A SiftingSignal publication/ Edited by Simon Mathews, MD

The week in GI, filtered to what is worth knowing.

Every week, 100+ papers from 25+ top GI and medical journals, transparently scored and physician-vetted. The signal, not the noise.

This week, in numbers

Issue №11 · week of Sep 13, 2026See the trends →
Top journals this week: Nat Rev Gastro Hep / Lancet GH / Gastroenterology / Gut
Selectivity
10.3%
15 in the issue of 145 screened
in the issue 15in depth 30held 7filtered out 93
89.7% of what published this week did not make the issue. That filter is the product. A further 30 cleared the bar and are carried in one line each, in full on the subspecialty pages.
How this week moves the standard
Changes practice 0
No paper this week forces an outright change to the standard. That is the usual, honest result.
Each paper is matched to the guideline that governs its question, then placed by how it moves it. These are the 15 cards in the issue; every one quotes the standard it was measured against, with its source and review date. Click a segment to filter the issue.
The signal map
EmergingReinforcesRefinesChangesstrong evidence · moves the standardretrospectiveguideline →How far it moves the standardEvidence strength
Each dot is a paper: evidence strength across, how far it moves the standard up, area = the journal's impact factor, colour = subspecialty. The shaded zone is a fixed bar (prospective cohort or better, refining the standard or better), so a big dot outside it is work the field rated highly that is not changing practice. Click a dot to open its card.

What to know this week

the top-scored · the 5-minute version

top-down anti-TNF from diagnosis cuts 5-year surgery to 3% versus 13% with step-up, resmetirom and semaglutide now approved for MASH F2-F3, and Peg-IFN to nucleos(t)ides: 38% HBsAg loss if baseline <100 IU/mL, 47.5% drop to <1000 if baseline ≥1000 at 48 weeks.

The 15 in the issue this week, ranked by signal score. Each anchored to the relevant standard of care. All in full below; 30 more, read and scored the same way, in one line each at the foot of the issue.

Your subspecialty, the takeaways
IBD9Hepatology16Esophagus/Reflux3Pancreas/Biliary3Endoscopy10Motility1Colorectal1Nutrition2
Type

This week to know

the 5 strongest this week · each scored 0 to 100 on what it lets you do, who it touches, the stakes, and how well the evidence backs it
IBD rct · n=389 · Sep 10, 2026 · Lancet GH · IF 39.1

Long-term outcomes of top-down therapy versus a conventional step-up strategy in adults newly diagnosed with Crohn's disease: 5-year follow-up of the PROFILE trial.

Practice-changingCrohn's diseasebiologicsanti-TNF
Clinical takeawayIn newly diagnosed Crohn's disease, initiate combined TNF inhibitor plus immunomodulator therapy at diagnosis rather than escalating gradually. The top-down approach reduces 5-year surgery risk by approximately 80%. This durable benefit persists even though most step-up patients eventually receive biologics by year 5, showing an early critical window for intervention.
What it foundStep-up therapy increased 5-year abdominal surgery hazard 5.23-fold compared to top-down anti-TNF plus immunomodulator from diagnosis (95% CI 1.99-13.76, p=0.0008); absolute surgery rates were 13% step-up versus 3% top-down.
ContextThis literature reports that the PROFILE trial's 5-year follow-up demonstrates sustained clinical benefit from top-down anti-TNF therapy initiated at diagnosis in newly diagnosed Crohn's disease compared to conventional step-up treatment strategies.
Reinforcessuggested applicable standard· American College of Gastroenterology, 'ACG Clinical Guideline: Management of Crohn’s Disease in Adults' (Lichtenstein GR, Loftus EV, Afzali A, et al., Am J Gastroenterol 2025;120(6):1225-1264). DOI 10.14309/ajg.0000000000003465, PMID 40701562.

Decision at stakeWhether to initiate anti-TNF therapy with immunomodulator from diagnosis versus step-up conventional therapy in newly diagnosed Crohn's disease

No single passage of this standard matched the paper closely enough to quote, so none is shown. The standard is cited above.

Our full summary of this standard

DIAGNOSIS: Use fecal calprotectin (cutoff >50-100 μg/g) to differentiate inflammatory from noninflammatory disease OF THE COLON (strong, moderate). Ileocolonoscopy with biopsies for suspected CD; biopsy uninvolved mucosa to define histologic extent; small bowel imaging is part of the initial workup (key concepts, ungraded). CT enterography is comparable to MR enterography for small bowel detection; MRE should be used PREFERENTIALLY in patients younger than 35 years and where serial examinations are likely, because of radiation avoidance, MRE is not a blanket first choice. Intestinal ultrasound is a radiation-free ADJUNCT to diagnosis and to monitoring treatment response (key concept, ungraded, not a graded recommendation). Perform routine endoscopic CRC surveillance in Crohn's colitis (strong, moderate). MILD-TO-MODERATE / LOWER PROGRESSION RISK: Recommend AGAINST oral mesalamine for induction or maintenance (strong, moderate); sulfasalazine should be considered ONLY for symptomatic mild COLONIC CD (key concept). Controlled ileal-release budesonide 9 mg daily for induction of symptomatic remission in mildly-to-moderately active ileocecal CD (strong, moderate), but recommend AGAINST ileal-release budesonide for MAINTENANCE (strong, low). MODERATE-TO-SEVERE / HIGHER RISK: SUGGEST AGAINST requiring failure of conventional therapy before initiating advanced therapy (conditional, LOW, a permission to skip step-up, not a mandate to start advanced therapy upfront). Oral corticosteroids for short-term induction only (strong, low). Recommend AGAINST azathioprine 1.5-2.5 mg/kg/d and 6-mercaptopurine 0.75-1.5 mg/kg/d for INDUCTION (strong, moderate), but SUGGEST the same agents and doses for MAINTENANCE after corticosteroid-induced remission (conditional, low). Check TPMT before starting azathioprine/6-MP (strong, low); measure NUDT15 variants in patients of East Asian ancestry and TPMT variants in all patients prior to thiopurine initiation (strong, moderate). Methotrexate up to 25 mg weekly IM/SC for maintenance after corticosteroid induction (conditional, low). Anti-TNF agents (IV infliximab, SC adalimumab, SC certolizumab pegol) for induction and maintenance (strong, moderate). Recommend COMBINATION IV infliximab + thiopurine over either agent alone in patients naive to both (strong, moderate). Vedolizumab IV for induction and maintenance of symptomatic remission (strong, moderate). Ustekinumab (strong, moderate); risankizumab (strong, moderate), and risankizumab over ustekinumab in prior anti-TNF exposure (conditional, low); mirikizumab (strong, moderate); guselkumab IV-then-SC or all-SC (strong, moderate). Upadacitinib for induction and maintenance in patients PREVIOUSLY EXPOSED TO ANTI-TNF (strong, moderate), the ACG does not endorse it as a first-line biologic-naive option. SC infliximab and SC vedolizumab are maintenance options in responders to IV induction (strong, moderate). PERIANAL FISTULIZING: infliximab for induction (strong, moderate); adalimumab (conditional, low); antibiotics added to infliximab or adalimumab (conditional, very low); vedolizumab, ustekinumab, upadacitinib each (conditional, VERY LOW). Drain perianal abscesses and place setons before escalating advanced therapy (key concept). POST-OPERATIVE: endoscopic assessment at 6-12 months after surgically induced remission over no monitoring (conditional, moderate); in LOW post-op recurrence risk, continued observation rather than immediate medical therapy (conditional, very low); imidazole antibiotics (metronidazole) 1-2 g/d after small intestinal resection (conditional, low); in HIGH-risk CD, anti-TNF to prevent endoscopic recurrence (STRONG, moderate) and vedolizumab (CONDITIONAL, low), these two are not co-equal. SURGERY/ABSCESS: intra-abdominal abscess >2 cm should be treated with antibiotics plus a drainage procedure, and immunosuppression HELD until drainage is achieved (conditional, low). DISEASE MODIFIERS: counsel active smokers to quit; use NSAIDs with caution; assess stress, depression and anxiety as part of comprehensive care (key concepts).

American College of Gastroenterology, 'ACG Clinical Guideline: Management of Crohn’s Disease in Adults' (Lichtenstein GR, Loftus EV, Afzali A, et al., Am J Gastroenterol 2025;120(6):1225-1264). DOI 10.14309/ajg.0000000000003465, PMID 40701562. · reviewed 2026-07-21 ↗
Noor NM … PROFILE Study Group · Lancet Gastroenterology & Hepatology · IF 39.1 · PubMed ↗Permalink
Hepatology guideline · Sep 11, 2026 · Gut · IF 24.6

International expert panel review for the use of resmetirom and semaglutide in the management of MASH-related fibrosis: clinical practice update.

New therapyMASLDguideline
Clinical takeawayPracticing GIs can now offer pharmacological treatment for MASH F2-F3 using resmetirom or semaglutide. This expert panel provides decision support for drug selection by patient phenotype, initiation protocols, on-treatment monitoring, response assessment, dose adjustment, and criteria for combining or switching agents.
What it foundResmetirom (thyroid hormone receptor-beta agonist) and semaglutide (GLP-1 RA) are the first FDA-approved pharmacological treatments for MASH F2-F3, marking the first therapy option for a previously untreated condition; expert panel consolidates phase III trial data and clinical guidance for their use.
ContextMASH F2-F3 previously had no pharmacological options. Resmetirom and semaglutide are the first FDA-approved agents for this indication, acting through complementary mechanisms. This expert consolidation replaces a prior era of supportive care alone with a structured clinical decision framework.
Refinessuggested applicable standard· AASLD 2023 Practice Guidance, updated by AASLD Practice Guidance October 2024 (resmetirom) and November 2025 (semaglutide)

Decision at stakechoosing between resmetirom and semaglutide for MASH with F2-F3 fibrosis and assessing on-treatment response

For adults with MASH and F2-F3 fibrosis identified by non-invasive tests (VCTE 8-15 kPa, MRE 3.1-4.4 kPa, or ELF 9.2-10.5) rather than biopsy, AASLD now gives dedicated, updated practice guidance on both FDA-approved pharmacotherapies: resmetirom (Oct 2024 update) and semaglutide 2.4mg/week subcutaneous (Nov 2025 update, following August 2025 accelerated FDA approval based on ESSENCE trial data: 62.9% vs 34.3% MASH resolution without fibrosis worsening; 36.8% vs 22.4% ≥1-stage fibrosis improvement).

From our summary of this standard, unedited — the part the paper bears on. marks omitted text. Our wording, not the guideline's; read the source for its own text.

Our full summary of this standard

Diagnose MASLD by hepatic steatosis on imaging (or biopsy) plus at least one cardiometabolic criterion and exclusion of competing etiologies (significant alcohol use, other liver disease), then risk-stratify fibrosis using a sequential non-invasive approach: FIB-4 first, followed by a second-line imaging-based test (VCTE, MRE, or ELF) for indeterminate/high-risk FIB-4, with liver biopsy reserved for discordant or unclear cases. Lifestyle modification (≥7-10% weight loss, Mediterranean diet, exercise) remains the foundation for all patients. For adults with MASH and F2-F3 fibrosis identified by non-invasive tests (VCTE 8-15 kPa, MRE 3.1-4.4 kPa, or ELF 9.2-10.5) rather than biopsy, AASLD now gives dedicated, updated practice guidance on both FDA-approved pharmacotherapies: resmetirom (Oct 2024 update) and semaglutide 2.4mg/week subcutaneous (Nov 2025 update, following August 2025 accelerated FDA approval based on ESSENCE trial data: 62.9% vs 34.3% MASH resolution without fibrosis worsening; 36.8% vs 22.4% ≥1-stage fibrosis improvement). Pioglitazone or vitamin E remain options per the 2023 base guidance. Manage cardiometabolic risk with statins for ASCVD reduction plus glycemic and blood-pressure control; for semaglutide specifically, routine hepatic panels are recommended only as clinically indicated (no discontinuations for LFT elevation in ESSENCE), with monitoring for GI adverse effects and rare risks (AKI, gallbladder disease, pancreatitis, thyroid C-cell tumors, retinopathy progression, lean mass loss). HCC surveillance with ultrasound and AFP every 6 months remains indicated only if cirrhosis is present.

AASLD 2023 Practice Guidance, updated by AASLD Practice Guidance October 2024 (resmetirom) and November 2025 (semaglutide) · reviewed 2026-07-23 ↗
Mironova M … Loomba R · Gut · IF 24.6 · PubMed ↗Permalink
Hepatology meta analysis · n=581 · Sep 7, 2026 · Gut · IF 24.6

HBsAg decline and clearance with peg-IFN therapy added to nucleos(t)ide analogues: an individual participant data meta-analysis of prospective trials (PROSPER).

New evidenceviral hepatitismeta-analysis
Clinical takeawayIn HBV patients on nucleos(t)ides pursuing HBsAg clearance or cure strategies, peg-IFN add-on success depends on baseline level. Patients with baseline <100 had ~38% HBsAg loss rate; baseline <1000 (combined <100 and 100-1000 strata) had ~18%. For higher-baseline patients (≥1000), use peg-IFN as lead-in to achieve intermediate reductions (47.5% reach HBsAg <1000 at 48 weeks), supporting sequential cure regimens with novel antivirals.
What it foundPeg-IFN added to nucleos(t)ide analogues achieved HBsAg loss in 38% of patients with baseline <100 IU/mL and 18% with baseline <1000 IU/mL. For patients with baseline ≥1000 IU/mL, intermediate HBsAg reductions occurred more frequently: 48 weeks of peg-IFN achieved HBsAg <1000 in 47.5% and <100 in 16.3%. Overall HBsAg loss occurred in 50/581 (8.6%).
ContextIndividual participant data meta-analysis of 8 prospective trials (581 patients; 44% HBeAg-positive at baseline) providing baseline-stratified HBsAg loss rates and intermediate reduction milestones-useful data for patient selection in chronic hepatitis B.
Emergingsuggested applicable standard· American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases / Infectious Diseases Society of America (AASLD/IDSA), "AASLD/IDSA Practice Guideline on Treatment of Chronic Hepatitis B," Hepatology, 2026

Decision at stakeWhether to add peg-IFN to nucleos(t)ide analogues for HBsAg reduction or loss

(5) DISCONTINUATION, in adults with CHB who are HBeAg-negative, without cirrhosis, with sustained undetectable HBV DNA on nucleos(t)ide analogue therapy, AASLD SUGGESTS NOT withdrawing NA therapy until HBsAg loss (CONDITIONAL, VERY LOW certainty).

From our summary of this standard, unedited — the part the paper bears on. marks omitted text. Our wording, not the guideline's; read the source for its own text.

Our full summary of this standard

The 2026 AASLD/IDSA guideline addresses six PICO questions only; it states explicitly that all other 2018 AASLD recommendations for CHB management remain applicable, and that screening/diagnosis were out of scope. Baseline evaluation and the standard treatment indications (cirrhosis with detectable HBV DNA; HBeAg-positive immune-active with ALT >2x ULN and HBV DNA >20,000 IU/mL; HBeAg-negative immune-active with ALT >2x ULN and HBV DNA >2,000 IU/mL; prophylaxis for reactivation risk during immunosuppression) derive from the 2018 document, not this update, which lists 'treatment of HBeAg-positive and -negative immune active CHB with ALT >2x ULN', treatment of children, treatment of cirrhosis, low-level viremia, virologic breakthrough, and special populations (transplant, acute HBV, HCV/HDV/HIV coinfection) as topics 'well covered in previous AASLD 2018 Guidance and for which recommendations have not changed'. Preferred agents remain entecavir, TDF, or TAF. THE SIX 2026 RECOMMENDATIONS: (1) PMTCT, for pregnant persons with HBV DNA >200,000 IU/mL at any time point during pregnancy, regardless of HBeAg status, AASLD RECOMMENDS initiating TDF or TAF at gestational week 28 (STRONG recommendation, MODERATE certainty, the only strong recommendation in the guideline); TDF has a more extensive safety record in pregnancy than TAF. Implementation qualifiers: initiate immediately if care is first sought after week 28; initiate at week 16 if infant HBIG will be unavailable (with subsequent infant vaccination); consider earlier initiation when amniocentesis is anticipated (transmission risk is increased with HBV DNA >2,000,000 IU/mL) or when preterm labor risk is high; continue TDF/TAF if already on it, switch entecavir or other agents to TDF/TAF; if treatment was solely for perinatal prophylaxis it may be discontinued at delivery, with HBV DNA and ALT monitored every 1-3 months for up to 6 months for withdrawal flare and treatment reinitiated if ALT >=5x ULN; use TDF or TAF in breastfeeding persons requiring treatment. (2) HORIZONTAL TRANSMISSION, for HBsAg-positive viremic persons not meeting disease-specific treatment indications who are in high-risk scenarios for transmission to others, AASLD SUGGESTS a shared decision-making approach regarding antiviral treatment (CONDITIONAL, VERY LOW certainty). Qualifiers the guideline stresses: the decision weighs exposure risk and the vaccine/immunity status of contacts, favoring treatment if contacts are unvaccinated, vaccine-nonresponsive, immunocompromised, or of unknown vaccine status; persons requesting treatment for prevention may be prescribed it since risks may not be disclosed; explicitly, people with CHB must NOT be restricted in daily activities, contact sports, school, or professional training and must NOT be required to take antivirals because of transmission risk in those settings; routine contact, shared meals, and hugging are not transmission routes (avoid sharing toothbrushes/razors); most healthcare workers with CHB are NOT high-risk, but those performing SHEA Category III exposure-prone procedures may require antivirals (SHEA target HBV DNA <1000 IU/mL); neither CDC nor SHEA requires disclosure to patients or staff; anti-stigma framing is part of the recommendation. (3) IMMUNE-TOLERANT PHASE, defined as HBeAg-positive, HBV DNA >10^7 IU/mL, and normal ALT; AASLD SUGGESTS antiviral therapy for those over age 40 years, OR with significant liver inflammation (grade >=2) or fibrosis (>=F2) on biopsy or noninvasive tests (CONDITIONAL, VERY LOW certainty). For persons under age 40 who are interested in starting treatment earlier, AASLD suggests shared decision-making weighing risk factors and the benefits and risks of treatment. Accurate phase identification requires persistently normal ALT on >=2 measurements >=6 months apart, using ULN 35 U/L (males) and 25 U/L (females). (4) INDETERMINATE ('grey zone') PHASE, the HBeAg-negative indeterminate phase is defined as HBsAg-positive, HBeAg-negative persons whose ALT and/or HBV DNA fall outside the thresholds for HBeAg-negative immune-active CHB (ALT >2x ULN and HBV DNA >2,000 IU/mL) and outside those for inactive CHB (HBV DNA <2,000 IU/mL with normal ALT), comprising predominantly two subgroups, (I) normal (<ULN) or mildly elevated (<2x ULN) ALT with HBV DNA >=2,000 IU/mL, or (II) elevated ALT (>ULN) with HBV DNA <2,000 IU/mL, with ALT interpreted against ULN 35 U/L (males) and 25 U/L (females) and phase assigned on >=2 ALT and HBV DNA measurements over a 6-12 month period; in adults who are HBsAg-positive, HBeAg-negative, without cirrhosis and in the indeterminate phase so defined, AASLD SUGGESTS antiviral therapy using a shared decision-making approach assessing risks and benefits, and re-evaluating that decision at each follow-up visit if treatment has not been initiated (CONDITIONAL, VERY LOW certainty). Decision-relevant factors include fibrosis stage, age, and sex, e.g. age >40, male sex, and low-normal platelets (<180 k/mm3) favor treatment. (5) DISCONTINUATION, in adults with CHB who are HBeAg-negative, without cirrhosis, with sustained undetectable HBV DNA on nucleos(t)ide analogue therapy, AASLD SUGGESTS NOT withdrawing NA therapy until HBsAg loss (CONDITIONAL, VERY LOW certainty). If a patient nonetheless has a strong desire to stop, shared decision-making applies and ALL of the following must be met: no history of advanced fibrosis/cirrhosis, hepatic decompensation (variceal bleed, ascites, encephalopathy, hepatorenal syndrome), HCC, or extrahepatic HBV complications; if HBeAg-positive at treatment start, HBeAg seroconversion to anti-HBe-positive for >=1 year with undetectable HBV DNA >=2 years; if HBeAg-negative at start, undetectable HBV DNA >=2 years; no HIV or HDV coinfection; quantitative HBsAg <100 IU/mL; and willingness to adhere to frequent monitoring. After stopping, monitor ALT and HBV DNA every 1-3 months for 6 months, then every 3 months for 6-12 months, then every 3-6 months. Restart antivirals IMMEDIATELY if HBV DNA >=10,000 IU/mL (4 log IU/mL) at any time regardless of ALT, OR ALT >=5x ULN regardless of HBV DNA, OR total bilirubin >2.5 mg/dL. (6) HCC SURVEILLANCE (all CONDITIONAL, VERY LOW certainty; modality/interval per AASLD 2023 HCC Practice Guidance), Rec 6: after HBsAg loss, continue surveillance in those with cirrhosis, family history of HCC, men who lost HBsAg after age 40, and women who lost HBsAg after age 50. Rec 7: in HBV-HDV coinfection, surveil adults independent of cirrhosis status; in children, individualize because HCC risk in that population is unknown. Rec 8: in HBV-HIV coinfection, surveil men >=18 years and women >=40 years. Rec 9: in HBV-HCV coinfection, AASLD recommends treating HCV and suggests HCC surveillance per HBV mono-infection criteria. Where a person has more than one coinfection, the surveillance recommendation should follow the coinfection carrying the highest associated risk. The guideline notes that most of its recommendations rest on low or very low certainty evidence and that shared decision-making, not uniform policy, is the intended mode of application.

American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases / Infectious Diseases Society of America (AASLD/IDSA), "AASLD/IDSA Practice Guideline on Treatment of Chronic Hepatitis B," Hepatology, 2026 · reviewed 2026-07-23 ↗
Dongelmans EJ … Sonneveld MJ · Gut · IF 24.6 · PubMed ↗Permalink
Hepatology prospective cohort · n=13,627 · Sep 8, 2026 · Clin Gastro Hep · IF 16.2

Personalised prediction of the individual risk of liver-related events in MASLD using the dynamics of non-invasive tests.

New evidenceMASLDcirrhosishepatocellular carcinomaartificial intelligence
Clinical takeawayThe JLCM improves discrimination for cirrhosis decompensation and HCC risk within the VCTE-Prognosis cohort compared to static LSM or FIB-4 alone. Prospective external validation in independent MASLD populations and deployment of a validated risk calculator are required before recommending clinical use for surveillance intensity or treatment decisions.
What it foundJoint latent class model incorporating LSM trajectory, FIB-4, sex, age, and platelets identified 61-80% of patients who developed cirrhosis decompensation or HCC across follow-up visits, compared to 39-56% with LSM alone and 32-60% with FIB-4, achieving AUROC 92.2% at 5-year follow-up.
ContextThis literature reports that personalised risk prediction for liver-related events in MASLD can be derived from longitudinal trends in non-invasive fibrosis markers, addressing the clinical challenge of interpreting dynamic test changes.
Refinessuggested applicable standard· AASLD 2023 Practice Guidance, updated by AASLD Practice Guidance October 2024 (resmetirom) and November 2025 (semaglutide)

Decision at stakehow to use non-invasive fibrosis tests (LSM, FIB-4) to predict which MASLD patients will develop cirrhosis decompensation or hepatocellular carcinoma

Diagnose MASLD by hepatic steatosis on imaging (or biopsy) plus at least one cardiometabolic criterion and exclusion of competing etiologies (significant alcohol use, other liver disease), then risk-stratify fibrosis using a sequential non-invasive approach: FIB-4 first, followed by a second-line imaging-based test (VCTE, MRE, or ELF) for indeterminate/high-risk FIB-4, with liver biopsy reserved for discordant or unclear cases.

From our summary of this standard, unedited — the part the paper bears on. marks omitted text. Our wording, not the guideline's; read the source for its own text.

Our full summary of this standard

Diagnose MASLD by hepatic steatosis on imaging (or biopsy) plus at least one cardiometabolic criterion and exclusion of competing etiologies (significant alcohol use, other liver disease), then risk-stratify fibrosis using a sequential non-invasive approach: FIB-4 first, followed by a second-line imaging-based test (VCTE, MRE, or ELF) for indeterminate/high-risk FIB-4, with liver biopsy reserved for discordant or unclear cases. Lifestyle modification (≥7-10% weight loss, Mediterranean diet, exercise) remains the foundation for all patients. For adults with MASH and F2-F3 fibrosis identified by non-invasive tests (VCTE 8-15 kPa, MRE 3.1-4.4 kPa, or ELF 9.2-10.5) rather than biopsy, AASLD now gives dedicated, updated practice guidance on both FDA-approved pharmacotherapies: resmetirom (Oct 2024 update) and semaglutide 2.4mg/week subcutaneous (Nov 2025 update, following August 2025 accelerated FDA approval based on ESSENCE trial data: 62.9% vs 34.3% MASH resolution without fibrosis worsening; 36.8% vs 22.4% ≥1-stage fibrosis improvement). Pioglitazone or vitamin E remain options per the 2023 base guidance. Manage cardiometabolic risk with statins for ASCVD reduction plus glycemic and blood-pressure control; for semaglutide specifically, routine hepatic panels are recommended only as clinically indicated (no discontinuations for LFT elevation in ESSENCE), with monitoring for GI adverse effects and rare risks (AKI, gallbladder disease, pancreatitis, thyroid C-cell tumors, retinopathy progression, lean mass loss). HCC surveillance with ultrasound and AFP every 6 months remains indicated only if cirrhosis is present.

AASLD 2023 Practice Guidance, updated by AASLD Practice Guidance October 2024 (resmetirom) and November 2025 (semaglutide) · reviewed 2026-07-23 ↗
Moreau C … Boursier J · Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology : the Official Clinical Practice Journal of the American Gastroenterological Association · IF 16.2 · PubMed ↗Permalink
Esophagus/Reflux retrospective · n=230 · Sep 8, 2026 · J Gastro Hep · IF 3.5

Clinical Spectrum of Esophageal Motility Disorders in Nonobstructive Dysphagia: A Multicenter, Multiethnic Study.

Diagnosticesophageal motilitydysphagiaachalasiabiomarker
Clinical takeawayIn patients with nonobstructive dysphagia, recognize weight loss, nausea, and absence of dyspepsia as clues to achalasia. Use RDC-IRP at approximately 18 mmHg during HRM to differentiate achalasia from EGJOO. This threshold was validated in an Asian population; generalizability to other demographics may require confirmation.
What it foundAmong 230 Asian dysphagia patients, achalasia (23.9%) was predicted by weight loss (adjusted OR 2.99), nausea/vomiting (OR 3.35), and absence of dyspepsia (OR 0.09). RDC-IRP at 18 mmHg threshold differentiated achalasia from non-achalasia with 90% sensitivity, 76.9% specificity, and AUC 0.894.
ContextAchalasia diagnosis relies on HRM and Chicago Classification criteria, which are standard. This study validates the RDC-IRP (rapid drink challenge integrated relaxation pressure) threshold for differentiation from EGJOO in a multiethnic Asian population, providing an actionable diagnostic refinement.
Refinessuggested applicable standard· International Working Group for Disorders of Gastrointestinal Motility and Function (Chicago Classification Working Group); Yadlapati R, Kahrilas PJ, Fox MR, et al. "Esophageal motility disorders on high-resolution manometry: Chicago classification version 4.0©." Neurogastroenterology & Motility. 2021;33(1):e14058

Decision at stakeUse rapid drink challenge-integrated relaxation pressure to discriminate achalasia from other esophageal motility disorders when baseline IRP values are borderline or overlap between diagnoses

Diagnose non-achalasia esophageal motility disorders on high-resolution manometry performed with the full CCv4.0 protocol, and treat the manometric pattern as a disorder only when it is accompanied by clinically relevant symptoms.

From our summary of this standard, unedited — the part the paper bears on. marks omitted text. Our wording, not the guideline's; read the source for its own text.

Our full summary of this standard

Diagnose non-achalasia esophageal motility disorders on high-resolution manometry performed with the full CCv4.0 protocol, and treat the manometric pattern as a disorder only when it is accompanied by clinically relevant symptoms. The protocol requires both positions: supine (60-second adaptation, 30-second landmark/baseline, ten 5 mL wet swallows, one multiple rapid swallow of five 2 mL swallows at 2-3 second intervals) and upright at >=80 degrees (five 5 mL wet swallows plus a 200 mL rapid drink challenge); solid swallows, a solid test meal, or pharmacologic provocation (amyl nitrite, cholecystokinin) are added when standard swallows do not explain the symptom. IRP thresholds are manufacturer- and position-specific (for the Medtronic system, abnormal median IRP is >=15 mmHg supine and >=12 mmHg upright). CCv4.0 grades diagnoses as conclusive or inconclusive: distal esophageal spasm requires a normal median IRP plus >=20% premature contractions (distal latency <4.5 s with DCI >=450 mmHg*s*cm) AND clinically relevant dysphagia or non-cardiac chest pain; hypercontractile esophagus requires a normal median IRP plus >=20% hypercontractile supine swallows (DCI >8,000 mmHg*s*cm) AND clinically relevant dysphagia or non-cardiac chest pain, with mechanical obstruction excluded. Ineffective esophageal motility requires a normal IRP in both positions plus >70% ineffective swallows or >=50% failed peristalsis, where an ineffective swallow is weak (DCI 100-450), failed (DCI <100), or fragmented; 50-70% ineffective swallows is inconclusive and requires supportive testing. Absent contractility requires a normal median IRP in both supine and upright positions with 100% failed peristalsis, and because achalasia can present this way, provocative testing and adjunctive investigation are needed when there is any clinical suspicion of achalasia. Manometric EGJ outflow obstruction is never conclusive on manometry alone: it requires an elevated median IRP in BOTH the primary and secondary position plus >=20% of swallows with elevated intrabolus pressure, with peristalsis preserved; a conclusive, clinically relevant diagnosis additionally requires compatible symptoms (dysphagia or non-cardiac chest pain) AND at least one supportive investigation showing obstruction (timed barium esophagram with tablet and/or functional lumen imaging probe). An isolated elevated supine IRP, an isolated elevated upright IRP, or isolated elevated intrabolus pressure alone are each inconclusive and do not establish EGJOO. CCv4.0 is a diagnostic classification and does not issue treatment recommendations; therapy for these entities is not traceable to this document.

International Working Group for Disorders of Gastrointestinal Motility and Function (Chicago Classification Working Group); Yadlapati R, Kahrilas PJ, Fox MR, et al. "Esophageal motility disorders on high-resolution manometry: Chicago classification version 4.0©." Neurogastroenterology & Motility. 2021;33(1):e14058 · reviewed 2026-07-19 ↗
Lim JX … Chuah KH · Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology · IF 3.5 · PubMed ↗Permalink

The read

the next 10, in full

IBD· 3

IBD prospective cohort · Sep 11, 2026 · J Clin Gastro · IF 2.9

Pharmacokinetic Predictor of Infection in Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Disease Treated With Intravenous and Subcutaneous Infliximab.

New evidencetherapeutic drug monitoringanti-TNFbiomarkerCrohn's disease
Clinical takeawayDuring IFX therapeutic drug monitoring, AUC predicted infection risk more strongly than Ctrough alone. Consider AUC in infection-risk assessment for dose decisions in IBD patients on IFX; however, this is observational evidence for an association, and whether AUC-guided dose adjustment will reduce infections has not been tested in a trial.
What it foundCumulative infliximab exposure over 8 weeks (AUC, OR 1.03 per 100 mg·d/L, 95% CI 1.01-1.05) predicted infection in a prospective cohort of 2451 treatment episodes, whereas trough concentration (Ctrough) did not.
ContextCtrough-based IFX monitoring is standard practice for optimizing drug levels and efficacy. This prospective cohort suggests cumulative exposure (AUC) may be a superior predictor of infection risk, potentially refining patient risk stratification; however, this challenges the current paradigm without proving that dose adjustment based on AUC will prevent infections.
Refinessuggested applicable standard· American College of Gastroenterology, 'ACG Clinical Guideline: Management of Crohn’s Disease in Adults' (Lichtenstein GR, Loftus EV, Afzali A, et al., Am J Gastroenterol 2025;120(6):1225-1264). DOI 10.14309/ajg.0000000000003465, PMID 40701562.

Decision at stakepharmacokinetic monitoring strategy for infliximab to predict and mitigate infection risk

DIAGNOSIS: Use fecal calprotectin (cutoff >50-100 μg/g) to differentiate inflammatory from noninflammatory disease OF THE COLON (strong, moderate). Ileocolonoscopy with biopsies for suspected CD; biopsy uninvolved mucosa to define histologic extent; small bowel imaging is part of the initial workup (key concepts, ungraded). CT enterography is comparable to MR enterography for small bowel detection; MRE should be used PREFERENTIALLY in patients younger than 35 years and where serial examinations are likely, because of radiation avoidance, MRE is not a blanket first choice. Intestinal ultrasound is a radiation-free ADJUNCT to diagnosis and to monitoring treatment response (key concept, ungraded, not a graded recommendation). Perform routine endoscopic CRC surveillance in Crohn's colitis (strong, moderate).

From our summary of this standard, unedited — the part the paper bears on. marks omitted text. Our wording, not the guideline's; read the source for its own text. The rest of this standard includes PERIANAL FISTULIZING, POST-OPERATIVE, SURGERY/ABSCESS and 3 more.

Our full summary of this standard

DIAGNOSIS: Use fecal calprotectin (cutoff >50-100 μg/g) to differentiate inflammatory from noninflammatory disease OF THE COLON (strong, moderate). Ileocolonoscopy with biopsies for suspected CD; biopsy uninvolved mucosa to define histologic extent; small bowel imaging is part of the initial workup (key concepts, ungraded). CT enterography is comparable to MR enterography for small bowel detection; MRE should be used PREFERENTIALLY in patients younger than 35 years and where serial examinations are likely, because of radiation avoidance, MRE is not a blanket first choice. Intestinal ultrasound is a radiation-free ADJUNCT to diagnosis and to monitoring treatment response (key concept, ungraded, not a graded recommendation). Perform routine endoscopic CRC surveillance in Crohn's colitis (strong, moderate). MILD-TO-MODERATE / LOWER PROGRESSION RISK: Recommend AGAINST oral mesalamine for induction or maintenance (strong, moderate); sulfasalazine should be considered ONLY for symptomatic mild COLONIC CD (key concept). Controlled ileal-release budesonide 9 mg daily for induction of symptomatic remission in mildly-to-moderately active ileocecal CD (strong, moderate), but recommend AGAINST ileal-release budesonide for MAINTENANCE (strong, low). MODERATE-TO-SEVERE / HIGHER RISK: SUGGEST AGAINST requiring failure of conventional therapy before initiating advanced therapy (conditional, LOW, a permission to skip step-up, not a mandate to start advanced therapy upfront). Oral corticosteroids for short-term induction only (strong, low). Recommend AGAINST azathioprine 1.5-2.5 mg/kg/d and 6-mercaptopurine 0.75-1.5 mg/kg/d for INDUCTION (strong, moderate), but SUGGEST the same agents and doses for MAINTENANCE after corticosteroid-induced remission (conditional, low). Check TPMT before starting azathioprine/6-MP (strong, low); measure NUDT15 variants in patients of East Asian ancestry and TPMT variants in all patients prior to thiopurine initiation (strong, moderate). Methotrexate up to 25 mg weekly IM/SC for maintenance after corticosteroid induction (conditional, low). Anti-TNF agents (IV infliximab, SC adalimumab, SC certolizumab pegol) for induction and maintenance (strong, moderate). Recommend COMBINATION IV infliximab + thiopurine over either agent alone in patients naive to both (strong, moderate). Vedolizumab IV for induction and maintenance of symptomatic remission (strong, moderate). Ustekinumab (strong, moderate); risankizumab (strong, moderate), and risankizumab over ustekinumab in prior anti-TNF exposure (conditional, low); mirikizumab (strong, moderate); guselkumab IV-then-SC or all-SC (strong, moderate). Upadacitinib for induction and maintenance in patients PREVIOUSLY EXPOSED TO ANTI-TNF (strong, moderate), the ACG does not endorse it as a first-line biologic-naive option. SC infliximab and SC vedolizumab are maintenance options in responders to IV induction (strong, moderate). PERIANAL FISTULIZING: infliximab for induction (strong, moderate); adalimumab (conditional, low); antibiotics added to infliximab or adalimumab (conditional, very low); vedolizumab, ustekinumab, upadacitinib each (conditional, VERY LOW). Drain perianal abscesses and place setons before escalating advanced therapy (key concept). POST-OPERATIVE: endoscopic assessment at 6-12 months after surgically induced remission over no monitoring (conditional, moderate); in LOW post-op recurrence risk, continued observation rather than immediate medical therapy (conditional, very low); imidazole antibiotics (metronidazole) 1-2 g/d after small intestinal resection (conditional, low); in HIGH-risk CD, anti-TNF to prevent endoscopic recurrence (STRONG, moderate) and vedolizumab (CONDITIONAL, low), these two are not co-equal. SURGERY/ABSCESS: intra-abdominal abscess >2 cm should be treated with antibiotics plus a drainage procedure, and immunosuppression HELD until drainage is achieved (conditional, low). DISEASE MODIFIERS: counsel active smokers to quit; use NSAIDs with caution; assess stress, depression and anxiety as part of comprehensive care (key concepts).

American College of Gastroenterology, 'ACG Clinical Guideline: Management of Crohn’s Disease in Adults' (Lichtenstein GR, Loftus EV, Afzali A, et al., Am J Gastroenterol 2025;120(6):1225-1264). DOI 10.14309/ajg.0000000000003465, PMID 40701562. · reviewed 2026-07-21 ↗
Kim JE … Kim YH · Journal of Clinical Gastroenterology · IF 2.9 · PubMed ↗Permalink
IBD prospective cohort · n=606 · Sep 8, 2026 · Clin Gastro Hep · IF 16.2

Influence of socioeconomic development on incidence and disease phenotype in inflammatory bowel disease: a population-based incident study across 16 regions.

EpidemiologyCrohn's diseaseulcerative colitisepidemiologyperianal disease
Clinical takeawayIn newly industrializing regions experiencing ongoing urbanization and economic development, expect higher IBD incidence, particularly CD, and heighten diagnostic suspicion accordingly. In more economically developed settings (higher Human Development Index), perianal CD is more common and should be specifically sought during CD evaluation. Disease activity and severity at presentation do not differ by development level, so initial treatment intensity should not be modified based on regional development.
What it foundUrbanization (per 10% increase in urban population) increased IBD incidence (IRR 1.68 overall; CD 1.73, UC 1.62). CD incidence associated with national HDI (IRR 4.05) and SDI (IRR 2.96). Both national and subnational HDI associated with perianal CD (aOR 2.61 and 2.40 respectively). Disease activity and treatment patterns unchanged by development indices.
ContextPopulation-based surveillance across 16 newly industrialized regions documents variation in IBD incidence and clinical phenotype correlating with socioeconomic development indices, though mechanistic drivers remain incompletely characterized.
Refinessuggested applicable standard· American College of Gastroenterology, 'ACG Clinical Guideline: Management of Crohn’s Disease in Adults' (Lichtenstein GR, Loftus EV, Afzali A, et al., Am J Gastroenterol 2025;120(6):1225-1264). DOI 10.14309/ajg.0000000000003465, PMID 40701562.

Decision at stakeRecognition of perianal CD phenotype during initial workup in high-development regions

DIAGNOSIS: Use fecal calprotectin (cutoff >50-100 μg/g) to differentiate inflammatory from noninflammatory disease OF THE COLON (strong, moderate). Ileocolonoscopy with biopsies for suspected CD; biopsy uninvolved mucosa to define histologic extent; small bowel imaging is part of the initial workup (key concepts, ungraded). CT enterography is comparable to MR enterography for small bowel detection; MRE should be used PREFERENTIALLY in patients younger than 35 years and where serial examinations are likely, because of radiation avoidance, MRE is not a blanket first choice. Intestinal ultrasound is a radiation-free ADJUNCT to diagnosis and to monitoring treatment response (key concept, ungraded, not a graded recommendation). Perform routine endoscopic CRC surveillance in Crohn's colitis (strong, moderate).

From our summary of this standard, unedited — the part the paper bears on. marks omitted text. Our wording, not the guideline's; read the source for its own text. The rest of this standard includes PERIANAL FISTULIZING, POST-OPERATIVE, SURGERY/ABSCESS and 3 more.

Our full summary of this standard

DIAGNOSIS: Use fecal calprotectin (cutoff >50-100 μg/g) to differentiate inflammatory from noninflammatory disease OF THE COLON (strong, moderate). Ileocolonoscopy with biopsies for suspected CD; biopsy uninvolved mucosa to define histologic extent; small bowel imaging is part of the initial workup (key concepts, ungraded). CT enterography is comparable to MR enterography for small bowel detection; MRE should be used PREFERENTIALLY in patients younger than 35 years and where serial examinations are likely, because of radiation avoidance, MRE is not a blanket first choice. Intestinal ultrasound is a radiation-free ADJUNCT to diagnosis and to monitoring treatment response (key concept, ungraded, not a graded recommendation). Perform routine endoscopic CRC surveillance in Crohn's colitis (strong, moderate). MILD-TO-MODERATE / LOWER PROGRESSION RISK: Recommend AGAINST oral mesalamine for induction or maintenance (strong, moderate); sulfasalazine should be considered ONLY for symptomatic mild COLONIC CD (key concept). Controlled ileal-release budesonide 9 mg daily for induction of symptomatic remission in mildly-to-moderately active ileocecal CD (strong, moderate), but recommend AGAINST ileal-release budesonide for MAINTENANCE (strong, low). MODERATE-TO-SEVERE / HIGHER RISK: SUGGEST AGAINST requiring failure of conventional therapy before initiating advanced therapy (conditional, LOW, a permission to skip step-up, not a mandate to start advanced therapy upfront). Oral corticosteroids for short-term induction only (strong, low). Recommend AGAINST azathioprine 1.5-2.5 mg/kg/d and 6-mercaptopurine 0.75-1.5 mg/kg/d for INDUCTION (strong, moderate), but SUGGEST the same agents and doses for MAINTENANCE after corticosteroid-induced remission (conditional, low). Check TPMT before starting azathioprine/6-MP (strong, low); measure NUDT15 variants in patients of East Asian ancestry and TPMT variants in all patients prior to thiopurine initiation (strong, moderate). Methotrexate up to 25 mg weekly IM/SC for maintenance after corticosteroid induction (conditional, low). Anti-TNF agents (IV infliximab, SC adalimumab, SC certolizumab pegol) for induction and maintenance (strong, moderate). Recommend COMBINATION IV infliximab + thiopurine over either agent alone in patients naive to both (strong, moderate). Vedolizumab IV for induction and maintenance of symptomatic remission (strong, moderate). Ustekinumab (strong, moderate); risankizumab (strong, moderate), and risankizumab over ustekinumab in prior anti-TNF exposure (conditional, low); mirikizumab (strong, moderate); guselkumab IV-then-SC or all-SC (strong, moderate). Upadacitinib for induction and maintenance in patients PREVIOUSLY EXPOSED TO ANTI-TNF (strong, moderate), the ACG does not endorse it as a first-line biologic-naive option. SC infliximab and SC vedolizumab are maintenance options in responders to IV induction (strong, moderate). PERIANAL FISTULIZING: infliximab for induction (strong, moderate); adalimumab (conditional, low); antibiotics added to infliximab or adalimumab (conditional, very low); vedolizumab, ustekinumab, upadacitinib each (conditional, VERY LOW). Drain perianal abscesses and place setons before escalating advanced therapy (key concept). POST-OPERATIVE: endoscopic assessment at 6-12 months after surgically induced remission over no monitoring (conditional, moderate); in LOW post-op recurrence risk, continued observation rather than immediate medical therapy (conditional, very low); imidazole antibiotics (metronidazole) 1-2 g/d after small intestinal resection (conditional, low); in HIGH-risk CD, anti-TNF to prevent endoscopic recurrence (STRONG, moderate) and vedolizumab (CONDITIONAL, low), these two are not co-equal. SURGERY/ABSCESS: intra-abdominal abscess >2 cm should be treated with antibiotics plus a drainage procedure, and immunosuppression HELD until drainage is achieved (conditional, low). DISEASE MODIFIERS: counsel active smokers to quit; use NSAIDs with caution; assess stress, depression and anxiety as part of comprehensive care (key concepts).

American College of Gastroenterology, 'ACG Clinical Guideline: Management of Crohn’s Disease in Adults' (Lichtenstein GR, Loftus EV, Afzali A, et al., Am J Gastroenterol 2025;120(6):1225-1264). DOI 10.14309/ajg.0000000000003465, PMID 40701562. · reviewed 2026-07-21 ↗
Mak JWY … GIVES-21 Consortium · Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology : the Official Clinical Practice Journal of the American Gastroenterological Association · IF 16.2 · PubMed ↗Permalink
IBD prospective cohort · n=391 · Sep 10, 2026 · Aliment Pharm Ther · IF 6.7

Real-World Effectiveness and Safety of Upadacitinib in Patients With Crohn's Disease-A Multicentre Prospective Study From the Italian Group for the Study of Inflammatory Bowel Diseases (IG-IBD).

New evidenceCrohn's diseaseJAK inhibitors
Clinical takeawayIn AT-experienced, moderate-to-severe CD patients, upadacitinib is an effective next-step option with particular benefit for those with active extraintestinal manifestations. Assess for remission by week 12 (51.2% achieved); higher baseline HBI predicts lower remission likelihood. Safety profile is favourable in this real-world cohort, though evidence is observational rather than randomised.
What it foundIn AT-experienced CD, upadacitinib achieved 54.7% remission (HBI ≤ 4) at week 24, 65.7% complete resolution of active extraintestinal manifestations by week 24, 11.3% discontinuation by week 24 (3.1% from adverse events), and no major cardiovascular, thromboembolic, or malignancy events.
ContextUpadacitinib was approved for moderate-to-severe CD, but real-world prospective data in heavily pretreated populations was limited. This multicentre observational study confirms sustained efficacy through 6 months and provides reassurance on safety specifically in AT-experienced patients-those for whom earlier advanced therapies have failed-addressing a key knowledge gap for practising clinicians.
Reinforcessuggested applicable standard· American College of Gastroenterology, 'ACG Clinical Guideline: Management of Crohn’s Disease in Adults' (Lichtenstein GR, Loftus EV, Afzali A, et al., Am J Gastroenterol 2025;120(6):1225-1264). DOI 10.14309/ajg.0000000000003465, PMID 40701562.

Decision at stakeUse upadacitinib for induction and maintenance in patients previously exposed to anti-TNF agents

Upadacitinib for induction and maintenance in patients PREVIOUSLY EXPOSED TO ANTI-TNF (strong, moderate), the ACG does not endorse it as a first-line biologic-naive option.

From our summary of this standard, unedited — the part the paper bears on. marks omitted text. Our wording, not the guideline's; read the source for its own text. The rest of this standard includes DIAGNOSIS, PERIANAL FISTULIZING, POST-OPERATIVE and 3 more.

Our full summary of this standard

DIAGNOSIS: Use fecal calprotectin (cutoff >50-100 μg/g) to differentiate inflammatory from noninflammatory disease OF THE COLON (strong, moderate). Ileocolonoscopy with biopsies for suspected CD; biopsy uninvolved mucosa to define histologic extent; small bowel imaging is part of the initial workup (key concepts, ungraded). CT enterography is comparable to MR enterography for small bowel detection; MRE should be used PREFERENTIALLY in patients younger than 35 years and where serial examinations are likely, because of radiation avoidance, MRE is not a blanket first choice. Intestinal ultrasound is a radiation-free ADJUNCT to diagnosis and to monitoring treatment response (key concept, ungraded, not a graded recommendation). Perform routine endoscopic CRC surveillance in Crohn's colitis (strong, moderate). MILD-TO-MODERATE / LOWER PROGRESSION RISK: Recommend AGAINST oral mesalamine for induction or maintenance (strong, moderate); sulfasalazine should be considered ONLY for symptomatic mild COLONIC CD (key concept). Controlled ileal-release budesonide 9 mg daily for induction of symptomatic remission in mildly-to-moderately active ileocecal CD (strong, moderate), but recommend AGAINST ileal-release budesonide for MAINTENANCE (strong, low). MODERATE-TO-SEVERE / HIGHER RISK: SUGGEST AGAINST requiring failure of conventional therapy before initiating advanced therapy (conditional, LOW, a permission to skip step-up, not a mandate to start advanced therapy upfront). Oral corticosteroids for short-term induction only (strong, low). Recommend AGAINST azathioprine 1.5-2.5 mg/kg/d and 6-mercaptopurine 0.75-1.5 mg/kg/d for INDUCTION (strong, moderate), but SUGGEST the same agents and doses for MAINTENANCE after corticosteroid-induced remission (conditional, low). Check TPMT before starting azathioprine/6-MP (strong, low); measure NUDT15 variants in patients of East Asian ancestry and TPMT variants in all patients prior to thiopurine initiation (strong, moderate). Methotrexate up to 25 mg weekly IM/SC for maintenance after corticosteroid induction (conditional, low). Anti-TNF agents (IV infliximab, SC adalimumab, SC certolizumab pegol) for induction and maintenance (strong, moderate). Recommend COMBINATION IV infliximab + thiopurine over either agent alone in patients naive to both (strong, moderate). Vedolizumab IV for induction and maintenance of symptomatic remission (strong, moderate). Ustekinumab (strong, moderate); risankizumab (strong, moderate), and risankizumab over ustekinumab in prior anti-TNF exposure (conditional, low); mirikizumab (strong, moderate); guselkumab IV-then-SC or all-SC (strong, moderate). Upadacitinib for induction and maintenance in patients PREVIOUSLY EXPOSED TO ANTI-TNF (strong, moderate), the ACG does not endorse it as a first-line biologic-naive option. SC infliximab and SC vedolizumab are maintenance options in responders to IV induction (strong, moderate). PERIANAL FISTULIZING: infliximab for induction (strong, moderate); adalimumab (conditional, low); antibiotics added to infliximab or adalimumab (conditional, very low); vedolizumab, ustekinumab, upadacitinib each (conditional, VERY LOW). Drain perianal abscesses and place setons before escalating advanced therapy (key concept). POST-OPERATIVE: endoscopic assessment at 6-12 months after surgically induced remission over no monitoring (conditional, moderate); in LOW post-op recurrence risk, continued observation rather than immediate medical therapy (conditional, very low); imidazole antibiotics (metronidazole) 1-2 g/d after small intestinal resection (conditional, low); in HIGH-risk CD, anti-TNF to prevent endoscopic recurrence (STRONG, moderate) and vedolizumab (CONDITIONAL, low), these two are not co-equal. SURGERY/ABSCESS: intra-abdominal abscess >2 cm should be treated with antibiotics plus a drainage procedure, and immunosuppression HELD until drainage is achieved (conditional, low). DISEASE MODIFIERS: counsel active smokers to quit; use NSAIDs with caution; assess stress, depression and anxiety as part of comprehensive care (key concepts).

American College of Gastroenterology, 'ACG Clinical Guideline: Management of Crohn’s Disease in Adults' (Lichtenstein GR, Loftus EV, Afzali A, et al., Am J Gastroenterol 2025;120(6):1225-1264). DOI 10.14309/ajg.0000000000003465, PMID 40701562. · reviewed 2026-07-21 ↗
Barberio B … Savarino EV · Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics · IF 6.7 · PubMed ↗Permalink

Hepatology· 4

Hepatology prospective cohort · n=938 · Sep 10, 2026 · Clin Gastro Hep · IF 16.2

Assessing Strategies to Mitigate the Effect of Age When Using FIB-4 Index to Screen for MASLD-Related Liver Fibrosis.

New evidenceMASLDbiomarkercirrhosis
Clinical takeawayIn MASLD patients at age extremes (<35 or ≥65 years), use FIB-3 (AST/ALT/platelet-based, age-omitted) instead of standard FIB-4 for fibrosis screening. It maintains equivalent diagnostic accuracy without the age-related bias that causes FIB-4 to underestimate risk in younger patients and overestimate in older patients, pending prospective confirmation for guideline adoption.
What it foundFIB-3 (age-removed from FIB-4; exact formula in source paper) maintained diagnostic accuracy of standard FIB-4 for detection of ≥F2 and ≥F3 MASLD fibrosis (AUROCs 0.76-0.78 vs MRE, 0.77-0.81 vs biopsy, all five strategies similar), while demonstrating improved sensitivity-specificity balance specifically at age extremes (<35 and ≥65 years).
ContextFIB-4 is guideline-recommended for MASLD screening but has known limitations at age extremes: the formula overestimates fibrosis in older patients and underestimates it in younger patients because age is a direct component. This study validates that removing age (FIB-3) maintains equivalent diagnostic accuracy while eliminating this bias, suggesting age-independent calculation could improve screening across age strata.
No standard claimed for this paper

Every paper is compared to the standard governing its question. This one is not: either no standard in the corpus matches it, or the comparison did not hold up on review and was withdrawn rather than published unverified. Both are logged.

Nammi J … Bril F · Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology : the Official Clinical Practice Journal of the American Gastroenterological Association · IF 16.2 · PubMed ↗Permalink
Hepatology retrospective · n=93 · Sep 8, 2026 · Aliment Pharm Ther · IF 6.7

Pharmacokinetic and Pharmacodynamic Variability Predict Late Events After Paediatric Liver Transplantation: Derivation and External Validation of a Landmark Risk Score.

New evidenceliver transplantpediatricbiomarker
Clinical takeawayAt 12 months post-pediatric liver transplant in recipients without major early complications (6-12 months post-transplant), calculate tacrolimus, aspartate aminotransferase, and total bilirubin variability from prior 6 months of measurements; score of 2-3 identifies patients at 4-9x higher risk for late complications or graft loss, warranting closer surveillance. Population predominantly biliary atresia.
What it foundA variability-based risk score (tacrolimus >25%, aspartate aminotransferase >50%, total bilirubin >50%) derived and externally validated at 12 months post-transplant, where score 2-3 identified higher-risk patients with hazard ratio 4.48 (95% CI 1.79-11.17) in derivation and 8.90 (95% CI 2.66-29.81) in validation cohorts.
ContextChallenges the sufficiency of cross-sectional tacrolimus concentrations and static liver biochemistry in post-transplant monitoring. Demonstrates that longitudinal instability and variability are better predictors of adverse long-term outcomes. Derived and externally validated in pediatric recipients, predominantly with biliary atresia, without early major complications.
Refinessuggested applicable standard· AASLD/AST, 'AASLD AST Practice Guideline on adult liver transplantation: Candidate evaluation' (Dove L et al., Hepatology 2026;83(6):1609-1645). DOI 10.1097/HEP.0000000000001644, PMID 41405234.

Decision at stakeidentify which post-transplant liver recipients require intensive long-term surveillance

No single passage of this standard matched the paper closely enough to quote, so none is shown. The standard is cited above.

Our full summary of this standard

Refer patients with decompensated cirrhosis (including those with MELD-Na <15 or MELD 3.0 <15 if they have clinically significant portal hypertension, recurrent ascites, hepatic encephalopathy, or variceal bleeding), acute liver failure meeting King's College Criteria/UNOS Status 1A, or HCC within Milan/UCSF criteria for comprehensive multidisciplinary liver transplant evaluation, with MELD 3.0 driving UNOS waitlist allocation and MELD exception scoring for HCC/HPS/FAP. Optimize modifiable risk factors before listing (alcohol abstinence, HCV DAA treatment, vaccinations, DM/obesity/OSA and dental clearance) and use bridging/downstaging locoregional therapy for HCC while awaiting transplant. After transplant, maintain lifelong immunosuppression with tacrolimus plus mycophenolate ± tapered steroids alongside infection prophylaxis and recurrent-disease surveillance.

AASLD/AST, 'AASLD AST Practice Guideline on adult liver transplantation: Candidate evaluation' (Dove L et al., Hepatology 2026;83(6):1609-1645). DOI 10.1097/HEP.0000000000001644, PMID 41405234. · reviewed 2026-07-21 ↗
Tang H … Zhang M · Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics · IF 6.7 · PubMed ↗Permalink
Hepatology retrospective · n=150 · Sep 9, 2026 · J Gastro Hep · IF 3.5

The Impact of HCC Surveillance on Tumor Features and Receipt of Curative Therapy: A Focus on Chronic Hepatitis B and MASLD.

New evidencehepatocellular carcinomaMASLDviral hepatitishealth services
Clinical takeawayEnsure HCC surveillance in cirrhotic patients, HBV carriers, and MASLD patients. Surveillance-diagnosed patients had 17.8-fold higher odds of receiving curative therapy, indicating earlier detection and better candidacy for potentially curative treatment. This reinforces guideline-recommended screening in at-risk populations; the finding that 72% of non-surveillance HCC cases had HBV and 54% had cirrhosis underscores real-world surveillance gaps despite guideline consensus.
What it foundHCC surveillance independently predicted curative therapy receipt (OR 17.78, 95% CI 5.56-56.88); in HBV carriers the effect was stronger (OR 26.79) and higher BMI also predicted curative receipt (OR 1.18 per unit). Surveillance-diagnosed patients presented with smaller tumors, lower rates of multifocal disease, and less vascular invasion.
ContextThis literature reports that hepatocellular carcinoma surveillance is associated with differences in tumor features and receipt of curative therapy in patients with chronic hepatitis B and MASLD.
Emergingsuggested applicable standard· American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases / Infectious Diseases Society of America (AASLD/IDSA), "AASLD/IDSA Practice Guideline on Treatment of Chronic Hepatitis B," Hepatology, 2026

Decision at stakewhether and how to implement HCC surveillance in chronic hepatitis B patients, particularly those with cirrhosis

(6) HCC SURVEILLANCE (all CONDITIONAL, VERY LOW certainty; modality/interval per AASLD 2023 HCC Practice Guidance), Rec 6: after HBsAg loss, continue surveillance in those with cirrhosis, family history of HCC, men who lost HBsAg after age 40, and women who lost HBsAg after age 50. Rec 9: in HBV-HCV coinfection, AASLD recommends treating HCV and suggests HCC surveillance per HBV mono-infection criteria.

From our summary of this standard, unedited — the part the paper bears on. marks omitted text. Our wording, not the guideline's; read the source for its own text.

Our full summary of this standard

The 2026 AASLD/IDSA guideline addresses six PICO questions only; it states explicitly that all other 2018 AASLD recommendations for CHB management remain applicable, and that screening/diagnosis were out of scope. Baseline evaluation and the standard treatment indications (cirrhosis with detectable HBV DNA; HBeAg-positive immune-active with ALT >2x ULN and HBV DNA >20,000 IU/mL; HBeAg-negative immune-active with ALT >2x ULN and HBV DNA >2,000 IU/mL; prophylaxis for reactivation risk during immunosuppression) derive from the 2018 document, not this update, which lists 'treatment of HBeAg-positive and -negative immune active CHB with ALT >2x ULN', treatment of children, treatment of cirrhosis, low-level viremia, virologic breakthrough, and special populations (transplant, acute HBV, HCV/HDV/HIV coinfection) as topics 'well covered in previous AASLD 2018 Guidance and for which recommendations have not changed'. Preferred agents remain entecavir, TDF, or TAF. THE SIX 2026 RECOMMENDATIONS: (1) PMTCT, for pregnant persons with HBV DNA >200,000 IU/mL at any time point during pregnancy, regardless of HBeAg status, AASLD RECOMMENDS initiating TDF or TAF at gestational week 28 (STRONG recommendation, MODERATE certainty, the only strong recommendation in the guideline); TDF has a more extensive safety record in pregnancy than TAF. Implementation qualifiers: initiate immediately if care is first sought after week 28; initiate at week 16 if infant HBIG will be unavailable (with subsequent infant vaccination); consider earlier initiation when amniocentesis is anticipated (transmission risk is increased with HBV DNA >2,000,000 IU/mL) or when preterm labor risk is high; continue TDF/TAF if already on it, switch entecavir or other agents to TDF/TAF; if treatment was solely for perinatal prophylaxis it may be discontinued at delivery, with HBV DNA and ALT monitored every 1-3 months for up to 6 months for withdrawal flare and treatment reinitiated if ALT >=5x ULN; use TDF or TAF in breastfeeding persons requiring treatment. (2) HORIZONTAL TRANSMISSION, for HBsAg-positive viremic persons not meeting disease-specific treatment indications who are in high-risk scenarios for transmission to others, AASLD SUGGESTS a shared decision-making approach regarding antiviral treatment (CONDITIONAL, VERY LOW certainty). Qualifiers the guideline stresses: the decision weighs exposure risk and the vaccine/immunity status of contacts, favoring treatment if contacts are unvaccinated, vaccine-nonresponsive, immunocompromised, or of unknown vaccine status; persons requesting treatment for prevention may be prescribed it since risks may not be disclosed; explicitly, people with CHB must NOT be restricted in daily activities, contact sports, school, or professional training and must NOT be required to take antivirals because of transmission risk in those settings; routine contact, shared meals, and hugging are not transmission routes (avoid sharing toothbrushes/razors); most healthcare workers with CHB are NOT high-risk, but those performing SHEA Category III exposure-prone procedures may require antivirals (SHEA target HBV DNA <1000 IU/mL); neither CDC nor SHEA requires disclosure to patients or staff; anti-stigma framing is part of the recommendation. (3) IMMUNE-TOLERANT PHASE, defined as HBeAg-positive, HBV DNA >10^7 IU/mL, and normal ALT; AASLD SUGGESTS antiviral therapy for those over age 40 years, OR with significant liver inflammation (grade >=2) or fibrosis (>=F2) on biopsy or noninvasive tests (CONDITIONAL, VERY LOW certainty). For persons under age 40 who are interested in starting treatment earlier, AASLD suggests shared decision-making weighing risk factors and the benefits and risks of treatment. Accurate phase identification requires persistently normal ALT on >=2 measurements >=6 months apart, using ULN 35 U/L (males) and 25 U/L (females). (4) INDETERMINATE ('grey zone') PHASE, the HBeAg-negative indeterminate phase is defined as HBsAg-positive, HBeAg-negative persons whose ALT and/or HBV DNA fall outside the thresholds for HBeAg-negative immune-active CHB (ALT >2x ULN and HBV DNA >2,000 IU/mL) and outside those for inactive CHB (HBV DNA <2,000 IU/mL with normal ALT), comprising predominantly two subgroups, (I) normal (<ULN) or mildly elevated (<2x ULN) ALT with HBV DNA >=2,000 IU/mL, or (II) elevated ALT (>ULN) with HBV DNA <2,000 IU/mL, with ALT interpreted against ULN 35 U/L (males) and 25 U/L (females) and phase assigned on >=2 ALT and HBV DNA measurements over a 6-12 month period; in adults who are HBsAg-positive, HBeAg-negative, without cirrhosis and in the indeterminate phase so defined, AASLD SUGGESTS antiviral therapy using a shared decision-making approach assessing risks and benefits, and re-evaluating that decision at each follow-up visit if treatment has not been initiated (CONDITIONAL, VERY LOW certainty). Decision-relevant factors include fibrosis stage, age, and sex, e.g. age >40, male sex, and low-normal platelets (<180 k/mm3) favor treatment. (5) DISCONTINUATION, in adults with CHB who are HBeAg-negative, without cirrhosis, with sustained undetectable HBV DNA on nucleos(t)ide analogue therapy, AASLD SUGGESTS NOT withdrawing NA therapy until HBsAg loss (CONDITIONAL, VERY LOW certainty). If a patient nonetheless has a strong desire to stop, shared decision-making applies and ALL of the following must be met: no history of advanced fibrosis/cirrhosis, hepatic decompensation (variceal bleed, ascites, encephalopathy, hepatorenal syndrome), HCC, or extrahepatic HBV complications; if HBeAg-positive at treatment start, HBeAg seroconversion to anti-HBe-positive for >=1 year with undetectable HBV DNA >=2 years; if HBeAg-negative at start, undetectable HBV DNA >=2 years; no HIV or HDV coinfection; quantitative HBsAg <100 IU/mL; and willingness to adhere to frequent monitoring. After stopping, monitor ALT and HBV DNA every 1-3 months for 6 months, then every 3 months for 6-12 months, then every 3-6 months. Restart antivirals IMMEDIATELY if HBV DNA >=10,000 IU/mL (4 log IU/mL) at any time regardless of ALT, OR ALT >=5x ULN regardless of HBV DNA, OR total bilirubin >2.5 mg/dL. (6) HCC SURVEILLANCE (all CONDITIONAL, VERY LOW certainty; modality/interval per AASLD 2023 HCC Practice Guidance), Rec 6: after HBsAg loss, continue surveillance in those with cirrhosis, family history of HCC, men who lost HBsAg after age 40, and women who lost HBsAg after age 50. Rec 7: in HBV-HDV coinfection, surveil adults independent of cirrhosis status; in children, individualize because HCC risk in that population is unknown. Rec 8: in HBV-HIV coinfection, surveil men >=18 years and women >=40 years. Rec 9: in HBV-HCV coinfection, AASLD recommends treating HCV and suggests HCC surveillance per HBV mono-infection criteria. Where a person has more than one coinfection, the surveillance recommendation should follow the coinfection carrying the highest associated risk. The guideline notes that most of its recommendations rest on low or very low certainty evidence and that shared decision-making, not uniform policy, is the intended mode of application.

American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases / Infectious Diseases Society of America (AASLD/IDSA), "AASLD/IDSA Practice Guideline on Treatment of Chronic Hepatitis B," Hepatology, 2026 · reviewed 2026-07-23 ↗
Huang SL … Kao JH · Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology · IF 3.5 · PubMed ↗Permalink
Hepatology prospective cohort · n=138,996 · Sep 7, 2026 · Aliment Pharm Ther · IF 6.7

Long-Term Major Adverse Liver Outcomes and Oncological Outcomes Across Steatotic Liver Disease Subtypes Classified Using the MetALD-ALD Prediction Index.

Epidemiologyhepatocellular carcinomaMASLDalcohol-associated liver diseaseepidemiology
Clinical takeawayIn UK Biobank participants free of cancer at baseline, ALD was associated with 1.70-fold higher MALO risk and 3.07-fold higher HCC risk compared with MASLD. MAPI specifics and classification thresholds live in the source. Alcohol underreporting may cause misclassification between MetALD and ALD. Prospective clinical utility and practical implementation for routine surveillance and referral decisions remain unvalidated.
What it foundAmong 138,996 SLD patients, ALD conferred 1.70-fold higher risk of major adverse liver outcomes and 3.07-fold higher hepatocellular carcinoma risk compared with MASLD; MetALD showed intermediate risks for cancer but not MALO.
ContextRetrospective risk stratification in a UK biobank cohort. Demonstrates distinct outcome risks by SLD subtype but does not establish prospective validity of MAPI as a practical classification tool for clinic-based use.
Reinforcessuggested applicable standard· American College of Gastroenterology (ACG), "ACG Clinical Guideline: Alcohol-Associated Liver Disease" (Jophlin, Singal, Bataller, et al.), Am J Gastroenterol 2024;119(1):30-54

Decision at stakeWhether hepatocellular carcinoma surveillance should be intensified in alcohol-associated liver disease

For alcohol-associated hepatitis (AH), severity is stratified by MELD: MELD >20 defines severe AH, which carries high short-term mortality and should preferably be managed in hospital; MELD ≤20 defines moderate AH.

From our summary of this standard, unedited — the part the paper bears on. marks omitted text. Our wording, not the guideline's; read the source for its own text.

Our full summary of this standard

Treatment of AUD with sustained abstinence is the most effective strategy to prevent progression and improve long-term outcomes at any stage of ALD; ACG recommends brief screening with a tool such as AUDIT-C (strong, high), brief motivational interventions (strong, low), and integrated multidisciplinary care combining behavioral therapy and/or pharmacotherapy (strong, low). AUD pharmacotherapy recommendations are scoped specifically to COMPENSATED ALD and are not co-equal: baclofen is recommended as an option (strong recommendation, moderate evidence); acamprosate or naltrexone are only suggested as options (conditional, very low); gabapentin or topiramate are suggested as options (conditional, very low); disulfiram is suggested AGAINST along any spectrum of ALD (conditional, very low). For severe alcohol withdrawal, benzodiazepines are the treatment of choice but with explicitly cautious use and careful monitoring given their potential to precipitate or exacerbate hepatic encephalopathy (strong, moderate); AWS is managed per CIWA-Ar protocol, differentiating it from HE while acknowledging the two can coexist. For alcohol-associated hepatitis (AH), severity is stratified by MELD: MELD >20 defines severe AH, which carries high short-term mortality and should preferably be managed in hospital; MELD ≤20 defines moderate AH. In severe AH (MELD >20) ACG recommends corticosteroid therapy ONLY if there are no contraindications (strong, moderate); active infection (including untreated HBV infection), uncontrolled diabetes mellitus, gastrointestinal bleeding, and severe renal failure are contraindications to corticosteroid use, though corticosteroids can be started after adequate control or reversal of infection, renal failure, and gastrointestinal bleeding. Prednisolone is preferred over prednisone; both are dosed 40 mg/day for a total of 4 weeks, with IV methylprednisolone 32 mg/day as the alternative for patients unable to take oral medication; there is no evidence supporting rapid vs slow tapering after the 4-week course. Corticosteroid response is assessed by Lille score at day 7 OR day 4 (day-4 shown as accurate as day-7); among non-responders (Lille >0.45) corticosteroids should be discontinued. ACG recommends IV N-acetylcysteine as an adjuvant to corticosteroids in severe AH (strong, moderate), while explicitly noting that other society guidelines have not adopted this recommendation. ACG recommends AGAINST pentoxifylline (strong, moderate) and AGAINST universal prophylactic antibiotics in hospitalized severe AH (strong, moderate); data on G-CSF and microbiome-based therapies are insufficient. Nutrition: target 35 kcal/kg/day with 1.2-1.5 g/kg/day protein; patients consuming <21 kcal/kg/day should receive nutritional support, preferably oral/enteral, oral nutritional supplements first, escalating to enteral nutrition if caloric targets remain unmet (strong, moderate). Thiamine, vitamin B12 and zinc deficiencies are common in AH and should be supplemented. For severe AH unresponsive to medical management with high risk of death, early liver transplantation for highly selected patients should be considered according to regional and institutional protocols (conditional recommendation, low level of evidence); LT selection must not be based solely on an arbitrary duration of sobriety, and should rest on detailed psychosocial evaluation by a social worker and addiction specialist, optionally supported by tools such as SIPAT, HRAR, MAPS, HPSS or SALT. For severe AH with 4 or more organ failures, non-responsive to corticosteroids and ineligible for early LT, palliative care engagement is appropriate.

American College of Gastroenterology (ACG), "ACG Clinical Guideline: Alcohol-Associated Liver Disease" (Jophlin, Singal, Bataller, et al.), Am J Gastroenterol 2024;119(1):30-54 · reviewed 2026-07-20 ↗
Li Y … Wu S · Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics · IF 6.7 · PubMed ↗Permalink

Endoscopy· 1

Endoscopy guideline · Sep 9, 2026 · Clin Gastro Hep · IF 16.2

AGA Clinical Practice Update on Management of Ampullary Neoplasms: Expert Review.

Guideline / reviewguideline
Clinical takeawayFor patients with suspected ampullary adenoma, use a side-viewing duodenoscope (not forward-viewing gastroscope) with careful biopsy technique-avoiding the pancreatic orifice to minimize pancreatitis risk-and obtain at least 6 biopsies, prioritizing ulcerated or indurated areas, to assess for occult malignancy. Perform EUS staging in adenomas considered for endoscopic resection, except lesions <1 cm with no worrisome features.
What it found20%-40% of ampullary adenomas harbor malignancy; AGA recommends side-viewing duodenoscope assessment with at least 6 biopsies from ulcerated or indurated areas, and EUS staging for adenomas amenable to endoscopic resection.
ContextAmpullary neoplasia is rare (0.6%-0.8% of GI cancers) with 5-year survival ranging 20%-75% by stage. This AGA expert review fills a documented gap in formalized guidance and standardizes assessment technique, particularly relevant given rising incidence in young adults.
Refinessuggested applicable standard· European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE), 'Endoscopic management of ampullary tumors: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline', 2021 (Vanbiervliet G, Strijker M, Arvanitakis M, et al. Endoscopy 2021;53(4):429-448; DOI 10.1055/a-1397-3198; PMID 33728632)

Decision at stakedetermine which ampullary adenomas are candidates for endoscopic versus surgical management

For malignancy, ESGE recommends pancreaticoduodenectomy including lymphadenectomy for ampullary lesions of stage T1 or higher, including when pathology after endoscopic papillectomy or surgical ampullectomy reveals T1 adenocarcinoma (strong, low); for Tis ampullary cancer, transduodenal ampullectomy or endoscopic papillectomy may be considered sufficient when final pathology shows no residual disease (strong, low).

From our summary of this standard, unedited — the part the paper bears on. marks omitted text. Our wording, not the guideline's; read the source for its own text. The rest of this standard includes TREATMENT, PROPHYLAXIS, BILIARY DRAINAGE and 1 more.

Our full summary of this standard

ESGE 2021 gates everything on proven adenoma. ESGE recommends AGAINST diagnostic/therapeutic papillectomy when adenoma has not been proven (strong, low), and recommends histological confirmation by endoscopic biopsies in the case of low-grade-dysplasia adenoma before initiating any treatment (strong, low). Assessment uses a side-viewing endoscope when an ampullary tumor is suspected (strong, moderate); the cap-assisted method is suggested only when the papilla is not seen on forward-viewing endoscopy (weak, moderate); high-resolution virtual chromoendoscopy is suggested for diagnosis and staging (weak, low). Staging is EUS plus abdominal MRCP (strong, low); IDUS is suggested only in selected patients, with routine use balanced against training, cost and pancreatitis risk (weak, low). ESGE suggests that IHC, K-ras and p53 evaluation, PCR, and microsatellite instability testing should NOT routinely be applied to ampullary tumor biopsies to inform prognosis or potential treatment response (weak, low). TREATMENT: ESGE recommends endoscopic papillectomy for ampullary adenoma without intraductal extension (strong, moderate), and en bloc resection of adenomas up to 20-30 mm to achieve R0 (strong, low). Technique is direct snare resection WITHOUT submucosal injection (strong, moderate) - but submucosal injection IS recommended before EMR of the extrapapillary duodenal-wall component of a laterally spreading ampullary tumor (strong, moderate); LST-p can be managed endoscopically, accepting higher intraprocedural and delayed bleeding risk (strong, low). ESGE suggests avoiding any biliary, pancreatic or biductal sphincterotomy prior to papillectomy (weak, very low) and suggests endocut current (weak, low). PROPHYLAXIS: prophylactic pancreatic duct stenting is recommended to reduce post-papillectomy pancreatitis (strong, moderate); ESGE suggests routine rectal administration of 100 mg diclofenac or indomethacin immediately before papillectomy in all patients without NSAID contraindication (weak, low); if PD stenting is not possible, high-volume lactated Ringer's hydration is suggested (weak, low). Prophylactic hemostasis is individualized (strong, very low). SURGERY: ESGE only SUGGESTS considering surgical treatment when endoscopic resection is not feasible for technical reasons (e.g. periampullary diverticulum, size >4 cm) and in the case of intraductal involvement of >20 mm - and surveillance thereafter is still mandatory (weak, low). For adenoma with intraductal extension of 20 mm or less, ESGE suggests complementary techniques in expert centers (thermal ablation by cystotome, or RFA) with temporary biliary stenting (weak, low). For malignancy, ESGE recommends pancreaticoduodenectomy including lymphadenectomy for ampullary lesions of stage T1 or higher, including when pathology after endoscopic papillectomy or surgical ampullectomy reveals T1 adenocarcinoma (strong, low); for Tis ampullary cancer, transduodenal ampullectomy or endoscopic papillectomy may be considered sufficient when final pathology shows no residual disease (strong, low). BILIARY DRAINAGE: ESGE recommends against routine preoperative biliary drainage in surgically eligible ampullary cancer, reserving it for cholangitis, severe symptomatic jaundice (e.g. intense pruritus), delayed surgery, or before neoadjuvant chemotherapy in jaundiced patients (strong, moderate); when required, endoscopic SEMS insertion (strong, moderate); ERCP with SEMS in palliative settings (strong, high). FOLLOW-UP: long-term monitoring after endoscopic papillectomy or surgical ampullectomy by duodenoscopy with biopsies of the scar and of any abnormal area, within the first 3 months, at 6 and 12 months, and yearly thereafter for at least 5 years (strong, low). On recurrence, assess local extent with endoscopy plus biopsies, EUS and MRCP before any treatment (strong, low); benign residual or recurrent lesions may be managed endoscopically including APC and EMR (weak, low).

European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE), 'Endoscopic management of ampullary tumors: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline', 2021 (Vanbiervliet G, Strijker M, Arvanitakis M, et al. Endoscopy 2021;53(4):429-448; DOI 10.1055/a-1397-3198; PMID 33728632) · reviewed 2026-07-19 ↗
Barakat M … Chahal P · Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology : the Official Clinical Practice Journal of the American Gastroenterological Association · IF 16.2 · PubMed ↗Permalink

Colorectal· 1

Colorectal guideline · Sep 7, 2026 · Gut · IF 24.6

Colorectal cancer in metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease: an international Delphi consensus statement.

Guideline / reviewMASLDcolorectal cancercolorectal cancer screeningguideline
Clinical takeawayHeighten CRC surveillance in MASLD patients; screening intensity should be informed by MASLD severity (worse outcomes with advanced disease), though specific severity-based intervals are not defined in this consensus. Coordinate with hepatology for risk-adapted screening strategy. Include metabolic management (weight loss, GLP-1 agonists where indicated, bariatric surgery where eligible); no proven CRC risk-reduction benefit from these interventions in MASLD is presented.
What it foundDelphi consensus: MASLD associates with increased CRC risk; severity of MASLD is associated with worse CRC outcomes, and metabolic burden further increases risk. Risk stratification by MASLD severity grade is not specified in this consensus. Quantitative risk elevation not specified.
ContextConfirms epidemiological association between MASLD and elevated CRC risk. Severity of MASLD is associated with worse CRC outcomes, suggesting it should inform surveillance strategy, but severity-based risk categories for screening are not defined. Expert agreement on gut-liver axis and dysbiosis provides mechanistic plausibility without clinical thresholds. Current practice applies standard CRC risk stratification without MASLD-specific adjustment.
Emergingsuggested applicable standard· American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases (AASLD), "AASLD Practice Guidance on the clinical assessment and management of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease," Hepatology 2023;77(5):1797-1835 (with the October 2024 resmetirom and November 2025 semaglutide Practice Guidance updates)

Decision at stakeCRC screening strategy and intensity for patients with MASLD

No single passage of this standard matched the paper closely enough to quote, so none is shown. The standard is cited above.

Our full summary of this standard

Lifestyle modification is the foundation of MASLD treatment, centered on a tiered weight-loss ladder targeting 7-10% body-weight loss for NASH/fibrosis improvement via a Mediterranean dietary pattern, elimination of sugar-sweetened beverages, 150 min/week of moderate aerobic activity plus resistance training, and alcohol reduction toward abstinence. Pharmacotherapy and bariatric surgery are added on top of lifestyle when lifestyle alone is insufficient, but each is gated by disease stage, comorbidity, and eligibility rather than applied as generic escalation: resmetirom is indicated (in conjunction with diet and exercise) only for noncirrhotic MASH with moderate-to-advanced fibrosis (F2-F3) and is not recommended in cirrhosis; GLP-1 receptor agonists are directed to patients with coexisting type 2 diabetes and/or obesity, with semaglutide now guidance-supported for noncirrhotic MASH with F2-F3 fibrosis; pioglitazone is reserved for biopsy-proven MASH, with or without type 2 diabetes; vitamin E 800 IU/day is reserved for biopsy-proven MASH in patients without type 2 diabetes and without cirrhosis; and bariatric/metabolic surgery is an option only for patients meeting metabolic weight-loss-surgery eligibility (BMI ≥40 kg/m2, or ≥35 kg/m2 with comorbidities), cannot be considered primary therapy for compensated MASH cirrhosis, and carries increased operative risk in decompensated cirrhosis. Comorbidity management-CV risk, statins, diabetes, OSA screening, thyroid, vaccination-is integral to MASLD care.

American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases (AASLD), "AASLD Practice Guidance on the clinical assessment and management of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease," Hepatology 2023;77(5):1797-1835 (with the October 2024 resmetirom and November 2025 semaglutide Practice Guidance updates) · reviewed 2026-07-23 ↗
Wu CT … Zheng MH · Gut · IF 24.6 · PubMed ↗Permalink

Nutrition· 1

Nutrition retrospective · n=5,174,261 · Sep 9, 2026 · Am J Clin Nutrition · IF 6.5

Acute Hyperglycemia During Hospitalization, Nutritional Support, and Longer-Term Cardiovascular Outcomes: a Nationwide Real-World Data Cohort Study.

New evidenceenteral nutritionparenteral nutritionepidemiology
Clinical takeawayIn non-diabetic adults without baseline cardiovascular disease, risk-stratify post-discharge patients based on acute hospitalization hyperglycemia. Counsel patients with glucose >180 mg/dL during admission about elevated long-term cardiovascular risk and consider intensified cardiovascular risk factor management (BP control, lipid management, smoking cessation, weight/glucose targets). Effect is more pronounced in patients who received parenteral or enteral nutrition. This observational study identifies an association but does not establish causality or demonstrate that acute glucose control itself reduces subsequent cardiovascular outcomes.
What it foundAcute hyperglycemia (blood glucose >180 mg/dL) during hospitalization, present in 26.8% of non-diabetic patients, associated with a 1.82-fold increased risk of composite cardiovascular events over median 2.3 years post-discharge (95% CI 1.80-1.84); risk rose to 2.11-fold with parenteral nutrition and 1.95-fold with enteral nutrition.
ContextPrior evidence established acute hyperglycemia as a marker of acute illness severity; this extends that finding to show persistent long-term cardiovascular consequences in non-diabetic patients years after discharge. Novel is the interaction with nutritional support-effect strongest with parenteral nutrition (2.11-fold), intermediate with enteral (1.95-fold), and weaker without nutritional support (1.35-fold)-suggesting nutritional route or severity of illness modifies the association. The mechanism remains unexplained; unmeasured confounding (unmeasured illness severity, complications, or metabolic derangement) cannot be ruled out.
Emergingsuggested applicable standard· American Diabetes Association Professional Practice Committee, "6. Glycemic Goals, Hypoglycemia, and Hyperglycemic Crises: Standards of Care in Diabetes-2026," Diabetes Care 2026;49(Supplement_1):S132-S149

Decision at stakemanaging acute hyperglycemia in non-diabetic hospitalized patients receiving nutritional support

No single passage of this standard matched the paper closely enough to quote, so none is shown. The standard is cited above.

Our full summary of this standard

Manage diabetes in GI/hepatology patients by individualizing the A1c target to the population, in cirrhosis, A1c is unreliable because altered red blood cell turnover typically underestimates glycemia, so set glycemic goals using blood glucose monitoring and/or CGM rather than a fixed A1c cutoff, and in diabetic gastroparesis individualize the target rather than applying a universal cutoff; ≤7% pre-bariatric, <6.5% pre-conception, while screening all T2DM for MASLD with FIB-4, screening T1DM for concurrent celiac disease, and screening for diabetic gastroparesis when chronic nausea, early satiety, or postprandial fullness are present. Evaluate new-onset DM after age 50 without obesity for a pancreatic cancer differential, and coordinate peri-procedural medication holds and multidisciplinary endocrinology involvement.

American Diabetes Association Professional Practice Committee, "6. Glycemic Goals, Hypoglycemia, and Hyperglycemic Crises: Standards of Care in Diabetes-2026," Diabetes Care 2026;49(Supplement_1):S132-S149 · reviewed 2026-07-23 ↗
Santos MP … Ley SH · American Journal of Clinical Nutrition · IF 6.5 · PubMed ↗Permalink
Everything else this week30 that cleared the bar

Ranked below the cards above, not excluded: these met the bar and were read and scored the same way. One line each, grouped by subspecialty, highest signal first; click through for the paper.

Also screened this week49 papers read, not selected

These cleared the journal filter and were read, but were not selected this week. A score means the paper was weighed: below 35 it fell short of the bar; at 35 or above, a check after scoring set it aside. A blank means it was set aside before scoring. Listed for anyone going deeper; no takeaway attached, because none was written. How we choose →

Endoscopy· 24

How we choose

the same pipeline every week
01

Scan

Every new paper across 48 vetted GI, hepatology, and general-medicine journals.

02

Screen

Drop what is not a study: letters, editorials, corrections, case reports. Classify the rest.

03

Anchor

Compare each paper to the guideline standard it touches, and record how far it moves it.

04

Verify

An adversarial second pass checks every claim against its cited source.

05

Vet

Each issue is reviewed by a physician editor before it publishes.