Suchergebnisse

This new diagnostic consensus guideline is a joint project of the European Crohn's and Colitis Organisation [ECCO] and the European Society of Gastrointestinal and Abdominal Radiology [ESGAR] that now merges the former ECCO-ESGAR Imaging Guideline and the former ECCO Endoscopy Guideline, also including laboratory parameters. It has been drafted by 30 ECCO and ESGAR members from 17 European countries. All the authors recognize th e work of and are grateful to previous ECCO and ESGAR members who contributed tocreating the earlier consensus guidelines on imaging and endoscopy. The former guidelines have been condensed into this new diagnostic consensus guideline which consists of two papers: the first detailing assessment at initial diagnosis, to monitor treat ment and for the detection of complications; the second dealing with the available scoring systems and general considerations regarding the different diagnostic tools. The strategy to define consensus was similar to that previously described in other ECCO consensus guidelines [available at www.ecco-ibd.eu]. Briefly, an open call for participants was made, with ECCO participants selected by the Guidelines' Committee of ECCO [known as GuiCom] on the basis of their publication record and a personal statement and ESGAR participants nominated by ESGAR. The following working parties were established: diagnostics at initial diagnosis, diagnostics for monitoring treatment in patients with known IBD, diagnostics for the detect ion of complications, scores for IBD, and general principles and technical aspects. Provisional guideline statements and supporting text were written following a comprehensive literature review, then refined following two voting rounds. The first voting round introduced a more comprehensive voting procedure, in which each Guidelines participants voted on all statements by explicitly reviewing those statements together with their respective supporting text and references. The second voting round included optional national representative participation of ECCO's 36 member countries and ESGAR's 28 member countries. The level of evidence was graded according to the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine [www.cebm.net]. The ECCO statements were finalized by the authors at a face-to-face meeting in Barcelona in October 2017 and represent consensus with agreement of at least 80% of the present participants. Consensus statements are intended to be read in context with their qualifying comments and not in isolation. The supporting text was then finalised under the direction of each working group leader [SV, TK, GF, VA, EC], before being integrated by the consensus leaders [CM, JS, AS].

This new diagnostic consensus guideline is a joint project of the European Crohn's and Colitis Organisation [ECCO] and the European Society of Gastrointestinal and Abdominal Radiology [ESGAR] that now merges the former ECCO-ESGAR Imaging Guideline and the former ECCO Endoscopy Guideline, also including laboratory parameters. It has been drafted by 30 ECCO and ESGAR members from 17 European countries. All the authors recognize the work of and are grateful to previous ECCO and ESGAR members who contributed to creating the earlier consensus guidelines on imaging and endoscopy. The former guidelines have been condensed into this new diagnostic consensus guideline which consists of two papers: the first detailing assessment at initial diagnosis, to monitor treat ment and for the detection of complications; the second dealing with the available scoring systems and general considerations regarding the different diagnostic tools. The strategy to define consensus was similar to that previously described in other ECCO consensus guidelines [available at www.ecco-ibd.eu]. Briefly, an open call for participants was made, with ECCO participants selected by the Guidelines' Committee of ECCO [known as GuiCom] on the basis of their publication record and a personal statement and ESGAR participants nominated by ESGAR. The following working parties were established: diagnostics at initial diagnosis, diagnostics for monitoring treatment in patients with known IBD, diagnostics for the detection of complications, scores for IBD, and general principles and technical aspects. Provisional guideline statements and supporting text were written following a comprehensive literature review, then refined following two voting rounds. The first voting round introduced a more comprehensive voting procedure, in which each Guidelines participants voted on all statements by explicitly reviewing those statements together with their respective supporting text and references. The second voting round included optional national representative participation of ECCO's 36 member countries and ESGAR's 28 member countries. The level of evidence was graded according to the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine [www.cebm.net]. The ECCO statements were finalized by the authors at a face-to-face meeting in Barcelona in October 2017 and represent consensus with agreement of at least 80% of the present participants. Consensus statements are intended to be read in context with their qualifying comments and not in isolation. The supporting text was then finalised under the direction of each working group leader [SV, TK, GF, VA, EC], before being integrated by the consensus leaders [CM, JS, AS].

Background: In the medical literature, the nomenclature and descriptions (ND) of small bowel (SB) ulcerative and inflammatory (U-I) lesions in capsule endoscopy (CE) are scarce and inconsistent. Inter-observer variability in interpreting these findings remains a major limitation in the assessment of the severity of mucosal lesions, which can impact negatively on clinical care, training and research on SB-CE. Objective: Focusing on SB-CE in Crohn's disease (CD), our aim is to establish a consensus on the ND of U-I lesions. Methods: An international panel of experienced SB-CE readers was formed during the 2016 United European Gastroenterology Week meeting. A core group of five CE and inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) experts established an Internet-based, three-round Delphi consensus but did not participate in the voting process. The core group built illustrated questionnaires, including SB-CE still frames of U-I lesions from patients with documented CD. Twenty-seven other experts were asked to rate and comment on the different proposals for the ND of the most frequent SB U-I lesions. For each round, we used a 6-point rating scale (varying from 'strongly disagree' to 'strongly agree'). The consensus was reached when at least 80 % of the voting members scored the statement within the 'agree' or 'strongly agree' categories. Results: A 100% participation rate was obtained for all the rounds. Consensual ND were reached for the following seven U-I lesions: aphthoid erosion, deep ulceration, superficial ulceration, stenosis, edema, hyperemia and denudation. Conclusion: Considering the most frequent SB U-I lesions seen in CE in CD, a consensual ND was reached by the international group of experts. These descriptions and names are useful not only for daily practice and medical education, but also for medical research.

BACKGROUND: In the medical literature, the nomenclature and descriptions (ND) of small bowel (SB) ulcerative and inflammatory (U-I) lesions in capsule endoscopy (CE) are scarce and inconsistent. Inter-observer variability in interpreting these findings remains a major limitation in the assessment of the severity of mucosal lesions, which can impact negatively on clinical care, training and research on SB-CE. OBJECTIVE: Focusing on SB-CE in Crohn's disease (CD), our aim is to establish a consensus on the ND of U-I lesions. METHODS: An international panel of experienced SB-CE readers was formed during the 2016 United European Gastroenterology Week meeting. A core group of five CE and inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) experts established an Internet-based, three-round Delphi consensus but did not participate in the voting process. The core group built illustrated questionnaires, including SB-CE still frames of U-I lesions from patients with documented CD. Twenty-seven other experts were asked to rate and comment on the different proposals for the ND of the most frequent SB U-I lesions. For each round, we used a 6-point rating scale (varying from 'strongly disagree' to 'strongly agree'). The consensus was reached when at least 80 % of the voting members scored the statement within the 'agree' or 'strongly agree' categories. RESULTS: A 100% participation rate was obtained for all the rounds. Consensual ND were reached for the following seven U-I lesions: aphthoid erosion, deep ulceration, superficial ulceration, stenosis, edema, hyperemia and denudation. CONCLUSION: Considering the most frequent SB U-I lesions seen in CE in CD, a consensual ND was reached by the international group of experts. These descriptions and names are useful not only for daily practice and medical education, but also for medical research.

BACKGROUND: In the medical literature, the nomenclature and descriptions (ND) of small bowel (SB) ulcerative and inflammatory (U-I) lesions in capsule endoscopy (CE) are scarce and inconsistent. Inter-observer variability in interpreting these findings remains a major limitation in the assessment of the severity of mucosal lesions, which can impact negatively on clinical care, training and research on SB-CE. OBJECTIVE: Focusing on SB-CE in Crohn's disease (CD), our aim is to establish a consensus on the ND of U-I lesions. METHODS: An international panel of experienced SB-CE readers was formed during the 2016 United European Gastroenterology Week meeting. A core group of five CE and inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) experts established an Internet-based, three-round Delphi consensus but did not participate in the voting process. The core group built illustrated questionnaires, including SB-CE still frames of U-I lesions from patients with documented CD. Twenty-seven other experts were asked to rate and comment on the different proposals for the ND of the most frequent SB U-I lesions. For each round, we used a 6-point rating scale (varying from 'strongly disagree' to 'strongly agree'). The consensus was reached when at least 80 % of the voting members scored the statement within the 'agree' or 'strongly agree' categories. RESULTS: A 100% participation rate was obtained for all the rounds. Consensual ND were reached for the following seven U-I lesions: aphthoid erosion, deep ulceration, superficial ulceration, stenosis, edema, hyperemia and denudation. CONCLUSION: Considering the most frequent SB U-I lesions seen in CE in CD, a consensual ND was reached by the international group of experts. These descriptions and names are useful not only for daily practice and medical education, but also for medical research.