway enteroscopy. Currently, double-balloon enteroscopy, single-balloon enteroscopy, and spiral enteroscopy are available in clinical practice. Recently, a novel motorized enteroscope has been described with the potential to shorten procedure time and allow for total enteroscopy in one session. In this review, we will present an overview of the currently available techniques, indications, diagnostic yield, and complications of device-assisted enteroscopy.

Over a 6-month period, a 69-year-old woman presented with recurrent symptomatic anaemia, melaena and haematochezia. Extensive investigations were carried out, including CT of the abdomen and pelvis, oesophagogastroduodenoscopy, colonoscopy, two capsule endoscopies and two CT angiograms. The lack of active bleeding at the time of both CT angiograms meant a diagnosis was only made following retrospective examination of images by interventional radiology once fresh ampullary bleeding was identified on capsule endoscopy. The unifying diagnosis was haemosuccus pancreaticus given the combination of the left gastric artery pseudoaneurysm, fresh bleeding identified from ampulla and the patient’s history of chronic alcohol-related pancreatitis. Subsequent coil embolisation was performed to an optimal result with no recurrence of symptoms to date.