A SiftingSignal publication/ Edited by Simon Mathews, MD

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

Every week, 200+ papers from 25+ top GI and medical journals, transparently scored and physician-vetted. The signal, not the noise.

This week, in numbers

Issue №14 · week of Oct 4, 2026See the trends →
Top journals this week: Lancet / JAMA / Nature Medicine / J Hepatology
Selectivity
8.1%
22 in the issue of 270 screened
in the issue 22in depth 75held 12filtered out 161
91.9% of what published this week did not make the issue. That filter is the product. A further 75 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. 12 of the 22 cards in the issue are matched to a standard, and each of those quotes it with its source and review date. From issue 14, every match is independently re-checked, so this bar reads lower than in earlier issues. Click a segment to filter the issue.
The signal map
647485narrative reviewguideline →Clinical utilityEvidence strength
Each dot is a paper: evidence strength across, clinical utility up (what you can do with it, what rides on it, how many patients, how new), area = the journal's impact factor, colour = subspecialty. A dark ring marks a paper that refines or changes its standard of care. The vertical scale spans this week's cards and its numbers are the real scores out of 100. Click a dot to open its card.

What to know this week

the top-scored · the 5-minute version

use 8-week sofosbuvir-velpatasvir in non-cirrhotic HCV, matching 12-week efficacy, screen first-degree relatives of SPS patients for CRC and perform frequent surveillance colonoscopy in SPS patients, and use 14-day bismuth quadruple therapy as first-line H. pylori treatment in ASEAN.

The 22 in the issue this week, ranked by signal score. Each anchored to the relevant standard of care. All in full below; 75 more, read and scored the same way, in one line each at the foot of the issue.

Your subspecialty, the takeaways
IBD21Hepatology38Esophagus/Reflux8Pancreas/Biliary9Endoscopy10Motility4Colorectal6Nutrition1
Type

This week to know

the 10 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
Hepatology rct · n=880 · Sep 30, 2026 · Lancet · IF 98.4

8 weeks versus 12 weeks of sofosbuvir-velpatasvir for treatment-naive, non-cirrhotic, chronic hepatitis C (RESOLVE): a multicentre, open-label, non-inferiority, randomised controlled trial in India.

New evidenceviral hepatitisbasic sciencebiomarkerhealth services
Clinical takeawayConsider shortening sofosbuvir-velpatasvir treatment to 8 weeks in treatment-naive, non-cirrhotic HCV patients, as it was non-inferior to the 12-week regimen with no serious adverse events.
What it found8-week sofosbuvir-velpatasvir achieved SVR12 in 98.8% vs 99.0% with 12-week treatment, non-inferior within a 5% margin.
ContextChallenges the standard 12-week regimen, offering equivalent efficacy with a shorter duration in treatment-naive, non-cirrhotic HCV patients, with no serious adverse events reported.
Refinessuggested applicable standard· American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases and Infectious Diseases Society of America (AASLD-IDSA), "Hepatitis C Guidance 2023 Update: AASLD-IDSA Recommendations for Testing, Managing, and Treating Hepatitis C Virus Infection" (Patients With Decompensated Cirrhosis section), 2023

… Treatment-naive WITHOUT cirrhosis (FIB-4 ≤3.25 and no other evidence of cirrhosis): glecaprevir 300 mg/pibrentasvir 120 mg once daily with food × 8 weeks, OR sofosbuvir 400 mg/velpatasvir 100 mg once daily × 12 weeks, both pangenotypic and equally recommended; pretreatment CBC, hepatic function panel, eGFR, quantitative HCV RNA, HIV, HBsAg, pregnancy test within 6 months, plus medication reconciliation for drug-drug interactions. …

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 active infection with HCV antibody testing with reflex HCV RNA PCR (Rating I, A); one-time opt-out anti-HCV testing is recommended for all adults ≥18 years and with each pregnancy (I, B), with annual testing for people who inject drugs, men with HIV who have unprotected sex with men, and MSM on PrEP (IIa, C). Treatment is recommended for all persons with acute or chronic HCV infection EXCEPT those with a short life expectancy that cannot be remediated by HCV therapy, liver transplantation, or another directed therapy. Stage fibrosis noninvasively (FIB-4; biopsy not required). The simplified treatment algorithm applies only to treatment-naive adults and EXCLUDES prior HCV treatment, HBsAg positivity, current pregnancy, known or suspected HCC, prior liver transplantation, and any current or prior episode of decompensated cirrhosis; excluded patients are managed by the genotype/population-specific sections, not the simplified pathway. Treatment-naive WITHOUT cirrhosis (FIB-4 ≤3.25 and no other evidence of cirrhosis): glecaprevir 300 mg/pibrentasvir 120 mg once daily with food × 8 weeks, OR sofosbuvir 400 mg/velpatasvir 100 mg once daily × 12 weeks, both pangenotypic and equally recommended; pretreatment CBC, hepatic function panel, eGFR, quantitative HCV RNA, HIV, HBsAg, pregnancy test within 6 months, plus medication reconciliation for drug-drug interactions. Treatment-naive WITH compensated cirrhosis (Child-Pugh A): glecaprevir/pibrentasvir × 8 weeks for genotypes 1-6, OR sofosbuvir/velpatasvir × 12 weeks for genotypes 1, 2, 4, 5, and 6 only, in genotype 3 with compensated cirrhosis, baseline NS5A resistance testing is required before sofosbuvir/velpatasvir and the presence of Y93H changes the regimen; pretreatment labs within 3 months plus CTP score and liver ultrasound within 6 months. On treatment, no routine laboratory monitoring is required except counseling diabetic patients about hypoglycemia and monitoring INR in patients on warfarin. Decompensated cirrhosis (CTP class B or C, or any prior decompensation): refer to a practitioner with expertise, ideally at a liver transplant center; ALL protease-inhibitor-containing regimens (glecaprevir, grazoprevir, voxilaprevir) are contraindicated. Ribavirin-eligible, treatment-naive: sofosbuvir/velpatasvir + weight-based ribavirin × 12 weeks (all genotypes), or ledipasvir/sofosbuvir + ribavirin × 12 weeks for genotypes 1, 4, 5, 6; ribavirin-ineligible: sofosbuvir/velpatasvir (or ledipasvir/sofosbuvir for GT 1, 4, 5, 6) × 24 weeks without ribavirin; prior sofosbuvir-based or NS5A inhibitor-based treatment failure: sofosbuvir/velpatasvir + weight-based ribavirin × 24 weeks. In CTP class C, start ribavirin at 600 mg/day and increase as tolerated toward weight-based dosing. Cure is defined by quantitative HCV RNA undetectable ≥12 weeks after completing therapy (SVR12), checked with a hepatic function panel; patients without cirrhosis who achieve SVR need no further liver-related follow-up, while patients with cirrhosis continue HCC ultrasound surveillance every 6 months and variceal screening per AASLD guidelines after SVR. Repeat annual HCV RNA testing in anyone with ongoing exposure risk.

American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases and Infectious Diseases Society of America (AASLD-IDSA), "Hepatitis C Guidance 2023 Update: AASLD-IDSA Recommendations for Testing, Managing, and Treating Hepatitis C Virus Infection" (Patients With Decompensated Cirrhosis section), 2023 · reviewed 2026-07-23 ↗
Goel A … Aggarwal R · The Lancet · IF 98.4 · PubMed ↗Permalink
Colorectal guideline · Sep 30, 2026 · Gastroenterology · IF 25.1

Serrated Polyposis Syndrome: A Review and Consensus Statement by the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer.

Guideline / reviewserrated polypcolorectal cancer screeningguidelinecolorectal cancer
Clinical takeawayScreen first-degree relatives of patients with SPS for CRC via colonoscopy. Perform meticulous colon inspection and frequent surveillance colonoscopy (compared to standard intervals) in SPS patients to reduce CRC risk. Consider colorectal surgery for SPS patients with cancer or unmanageable polyp burden. Germline genetic testing is indicated only in individuals meeting criteria for a known hereditary syndrome.
What it foundIndividuals with serrated polyposis syndrome (SPS), diagnosed based on WHO criteria (size, cumulative lifetime number, and location of serrated polyps), have an increased risk of prevalent and incident colorectal cancer (CRC).
ContextConfirms and refines current practice by emphasizing the need for rigorous surveillance and screening in SPS patients and their first-degree relatives, aligning with WHO diagnostic criteria.
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.

Rex DK … Robertson DJ · Gastroenterology · IF 25.1 · PubMed ↗Permalink
Esophagus/Reflux guideline · Oct 1, 2026 · J Gastro Hep · IF 3.5

Helicobacter pylori Management in ASEAN Countries: The Bangkok II Consensus Report.

Guideline / reviewguidelineepidemiologymicrobiomehealth services
Clinical takeawayConsider 14-day bismuth quadruple therapy as the first-line empirical treatment for H. pylori eradication in Southeast Asia, particularly in areas with high clarithromycin resistance.
What it found14-day bismuth quadruple therapy is the preferred empirical first-line regimen for H. pylori eradication in ASEAN due to high clarithromycin resistance.
ContextRefines prior guidance by emphasizing region-specific treatment strategies, addressing high clarithromycin resistance and resource disparities in ASEAN.
Reinforcessuggested applicable standard· American College of Gastroenterology, Chey WD, Howden CW, Moss SF, et al. 'ACG Clinical Guideline: Treatment of Helicobacter pylori Infection.' Am J Gastroenterol 2024;119(9):1730-1753

Decision at stakethe use of 14-day bismuth quadruple therapy as the preferred first-line regimen for H. pylori eradication

… First-line in treatment-naive patients: the PREFERRED regimen (strong recommendation, moderate quality of evidence) is optimized bismuth quadruple therapy (BQT) for 14 days = standard-dose PPI twice daily + bismuth subcitrate or subsalicylate four times daily + tetracycline 500 mg four times daily + metronidazole 500 mg three or four times daily; 'optimized' means the full 14 days, using tetracycline (do NOT substitute doxycycline) and adequate metronidazole (at least 1.5 g/day). …

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

Confirm ACTIVE infection before treating using a urea breath test, fecal (stool) antigen test, or endoscopic biopsy-based test (histology or rapid urease); do NOT use serology. Testing and treatment are a SINGLE decision, do NOT test unless you intend to treat, and, conversely, offer eradication to EVERY patient found to have confirmed active infection regardless of why they were tested ('if you test, you treat'); confirmed active infection is itself the indication to treat, not one of the conditions below. The following are indications to TEST for H. pylori (and to treat whenever the test is positive): active or prior peptic ulcer disease, gastric MALT lymphoma, atrophic gastritis / gastric intestinal metaplasia and other gastric premalignant conditions, uninvestigated dyspepsia in patients under 60 without alarm features (test-and-treat), functional dyspepsia, long-term NSAID or aspirin use, unexplained iron-deficiency anemia, immune (idiopathic) thrombocytopenic purpura, resected early gastric cancer or gastric adenomas, first-degree relatives of gastric-cancer patients, and adult household members of an infected person (test non-serologically). First-line in treatment-naive patients: the PREFERRED regimen (strong recommendation, moderate quality of evidence) is optimized bismuth quadruple therapy (BQT) for 14 days = standard-dose PPI twice daily + bismuth subcitrate or subsalicylate four times daily + tetracycline 500 mg four times daily + metronidazole 500 mg three or four times daily; 'optimized' means the full 14 days, using tetracycline (do NOT substitute doxycycline) and adequate metronidazole (at least 1.5 g/day). Optimized BQT is preferred even with penicillin allergy; avoid tetracycline in women of childbearing potential and avoid bismuth subsalicylate in salicylate allergy. CONDITIONAL alternatives (low/moderate QOE, require no penicillin allergy) are rifabutin triple therapy (omeprazole 10 mg / amoxicillin 250 mg / rifabutin 12.5 mg, i.e. Talicia, 4 capsules three times daily for 14 days) and vonoprazan-amoxicillin DUAL therapy (vonoprazan 20 mg twice daily + amoxicillin 1000 mg three times daily for 14 days). Vonoprazan-clarithromycin TRIPLE therapy (vonoprazan 20 mg twice daily + clarithromycin 500 mg twice daily + amoxicillin 1000 mg twice daily for 14 days) should be used ONLY when the strain is clarithromycin-susceptible. AVOID any empiric clarithromycin-containing (including PPI-clarithromycin triple) or levofloxacin-containing regimen unless susceptibility is documented (clarithromycin resistance ~22-31%, levofloxacin ~38%); prefer esomeprazole or rabeprazole, or a PCAB, over omeprazole/lansoprazole/pantoprazole in known rapid or ultrarapid CYP2C19 metabolizers. Test of cure is required for ALL treated patients: confirm eradication with a urea breath test, fecal antigen test, or biopsy-based test performed at least 4 weeks after finishing antibiotics and after holding PPIs/PCABs for at least 2 weeks (an H2-receptor antagonist may be used in the interim).

American College of Gastroenterology, Chey WD, Howden CW, Moss SF, et al. 'ACG Clinical Guideline: Treatment of Helicobacter pylori Infection.' Am J Gastroenterol 2024;119(9):1730-1753 · reviewed 2026-07-23 ↗
Vilaichone RK … Mahachai V · Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology · IF 3.5 · PubMed ↗Permalink
Endoscopy rct · n=62 · Sep 30, 2026 · GIE · IF 8.0

Radiofrequency ablation versus hybrid argon plasma coagulation for dysplastic Barrett's esophagus: a randomized-controlled trial assessing procedural tolerability and safety (RATE study).

New evidenceBarrett's esophagusesophageal cancerdysphagia
Clinical takeawayh-APC may be an alternative to RFA for dysplastic Barrett's esophagus, as it was associated with lower postprocedural pain and stricture risk while achieving similar eradication rates. Further evidence is needed before it can be recommended over RFA.
What it foundh-APC reduced 30-day postprocedural chest pain burden to 40.5 VAS-days compared to 64.5 with RFA (P=0.010) and strictures to 3.2% compared to 19.4% (P=0.043), with similar CR-IM (71.0% vs 67.7%) and CR-D (90.3% in both).
ContextThis study suggests h-APC may offer comparable efficacy to RFA with fewer adverse effects, but it does not yet challenge the current standard of care.
Measured against the standard of care· AGA 2025 (surveillance) / ACG 2022 (diagnosis, endoscopic therapy, post-EET)

Decision at stakethe choice of ablative modality for dysplastic Barrett's esophagus

… Its 8 GRADE recommendations are: (1) endoscopic surveillance for nondysplastic BE rather than none (conditional, low certainty); (2) NO endoscopic surveillance for columnar-lined esophagus <1 cm, even with intestinal metaplasia, when there is no neoplasia (conditional); (3) high-definition white-light endoscopy PLUS chromoendoscopy over white light alone (STRONG); (4) no recommendation for or against wide-area transepithelial sampling (WATS-3D) as an adjunct to structured biopsy; (5) no recommendation on p53 IHC and (6) no recommendation on TissueCypher as adjuncts to histopathology in NDBE, indefinite for dysplasia (IND), or LGD; (7) daily PPI over no PPI to prevent neoplastic progression (conditional); (8) PPI over antireflux surgery to prevent progression to HGD/EAC (conditional). …

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

Surveillance practice is now defined by the AGA 2025 surveillance guideline (Wani et al., Gastroenterology 2025;169:1184-1231; endorsed by the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology). Its 8 GRADE recommendations are: (1) endoscopic surveillance for nondysplastic BE rather than none (conditional, low certainty); (2) NO endoscopic surveillance for columnar-lined esophagus <1 cm, even with intestinal metaplasia, when there is no neoplasia (conditional); (3) high-definition white-light endoscopy PLUS chromoendoscopy over white light alone (STRONG); (4) no recommendation for or against wide-area transepithelial sampling (WATS-3D) as an adjunct to structured biopsy; (5) no recommendation on p53 IHC and (6) no recommendation on TissueCypher as adjuncts to histopathology in NDBE, indefinite for dysplasia (IND), or LGD; (7) daily PPI over no PPI to prevent neoplastic progression (conditional); (8) PPI over antireflux surgery to prevent progression to HGD/EAC (conditional). Implementation statements require a high-quality exam, a structured (Seattle-type) biopsy protocol, confirmation of any BE-related dysplasia by an expert GI pathologist, intervals tailored to segment length and dysplasia grade, and shared decision-making. Surveillance should stop when a patient could not tolerate endoscopic therapy, surgery, or oncologic treatment for EAC, at any age. The AGA 2025 interval table could not be read directly (full text paywalled). Until it is, the intervals below are the ACG 2022 intervals, which remain consistent with AGA's segment-length framing: NDBE <3 cm every 5 years; NDBE >=3 cm every 3 years; IND, after a second-pathologist read, optimize to twice-daily PPI, repeat EGD within 6 months, then annually if IND persists; confirmed LGD on surveillance, EGD at 6 and 12 months, then annually. Diagnosis (IM plus >=1 cm columnar mucosa, no biopsy of a normal or <1 cm irregular Z line, >=8 biopsies), endoscopic eradication therapy (EET over esophagectomy for HGD/T1a (strong); EET suggested for confirmed LGD with surveillance an acceptable alternative; resect visible lesions before RFA; sm1 low-risk T1b may be considered for EET) and post-EET intervals (baseline LGD: 1 year, 3 years, then every 2 years; baseline HGD/T1a: 3, 6, 12 months, then annually) are still governed by ACG 2022. The AGA surveillance guideline does not address them, and AGA has said a separate screening guideline will follow in 2026.

AGA 2025 (surveillance) / ACG 2022 (diagnosis, endoscopic therapy, post-EET) · reviewed 2026-10-11 ↗
Klimkowski R … Januszewicz W · Gastrointestinal Endoscopy · IF 8.0 · PubMed ↗Permalink
Hepatology rct · n=184 · Oct 1, 2026 · Liver International · IF 6.7

A 7-mm Covered TIPS Reduces Hepatic Encephalopathy Without Increasing Rebleeding in Cirrhotic Patients With Small Liver: A Randomized Study.

Practice-changingcirrhosisportal hypertensionhepatic encephalopathyvariceal bleeding
Clinical takeawayConsider using 7-mm covered TIPS instead of 8-mm stents in cirrhotic patients with a relatively small liver to prevent variceal rebleeding, as it reduces hepatic encephalopathy without increasing rebleeding or shunt dysfunction.
What it found7-mm covered TIPS cut 2-year overt hepatic encephalopathy to 21.4% vs 37.2% with 8-mm stents, with no difference in rebleeding (10.9% vs 9.8%) or shunt dysfunction (8.7% vs 8.7%).
ContextChallenges the current guideline recommendation of 8-mm TIPS stents, providing evidence for a safer alternative in patients with small livers.
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.

Liu F … Yang Y · Liver International : Official Journal of the International Association for the Study of the Liver · IF 6.7 · PubMed ↗Permalink
Pancreas/Biliary rct · n=101 · Sep 30, 2026 · Nature Medicine · IF 52.5

Intravenous hyaluronidase-expressing oncolytic adenovirus with chemotherapy in metastatic pancreatic cancer: a randomized phase 2b trial.

New therapypancreatic cancer
Clinical takeawayConsider VCN-01 with GnP as a first-line therapy for metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma, pending phase 3 trial confirmation, noting that VCN-01-related adverse events included pyrexia, flu-like symptoms, liver enzyme elevation, and decreased platelet counts, with serious events in 22.6% of patients.
What it foundAdding VCN-01 to gemcitabine and nab-paclitaxel (GnP) extended median overall survival to 10.8 vs 8.6 months (HR=0.57, P=0.055) in the full analysis set (FAS) population of metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma.
ContextThis challenges the current standard of GnP alone, showing a survival benefit with VCN-01 in a phase 2b trial, though safety concerns warrant further evaluation.
Emergingsuggested applicable standard· National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN), NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines®): Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma, Version 2.2025, verified directly against the metastatic first-line algorithm (PANC-10) and Principles of Systemic Therapy (PANC-F, 6 of 13), footnote y: "Good PS is defined as ECOG 0-1 ... and intermediate PS is defined as ECOG 2"; peer-reviewed publication of this guideline series with a resolving identifier: Tempero MA, et al. Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma, Version 2.2021, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 2021;19(4):439-457.

Decision at stakefirst-line therapy for metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma

… METASTATIC disease by performance status: good PS (ECOG 0-1, adequate organ function), first-line FOLFIRINOX/modified FOLFIRINOX, NALIRIFOX, or gemcitabine + nab-paclitaxel, with clinical trial preferred; after ~4-6 months without progression, transition to a maintenance strategy (including olaparib for germline BRCA1/2 carriers who have NOT progressed on first-line platinum-based therapy), a clinical trial, or a treatment break; intermediate PS (ECOG 2), clinical trial preferred, otherwise less-intensive first-line therapy (preferred gemcitabine + nab-paclitaxel [category 1], or single-agent gemcitabine or capecitabine, or FOLFOX/FOLFIRI/CapeOx), since the intensive triplets (FOLFIRINOX/modified FOLFIRINOX and NALIRIFOX) are limited to ECOG 0-1 and are generally not appropriate at ECOG 2, with the same maintenance-versus-progression reassessment applied after ~4-6 months without progression; poor PS (ECOG 3-4), palliative/best supportive care, with single-agent chemotherapy or a biomarker-directed agent only if clinically appropriate. …

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

Evaluate suspected pancreatic adenocarcinoma with a dedicated pancreatic-protocol (multiphasic, contrast-enhanced) CT of the abdomen as the preferred imaging for diagnosis and staging (MRI/MRCP is an acceptable alternative); PET/CT may be added after, never as a substitute for, protocol CT/MRI in higher-risk situations. Obtain tissue confirmation, preferably by EUS-guided FNA/FNB with core biopsy where feasible; biopsy is generally required before neoadjuvant or palliative therapy, whereas patients with clearly resectable disease may proceed to surgery without preoperative biopsy. Measure baseline CA 19-9 (interpret after biliary decompression / with normal bilirubin; it can be falsely low in Lewis-antigen-negative patients and falsely elevated with cholestasis). Offer GERMLINE testing for inherited susceptibility to EVERY patient with confirmed pancreatic adenocarcinoma regardless of family history, using a comprehensive multi-gene panel; separately, for patients with locally advanced or metastatic disease who are candidates for anti-cancer therapy, obtain TUMOR/SOMATIC molecular profiling (broad NGS; RNA-based assays improve fusion detection; cell-free/liquid biopsy if tissue is insufficient). Assign resectability, resectable, borderline resectable, locally advanced (unresectable), or metastatic, by multidisciplinary review, ideally at a high-volume center. RESECTABLE disease: upfront resection (pancreaticoduodenectomy for head/uncinate; distal pancreatectomy ± splenectomy for body/tail) followed by adjuvant therapy, or neoadjuvant therapy in selected high-risk patients; preferred adjuvant regimen is modified FOLFIRINOX in patients able to tolerate it, ideally begun within 12 weeks of surgery, for a total of ~6 months of perioperative systemic therapy. BORDERLINE RESECTABLE and LOCALLY ADVANCED disease: neoadjuvant systemic therapy, with or without subsequent chemoradiation/RT, then restaging and reassessment for resection. METASTATIC disease by performance status: good PS (ECOG 0-1, adequate organ function), first-line FOLFIRINOX/modified FOLFIRINOX, NALIRIFOX, or gemcitabine + nab-paclitaxel, with clinical trial preferred; after ~4-6 months without progression, transition to a maintenance strategy (including olaparib for germline BRCA1/2 carriers who have NOT progressed on first-line platinum-based therapy), a clinical trial, or a treatment break; intermediate PS (ECOG 2), clinical trial preferred, otherwise less-intensive first-line therapy (preferred gemcitabine + nab-paclitaxel [category 1], or single-agent gemcitabine or capecitabine, or FOLFOX/FOLFIRI/CapeOx), since the intensive triplets (FOLFIRINOX/modified FOLFIRINOX and NALIRIFOX) are limited to ECOG 0-1 and are generally not appropriate at ECOG 2, with the same maintenance-versus-progression reassessment applied after ~4-6 months without progression; poor PS (ECOG 3-4), palliative/best supportive care, with single-agent chemotherapy or a biomarker-directed agent only if clinically appropriate. Treat by molecular target wherever an actionable alteration is present, across lines: pembrolizumab (or dostarlimab) for MSI-H/dMMR and pembrolizumab for TMB-H, olaparib for germline BRCA1/2 (maintenance after platinum), larotrectinib/entrectinib for NTRK fusions, selpercatinib for RET fusions, dabrafenib + trametinib for BRAF V600E, erdafitinib for FGFR2 alterations, fam-trastuzumab deruxtecan for HER2-positive disease, zenocutuzumab for NRG1 fusion-positive disease, and (in recent NCCN versions) KRAS G12C inhibitors (adagrasib/sotorasib), several of these after prior systemic therapy. Integrate supportive care throughout: relieve obstructive jaundice with an endoscopic self-expanding metal stent in non-operative or neoadjuvant pathways, but do NOT perform routine preoperative biliary drainage before planned upfront resection; treat exocrine insufficiency with pancreatic enzyme replacement titrated to symptoms (common starting dose ~40,000-50,000 units of lipase with main meals, roughly half with snacks, increased as needed); manage refractory pain with celiac plexus neurolysis or palliative RT; relieve gastric outlet obstruction with surgical or EUS-guided gastrojejunostomy (or enteral stenting); and provide VTE prophylaxis, nutritional support, and early palliative care.

National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN), NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines®): Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma, Version 2.2025, verified directly against the metastatic first-line algorithm (PANC-10) and Principles of Systemic Therapy (PANC-F, 6 of 13), footnote y: "Good PS is defined as ECOG 0-1 ... and intermediate PS is defined as ECOG 2"; peer-reviewed publication of this guideline series with a resolving identifier: Tempero MA, et al. Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma, Version 2.2021, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 2021;19(4):439-457. · reviewed 2026-07-23 ↗
Garcia-Carbonero R … Hidalgo M · Nature Medicine · IF 52.5 · PubMed ↗Permalink
Colorectal meta analysis · n=3,277 · Oct 1, 2026 · Colorectal Disease · IF 3.2

LigaSure versus conventional excisional haemorrhoidectomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis of randomised controlled trials.

New evidencesystematic reviewmeta-analysiscolorectal surgery
Clinical takeawayConsider LigaSure for grade IV haemorrhoidectomy to improve early perioperative outcomes, particularly postoperative pain and recovery time.
What it foundLigaSure reduced postoperative pain on days 1 and 2 (mean difference not specified), cut analgesic use, intraoperative blood loss, operating time, and time to return to daily activities, and lowered risks of wound discharge, postoperative bleeding, and acute urinary retention compared to conventional haemorrhoidectomy.
ContextConfirms and refines prior evidence that LigaSure offers advantages in early recovery and perioperative outcomes compared to conventional haemorrhoidectomy, though long-term recurrence and anorectal outcomes remain uncertain.
Measured against the standard of care· ASCRS 2024 (Dis Colon Rectum 2024;67(5):614-623) / AGA Clinical Practice Update 2026 (Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol, Qureshi et al.)

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

Two current US documents now apply: ASCRS 2024 (GRADE-graded clinical practice guideline) and the AGA 2026 Clinical Practice Update (expert review, 11 best practice advice statements, no GRADE strength; Qureshi, Hoang, Frye, Rao; Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol, online April 29, 2026). Diagnosis: take a disease-specific history and exam. AGA advises anoscopy, whenever possible, for every new patient with suspected hemorrhoids before any treatment, to confirm the diagnosis and exclude other pathology including cancer. Do not automatically attribute rectal bleeding to hemorrhoids. Complete colonic evaluation is for select patients: no obvious anorectal bleeding source, associated abdominal symptoms or change in bowel habit, persistent hematochezia after successful treatment, or due for CRC screening. Grade internal hemorrhoids I-IV by prolapse. First line is diet and behavior: fiber (AGA cites 20-30 g/day) plus fluid, avoid straining, and limit toilet time (AGA cites about 3 minutes). Sitz baths have little evidence. Topical anesthetics, corticosteroids and vasoactive agents may give short-term relief on weak evidence; AGA limits topical corticosteroids to 2 weeks or less because of skin atrophy. ASCRS adds that oral phlebotonics help bleeding, pruritus and discharge but not pain. Office procedures come before surgery for grade I-III disease (ASCRS: grade I-II and select grade III refractory to conservative care). Rubber band ligation is the most effective office procedure (AGA: 66-94% success, more durable for prolapse and recurrent bleeding; about 2% complications). Infrared coagulation is comparable in the short term and preferred in anticoagulated patients, patients with coagulopathy or cirrhosis, and pregnant patients. Counsel every procedural patient on the rare risk of pelvic sepsis and its warning signs. Refer grade III disease refractory to office procedures, grade IV disease, and symptomatic combined internal/external disease for excisional hemorrhoidectomy, the definitive treatment. Doppler-guided artery ligation is an option (less pain, more recurrence). Stapled hemorrhoidopexy is not routinely first line (higher recurrence, unique serious complications). Special populations (AGA): in active Crohn's disease or UC, defer hemorrhoid treatment until remission; in pregnancy, treat conservatively and defer procedures until after delivery unless necessary; in cirrhosis, distinguish hemorrhoids from rectal varices. Acutely thrombosed external hemorrhoids: the two societies differ. ASCRS 2024 says select patients may benefit from early surgical excision, which beats incision/evacuation for recurrence. AGA 2026 says these are best treated surgically by incision and drainage, which relieves symptoms faster than nonoperative care (a secondary summary places this within 72 hours).

ASCRS 2024 (Dis Colon Rectum 2024;67(5):614-623) / AGA Clinical Practice Update 2026 (Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol, Qureshi et al.) · reviewed 2026-10-11 ↗
Barone GL … Formiga FB · Colorectal Disease : the Official Journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland · IF 3.2 · PubMed ↗Permalink
Hepatology retrospective · n=4,467 · Sep 29, 2026 · Clin Gastro Hep · IF 16.2

Characterizing the Benefits of Serial Ascitic Fluid Testing in Ambulatory Patients with Cirrhosis: A National Cohort Study.

New evidenceascitesepidemiologyhealth servicesbiomarker
Clinical takeawayConsider universal ascitic fluid testing at every outpatient paracentesis in cirrhosis patients, especially those with higher CTP scores, to reduce short-term hospitalization and mortality. Note: observational data may reflect differences in patient selection and care delivery.
What it foundUniversal ascitic fluid testing at every outpatient paracentesis reduced 7-day hospitalization risk by 35% (RR 0.65 vs. intermediate-frequency testing, 95% CI 0.58-0.72) and 30-day mortality, particularly in patients with higher CTP scores.
ContextChallenges current variable practices (32.7% testing rate) and suggests universal testing may improve outcomes, particularly in higher-risk patients with higher CTP scores.
Measured against the standard of care· AASLD 2021 Practice Guidance (Biggins et al., Hepatology) / AGA Clinical Practice Update 2025 (Orman et al., Gastroenterology 2025;169(7):1547-1557)

… Initial fluid testing: neutrophil (PMN) count, total protein, and ascitic albumin with a same-day serum albumin to calculate the SAAG. …

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

Perform a diagnostic paracentesis as soon as possible in any patient with new-onset ascites that can be sampled. Also perform one in any patient with cirrhosis and ascites who is admitted to hospital. AASLD 2021 says this applies to emergent admission for any reason. AGA 2025 BPA 2 names admission for ascites- or encephalopathy-related symptoms. The tap rules out SBP even without signs of infection, because up to one-third of SBP is asymptomatic. Repeat it whenever signs, symptoms or labs suggest infection, and in tense ascites with AKI. Paracentesis is safe with coagulopathy: INR >1.5 or platelets <50×10^9/L is not a contraindication, and routine FFP or platelet transfusion is not recommended. Possible exceptions are DIC, and uremia with thrombocytopenia, where desmopressin may be considered. Initial fluid testing: neutrophil (PMN) count, total protein, and ascitic albumin with a same-day serum albumin to calculate the SAAG. AGA 2025 adds Gram stain and culture to the initial panel for new-onset ascites and hospitalized patients. AASLD 2021 treats culture as part of the SBP workup rather than the routine panel. Either way, inoculate ≥10 mL into aerobic and anaerobic blood-culture bottles at the bedside before antibiotics. Amylase, cytology, glucose, LDH, AFB/ADA and triglycerides are ordered only for a clinical reason. SAAG ≥1.1 g/dL means portal hypertension (~97% accuracy). SAAG <1.1 g/dL points to a non-portal-hypertensive cause: carcinomatosis, TB peritonitis, nephrotic syndrome, pancreatic or chylous ascites. Within high-SAAG ascites, total protein <2.5 g/dL suggests cirrhosis (also massive liver metastases or late Budd-Chiari). Total protein ≥2.5 g/dL suggests a cardiac or postsinusoidal cause (heart failure, portal vein thrombosis, SOS, early Budd-Chiari), so work up with echocardiography, hepatic-vein Doppler or right-heart catheterization. SBP is diagnosed by ascitic PMN >250/mm^3, with or without a positive culture, once a surgically treatable source has been excluded. SBE is diagnosed by pleural fluid PMN >250/mm^3 in a hepatic hydrothorax after pneumonia and other secondary causes are excluded. It is treated with antibiotics and no chest tube.

AASLD 2021 Practice Guidance (Biggins et al., Hepatology) / AGA Clinical Practice Update 2025 (Orman et al., Gastroenterology 2025;169(7):1547-1557) · reviewed 2026-10-11 ↗
Mahmud N … Serper M · Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology : the Official Clinical Practice Journal of the American Gastroenterological Association · IF 16.2 · PubMed ↗Permalink
IBD prospective cohort · n=7,283 · Sep 29, 2026 · Clin Gastro Hep · IF 16.2

Upadacitinib Is Associated with the Lowest Risk of Treatment Failure Among Advanced Therapies for Ulcerative Colitis: A Real-World Administrative Claims Study.

New evidenceulcerative colitisJAK inhibitorsbiologicshealth services
Clinical takeawayConsider upadacitinib as a potential advanced therapy option for ulcerative colitis, particularly in patients who have failed or are intolerant to other advanced therapies, given its association with a lower risk of treatment failure (hospitalization, surgery, or steroid need) compared to infliximab, adalimumab, vedolizumab, ustekinumab, and tofacitinib in this real-world analysis.
What it foundIn a real-world cohort of ulcerative colitis patients, initiating upadacitinib was associated with a 31-41% lower risk of treatment failure (a composite of IBD-related hospitalization, surgery, or new corticosteroid use) compared to infliximab, adalimumab, vedolizumab, ustekinumab, and tofacitinib (HRs 0.59-0.69).
ContextThis large real-world study provides comparative effectiveness data across six advanced therapies, which is largely absent from head-to-head randomized trials. It supports the high efficacy of upadacitinib seen in its pivotal trials and positions it favorably against all other major biologic and small molecule classes in a real-world setting. Findings were consistent in patients with and without prior AT exposure.
Measured against the standard of care· AGA Clinical Practice Update on Inpatient Management of Adults With IBD (Gastroenterology 2026) / ACG UC Guideline Update 2025 / AGA Living Guideline, Moderate-to-Severe UC 2024 (panel review March 2026)

… Advanced-therapy-naive, higher efficacy: infliximab, vedolizumab, ozanimod, etrasimod, upadacitinib, risankizumab, guselkumab. … Previously TNF-exposed, higher efficacy: tofacitinib, upadacitinib, ustekinumab. Lower: adalimumab, vedolizumab, ozanimod, etrasimod. …

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

Outpatient positioning is unchanged from the ACG 2025 UC guideline and the AGA living guideline for moderate-to-severe UC. Confirm UC with endoscopy showing continuous colonic inflammation from the rectum plus histology, after excluding infection with two-step C. difficile testing. Treat mild-moderate disease with 5-ASA chosen by route and extent: suppository for proctitis, enema for left-sided disease, oral plus rectal for extensive disease. If 5-ASA fails, treat as moderate-to-severe rather than stepping up gradually. Position advanced therapy by efficacy tier, not by an anti-TNF-first rule. Advanced-therapy-naive, higher efficacy: infliximab, vedolizumab, ozanimod, etrasimod, upadacitinib, risankizumab, guselkumab. Intermediate: golimumab, ustekinumab, tofacitinib, filgotinib, mirikizumab. Lower: adalimumab. Previously TNF-exposed, higher efficacy: tofacitinib, upadacitinib, ustekinumab. Lower: adalimumab, vedolizumab, ozanimod, etrasimod. After anti-TNF primary non-response, switch mechanism rather than cycling within the class. Treat to target (STRIDE-II): endoscopic improvement, Mayo endoscopic subscore 0-1. Begin CRC surveillance 8-10 years after diagnosis for extensive or left-sided disease; isolated proctitis follows average-risk screening. Inpatient care now follows the 2026 AGA Clinical Practice Update (13 best-practice statements). Admit for severe symptoms refractory to outpatient therapy, suspected complications (obstruction, abscess, toxic megacolon) or significant malnutrition, and identify acute severe UC by Truelove-Witts. Give every patient admitted with diarrhea two-step C. difficile testing. Test for CMV, with early endoscopy, if symptoms worsen, the patient is systemically toxic or disease is steroid-refractory. Give routine VTE prophylaxis with LMWH or fondaparinux unless contraindicated, and individualize post-discharge extension. Give IV methylprednisolone 60 mg/day or equivalent; the AGA living guideline says 40-60 mg/day, and higher doses add no benefit. Do not give adjunctive antibiotics without infection. Involve surgery early. Assess response by day 3 (72 h) using stool frequency and CRP (Oxford criteria); do not continue IV steroids beyond about 7 days without response. Rescue steroid non-responders with infliximab (accelerated or intensified dosing in selected patients with high inflammatory burden or protein-losing colopathy), cyclosporine, or a JAK inhibitor at standard or intensified dosing, or with colectomy. Before discharge, the response should be stable and a transition plan should be in place.

AGA Clinical Practice Update on Inpatient Management of Adults With IBD (Gastroenterology 2026) / ACG UC Guideline Update 2025 / AGA Living Guideline, Moderate-to-Severe UC 2024 (panel review March 2026) · reviewed 2026-10-11 ↗
Hupé M … Singh S · Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology : the Official Clinical Practice Journal of the American Gastroenterological Association · IF 16.2 · PubMed ↗Permalink
Endoscopy rct · n=242 · Sep 30, 2026 · J Gastro Hep · IF 3.5

Efficacy and Safety of 1-L Polyethylene Glycol With Low Ascorbic Acid for Bowel Preparation: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

New evidencecolonoscopyendoscopy qualitycolorectal cancer screening
Clinical takeawayConsider using 1-L PEG + low Asc for bowel preparation in low-risk adults undergoing colonoscopy, as it is noninferior to standard regimens with comparable tolerability and safety.
What it found1-L PEG + low Asc achieved 92.7% successful bowel cleansing (Harefield Cleansing Scale), noninferior to 1-L PEG + Asc (100%) and 2-L PEG + Asc (98.7%) within a 13% margin.
ContextRefines current practice by showing that reducing ascorbic acid dose in 1-L PEG regimens maintains efficacy while potentially lowering adverse event risks.
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.

Baek JE … Lee KM · Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology · IF 3.5 · PubMed ↗Permalink

The read

the next 12, in full

IBD· 5

IBD prospective cohort · n=51,844 · Oct 1, 2026 · Inflamm Bowel Dis · IF 4.5

Chronic opioid use and the risk of infections and death in patients with inflammatory bowel disease: a nationwide cohort study based on real-world data.

New evidenceCrohn's diseaseulcerative colitisepidemiologyhealth services
Clinical takeawayAvoid chronic opioid use in adult IBD patients when possible, as it is associated with significantly higher risks of infections and mortality, regardless of opioid strength.
What it foundChronic opioid use (≥3 prescriptions/year) in adult IBD patients increased hospital-diagnosed infections (aHR 1.91-1.93), antibiotic prescriptions (aHR 1.47-1.56), and mortality (aHR 1.74-1.76) compared to non-users.
ContextConfirms prior concerns about opioid risks in IBD, extending evidence to a nationwide cohort with robust adjustment for confounders. Both strong and weak opioids were associated with these adverse outcomes.
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.

Nørgård BM … Nielsen J · Inflammatory Bowel Diseases · IF 4.5 · PubMed ↗Permalink
IBD meta analysis · n=49 · Oct 1, 2026 · Inflamm Bowel Dis · IF 4.5

Advanced therapies for extraintestinal manifestations of IBD: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

New evidencebiologicsJAK inhibitorsanti-TNFsystematic review
Clinical takeawayFor musculoskeletal EIMs in IBD, consider TNF antagonists or JAK inhibitors, noting that TNF antagonists have higher efficacy in peripheral (73%) than axial (57%) arthritis. Avoid vedolizumab for axial arthritis due to its very low efficacy (12% improvement).
What it foundTNF antagonists achieved clinical improvement in 61% of musculoskeletal EIMs, with higher rates for peripheral (73%) than axial arthritis (57%); vedolizumab had significantly lower efficacy (42%), particularly for axial arthritis (12%).
ContextThis meta-analysis confirms TNF antagonists and JAK inhibitors as effective for musculoskeletal EIMs, refining prior evidence by highlighting vedolizumab's limited efficacy in axial arthritis.
Measured against the standard of care· AGA Clinical Practice Update on Inpatient Management of Adults With IBD (Gastroenterology 2026) / ACG UC Guideline Update 2025 / AGA Living Guideline, Moderate-to-Severe UC 2024 (panel review March 2026)

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

Outpatient positioning is unchanged from the ACG 2025 UC guideline and the AGA living guideline for moderate-to-severe UC. Confirm UC with endoscopy showing continuous colonic inflammation from the rectum plus histology, after excluding infection with two-step C. difficile testing. Treat mild-moderate disease with 5-ASA chosen by route and extent: suppository for proctitis, enema for left-sided disease, oral plus rectal for extensive disease. If 5-ASA fails, treat as moderate-to-severe rather than stepping up gradually. Position advanced therapy by efficacy tier, not by an anti-TNF-first rule. Advanced-therapy-naive, higher efficacy: infliximab, vedolizumab, ozanimod, etrasimod, upadacitinib, risankizumab, guselkumab. Intermediate: golimumab, ustekinumab, tofacitinib, filgotinib, mirikizumab. Lower: adalimumab. Previously TNF-exposed, higher efficacy: tofacitinib, upadacitinib, ustekinumab. Lower: adalimumab, vedolizumab, ozanimod, etrasimod. After anti-TNF primary non-response, switch mechanism rather than cycling within the class. Treat to target (STRIDE-II): endoscopic improvement, Mayo endoscopic subscore 0-1. Begin CRC surveillance 8-10 years after diagnosis for extensive or left-sided disease; isolated proctitis follows average-risk screening. Inpatient care now follows the 2026 AGA Clinical Practice Update (13 best-practice statements). Admit for severe symptoms refractory to outpatient therapy, suspected complications (obstruction, abscess, toxic megacolon) or significant malnutrition, and identify acute severe UC by Truelove-Witts. Give every patient admitted with diarrhea two-step C. difficile testing. Test for CMV, with early endoscopy, if symptoms worsen, the patient is systemically toxic or disease is steroid-refractory. Give routine VTE prophylaxis with LMWH or fondaparinux unless contraindicated, and individualize post-discharge extension. Give IV methylprednisolone 60 mg/day or equivalent; the AGA living guideline says 40-60 mg/day, and higher doses add no benefit. Do not give adjunctive antibiotics without infection. Involve surgery early. Assess response by day 3 (72 h) using stool frequency and CRP (Oxford criteria); do not continue IV steroids beyond about 7 days without response. Rescue steroid non-responders with infliximab (accelerated or intensified dosing in selected patients with high inflammatory burden or protein-losing colopathy), cyclosporine, or a JAK inhibitor at standard or intensified dosing, or with colectomy. Before discharge, the response should be stable and a transition plan should be in place.

AGA Clinical Practice Update on Inpatient Management of Adults With IBD (Gastroenterology 2026) / ACG UC Guideline Update 2025 / AGA Living Guideline, Moderate-to-Severe UC 2024 (panel review March 2026) · reviewed 2026-10-11 ↗
Sachdeva K … Ananthakrishnan A · Inflammatory Bowel Diseases · IF 4.5 · PubMed ↗Permalink
IBD review · Oct 2, 2026 · Aliment Pharm Ther · IF 6.7

Review Article: Beyond the Therapeutic Ceiling in Inflammatory Bowel Disease-Mechanism-Based Positioning and Emerging Therapeutic Strategies.

Guideline / reviewCrohn's diseaseulcerative colitisJAK inhibitorsS1P modulators
Clinical takeawayConsider selective IL-23 inhibitors as foundational therapies in IBD treatment algorithms, particularly for refractory disease, while monitoring for long-term safety and efficacy.
What it foundSelective IL-23 inhibitors are increasingly positioned as foundational therapies in IBD, supported by comparative studies against other advanced therapies.
ContextRefines current practice by emphasizing mechanism-based therapeutic positioning over expanding treatment options, aligning with recent comparative effectiveness research in refractory IBD populations.
Measured against the standard of care· ACG 2025 (Lichtenstein et al., Am J Gastroenterol) / AGA Living Guideline 2025 (Scott et al., Gastroenterology) / AGA Clinical Practice Update on Therapeutic Endoscopy in IBD 2026 (CGH)

Decision at stakethe positioning of selective IL-23 inhibitors and novel therapeutic strategies in IBD treatment algorithms

… The ACG 2025 moderate-to-severe recommendations (anti-TNF, IFX + thiopurine combination and IL-12/23/IL-23 agents, each strong/moderate; upadacitinib after anti-TNF exposure; steroids for short-term induction only; TPMT/NUDT15 testing before thiopurines) still stand alongside AGA. … THERAPEUTIC ENDOSCOPY (AGA Clinical Practice Update, CGH 2026; details below come from AGA news coverage, not the full text, and are ungraded advice): get cross-sectional imaging before the procedure. …

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.

Our full summary of this standard

Two current US guidelines govern Crohn's disease and should be read together. ACG 2025 (Lichtenstein et al.) remains the reference for diagnosis, mild-to-moderate disease, perianal, postoperative and abscess management. DIAGNOSIS: fecal calprotectin (>50-100 μg/g) separates inflammatory from noninflammatory disease of the colon. Workup is ileocolonoscopy with biopsies, including uninvolved mucosa, plus small-bowel imaging. CTE and MRE are comparable; prefer MRE in patients <35 y and when serial exams are likely. Intestinal ultrasound is an ungraded adjunct. Do routine CRC surveillance in Crohn's colitis. MILD-TO-MODERATE: recommend against oral mesalamine; sulfasalazine only for symptomatic mild colonic CD; ileal-release budesonide 9 mg for induction in ileocecal disease but not for maintenance. MODERATE-TO-SEVERE (AGA Living Guideline, Scott et al., Gastroenterology 2025;169(7):1397-1448, 16 recommendations: 1 strong, 9 conditional, 6 knowledge gaps; updated quarterly, adult outpatients only): RECOMMEND infliximab, adalimumab, ustekinumab, risankizumab, mirikizumab, guselkumab or upadacitinib over no treatment; SUGGEST certolizumab pegol or vedolizumab over no treatment. Advanced-therapy-naive: suggest higher-efficacy agents (infliximab, adalimumab, vedolizumab, ustekinumab, risankizumab, mirikizumab, guselkumab) over lower-efficacy ones (certolizumab pegol, upadacitinib). Prior advanced-therapy (especially anti-TNF) exposure: suggest higher- or intermediate-efficacy agents (adalimumab, risankizumab, guselkumab, upadacitinib; ustekinumab, mirikizumab) over lower-efficacy ones (vedolizumab, certolizumab pegol). Suggest against thiopurine monotherapy for induction; suggest it for maintenance of remission. Suggest SC/IM methotrexate monotherapy; suggest against oral methotrexate. In thiopurine-naive patients starting infliximab, suggest infliximab + thiopurine over infliximab alone. No recommendation on IFX + MTX, adalimumab + immunomodulator, or non-TNF biologic + immunomodulator. After ≥6 months of steroid-free remission on anti-TNF + immunomodulator, suggest withdrawing the immunomodulator and suggest against withdrawing the anti-TNF. SUGGEST upfront advanced therapy over step-up therapy (corticosteroids and/or immunomodulator first). No recommendation on treating to endoscopic vs symptomatic remission. The ACG 2025 moderate-to-severe recommendations (anti-TNF, IFX + thiopurine combination and IL-12/23/IL-23 agents, each strong/moderate; upadacitinib after anti-TNF exposure; steroids for short-term induction only; TPMT/NUDT15 testing before thiopurines) still stand alongside AGA. ACG perianal (infliximab first; drain abscesses and place setons before escalating), postoperative (endoscopy at 6-12 months; anti-TNF strong, vedolizumab conditional in high-risk patients) and intra-abdominal abscess (>2 cm: antibiotics plus drainage, hold immunosuppression) positions are unchanged. THERAPEUTIC ENDOSCOPY (AGA Clinical Practice Update, CGH 2026; details below come from AGA news coverage, not the full text, and are ungraded advice): get cross-sectional imaging before the procedure. Endoscopic balloon dilation is first-line for short strictures (about ≤4-5 cm) with few risk factors (fistula, prestenotic dilation >5 cm, high CRP, prior anti-TNF). Longer or multiple strictures, or ≥3 risk factors, favor surgery.

ACG 2025 (Lichtenstein et al., Am J Gastroenterol) / AGA Living Guideline 2025 (Scott et al., Gastroenterology) / AGA Clinical Practice Update on Therapeutic Endoscopy in IBD 2026 (CGH) · reviewed 2026-10-11 ↗
Subhaharan D, Subramanian S · Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics · IF 6.7 · PubMed ↗Permalink
IBD systematic review · Oct 1, 2026 · Inflamm Bowel Dis · IF 4.5

The missing evidence: Stricturing Crohn's disease in clinical trials, a systematic review.

New evidenceCrohn's diseasebiologicsanti-TNFsystematic review
Clinical takeawayConsider anti-TNF agents for adults with stricturing Crohn's disease, particularly in passable lesions, and use imaging (ultrasonography or MRI) for monitoring bowel wall thickness, though standardized fibrosis assessment is lacking.
What it foundBiologic therapy, predominantly anti-TNF agents, showed clinical improvement compared to standard of care in stricturing Crohn's disease, with lower response rates in nonpassable lesions.
ContextConfirms the clinical utility of anti-TNF agents in stricturing Crohn's disease but highlights the need for phenotype-specific trials and standardized imaging biomarkers.
Measured against the standard of care· ACG 2025 (Lichtenstein et al., Am J Gastroenterol) / AGA Living Guideline 2025 (Scott et al., Gastroenterology) / AGA Clinical Practice Update on Therapeutic Endoscopy in IBD 2026 (CGH)

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

Two current US guidelines govern Crohn's disease and should be read together. ACG 2025 (Lichtenstein et al.) remains the reference for diagnosis, mild-to-moderate disease, perianal, postoperative and abscess management. DIAGNOSIS: fecal calprotectin (>50-100 μg/g) separates inflammatory from noninflammatory disease of the colon. Workup is ileocolonoscopy with biopsies, including uninvolved mucosa, plus small-bowel imaging. CTE and MRE are comparable; prefer MRE in patients <35 y and when serial exams are likely. Intestinal ultrasound is an ungraded adjunct. Do routine CRC surveillance in Crohn's colitis. MILD-TO-MODERATE: recommend against oral mesalamine; sulfasalazine only for symptomatic mild colonic CD; ileal-release budesonide 9 mg for induction in ileocecal disease but not for maintenance. MODERATE-TO-SEVERE (AGA Living Guideline, Scott et al., Gastroenterology 2025;169(7):1397-1448, 16 recommendations: 1 strong, 9 conditional, 6 knowledge gaps; updated quarterly, adult outpatients only): RECOMMEND infliximab, adalimumab, ustekinumab, risankizumab, mirikizumab, guselkumab or upadacitinib over no treatment; SUGGEST certolizumab pegol or vedolizumab over no treatment. Advanced-therapy-naive: suggest higher-efficacy agents (infliximab, adalimumab, vedolizumab, ustekinumab, risankizumab, mirikizumab, guselkumab) over lower-efficacy ones (certolizumab pegol, upadacitinib). Prior advanced-therapy (especially anti-TNF) exposure: suggest higher- or intermediate-efficacy agents (adalimumab, risankizumab, guselkumab, upadacitinib; ustekinumab, mirikizumab) over lower-efficacy ones (vedolizumab, certolizumab pegol). Suggest against thiopurine monotherapy for induction; suggest it for maintenance of remission. Suggest SC/IM methotrexate monotherapy; suggest against oral methotrexate. In thiopurine-naive patients starting infliximab, suggest infliximab + thiopurine over infliximab alone. No recommendation on IFX + MTX, adalimumab + immunomodulator, or non-TNF biologic + immunomodulator. After ≥6 months of steroid-free remission on anti-TNF + immunomodulator, suggest withdrawing the immunomodulator and suggest against withdrawing the anti-TNF. SUGGEST upfront advanced therapy over step-up therapy (corticosteroids and/or immunomodulator first). No recommendation on treating to endoscopic vs symptomatic remission. The ACG 2025 moderate-to-severe recommendations (anti-TNF, IFX + thiopurine combination and IL-12/23/IL-23 agents, each strong/moderate; upadacitinib after anti-TNF exposure; steroids for short-term induction only; TPMT/NUDT15 testing before thiopurines) still stand alongside AGA. ACG perianal (infliximab first; drain abscesses and place setons before escalating), postoperative (endoscopy at 6-12 months; anti-TNF strong, vedolizumab conditional in high-risk patients) and intra-abdominal abscess (>2 cm: antibiotics plus drainage, hold immunosuppression) positions are unchanged. THERAPEUTIC ENDOSCOPY (AGA Clinical Practice Update, CGH 2026; details below come from AGA news coverage, not the full text, and are ungraded advice): get cross-sectional imaging before the procedure. Endoscopic balloon dilation is first-line for short strictures (about ≤4-5 cm) with few risk factors (fistula, prestenotic dilation >5 cm, high CRP, prior anti-TNF). Longer or multiple strictures, or ≥3 risk factors, favor surgery.

ACG 2025 (Lichtenstein et al., Am J Gastroenterol) / AGA Living Guideline 2025 (Scott et al., Gastroenterology) / AGA Clinical Practice Update on Therapeutic Endoscopy in IBD 2026 (CGH) · reviewed 2026-10-11 ↗
Merola E … Dore MP · Inflammatory Bowel Diseases · IF 4.5 · PubMed ↗Permalink
IBD meta analysis · n=750 · Oct 1, 2026 · Colorectal Disease · IF 3.2

Long-term clinical outcomes of stem cell-based interventions in Crohn's-related perianal fistula: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

New evidenceCrohn's diseaseperianal diseasemeta-analysissystematic review
Clinical takeawayConsider mesenchymal stem cell therapy for Crohn's disease-associated perianal fistulas refractory to conventional treatment, as it achieves durable closure in approximately two-thirds of patients with a favorable safety profile.
What it foundPooled long-term healing rate with stem cell-based therapy was 59% (95% CI, 51%-67%) in RCTs, compared to conventional treatment.
ContextConfirms stem cell-based therapy as a viable long-term option for refractory Crohn's-related perianal fistulas in patients who have failed conventional treatment, extending prior evidence of short-term efficacy.
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.

Heidari M … Alatab S · Colorectal Disease : the Official Journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland · IF 3.2 · PubMed ↗Permalink

Hepatology· 4

Hepatology prospective cohort · n=1,552 · Oct 1, 2026 · Liver International · IF 6.7

Five Years of HCV Dried Blood Spot Testing in At-Risk Populations and the Impact of Reduced Sensitivity on Missed Diagnoses.

New evidenceviral hepatitisepidemiologyhealth servicesbiomarker
Clinical takeawayConsider DBS testing for HCV screening in underserved populations despite its lower sensitivity compared to plasma-based testing, as it increases testing coverage and identifies a substantial proportion of infections.
What it foundDBS testing detected 27.6% HCV RNA positivity (428/1552) but missed 2.7% of infections (12 cases) due to a detection threshold of 1252 IU/mL, with systematic underestimation compared to plasma measurements (mean bias -2.29 log10 IU/mL).
ContextConfirms the utility of DBS testing in expanding HCV screening in underserved populations, though it highlights a small but notable risk of missed diagnoses due to lower sensitivity compared to plasma-based testing.
Refinessuggested applicable standard· American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases and Infectious Diseases Society of America (AASLD-IDSA), "Hepatitis C Guidance 2023 Update: AASLD-IDSA Recommendations for Testing, Managing, and Treating Hepatitis C Virus Infection" (Patients With Decompensated Cirrhosis section), 2023

Diagnose active infection with HCV antibody testing with reflex HCV RNA PCR (Rating I, A); one-time opt-out anti-HCV testing is recommended for all adults ≥18 years and with each pregnancy (I, B), with annual testing for people who inject drugs, men with HIV who have unprotected sex with men, and MSM on PrEP (IIa, C). Treatment is recommended for all persons with acute or chronic HCV infection EXCEPT those with a short life expectancy that cannot be remediated by HCV therapy, liver transplantation, or another directed therapy. …

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 active infection with HCV antibody testing with reflex HCV RNA PCR (Rating I, A); one-time opt-out anti-HCV testing is recommended for all adults ≥18 years and with each pregnancy (I, B), with annual testing for people who inject drugs, men with HIV who have unprotected sex with men, and MSM on PrEP (IIa, C). Treatment is recommended for all persons with acute or chronic HCV infection EXCEPT those with a short life expectancy that cannot be remediated by HCV therapy, liver transplantation, or another directed therapy. Stage fibrosis noninvasively (FIB-4; biopsy not required). The simplified treatment algorithm applies only to treatment-naive adults and EXCLUDES prior HCV treatment, HBsAg positivity, current pregnancy, known or suspected HCC, prior liver transplantation, and any current or prior episode of decompensated cirrhosis; excluded patients are managed by the genotype/population-specific sections, not the simplified pathway. Treatment-naive WITHOUT cirrhosis (FIB-4 ≤3.25 and no other evidence of cirrhosis): glecaprevir 300 mg/pibrentasvir 120 mg once daily with food × 8 weeks, OR sofosbuvir 400 mg/velpatasvir 100 mg once daily × 12 weeks, both pangenotypic and equally recommended; pretreatment CBC, hepatic function panel, eGFR, quantitative HCV RNA, HIV, HBsAg, pregnancy test within 6 months, plus medication reconciliation for drug-drug interactions. Treatment-naive WITH compensated cirrhosis (Child-Pugh A): glecaprevir/pibrentasvir × 8 weeks for genotypes 1-6, OR sofosbuvir/velpatasvir × 12 weeks for genotypes 1, 2, 4, 5, and 6 only, in genotype 3 with compensated cirrhosis, baseline NS5A resistance testing is required before sofosbuvir/velpatasvir and the presence of Y93H changes the regimen; pretreatment labs within 3 months plus CTP score and liver ultrasound within 6 months. On treatment, no routine laboratory monitoring is required except counseling diabetic patients about hypoglycemia and monitoring INR in patients on warfarin. Decompensated cirrhosis (CTP class B or C, or any prior decompensation): refer to a practitioner with expertise, ideally at a liver transplant center; ALL protease-inhibitor-containing regimens (glecaprevir, grazoprevir, voxilaprevir) are contraindicated. Ribavirin-eligible, treatment-naive: sofosbuvir/velpatasvir + weight-based ribavirin × 12 weeks (all genotypes), or ledipasvir/sofosbuvir + ribavirin × 12 weeks for genotypes 1, 4, 5, 6; ribavirin-ineligible: sofosbuvir/velpatasvir (or ledipasvir/sofosbuvir for GT 1, 4, 5, 6) × 24 weeks without ribavirin; prior sofosbuvir-based or NS5A inhibitor-based treatment failure: sofosbuvir/velpatasvir + weight-based ribavirin × 24 weeks. In CTP class C, start ribavirin at 600 mg/day and increase as tolerated toward weight-based dosing. Cure is defined by quantitative HCV RNA undetectable ≥12 weeks after completing therapy (SVR12), checked with a hepatic function panel; patients without cirrhosis who achieve SVR need no further liver-related follow-up, while patients with cirrhosis continue HCC ultrasound surveillance every 6 months and variceal screening per AASLD guidelines after SVR. Repeat annual HCV RNA testing in anyone with ongoing exposure risk.

American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases and Infectious Diseases Society of America (AASLD-IDSA), "Hepatitis C Guidance 2023 Update: AASLD-IDSA Recommendations for Testing, Managing, and Treating Hepatitis C Virus Infection" (Patients With Decompensated Cirrhosis section), 2023 · reviewed 2026-07-23 ↗
Capelli N … Tuaillon E · Liver International : Official Journal of the International Association for the Study of the Liver · IF 6.7 · PubMed ↗Permalink
Hepatology prospective cohort · n=350 · Oct 1, 2026 · Liver International · IF 6.7

Impact of PD-1 Inhibitor Timing Relative to Locoregional Therapy on Outcomes in uHCC Treated With Lenvatinib-Based Triple Therapy.

New evidencehepatocellular carcinomasystematic reviewbiomarker
Clinical takeawayConsider initiating PD-1 inhibitors prior to HAIC in uHCC patients receiving lenvatinib-based triple therapy, particularly in HAIC-treated patients.
What it foundPre-LRT PD-1 inhibitors improved overall survival to 34.03 months vs 30.6 months with Post-LRT PD-1 inhibitors (p=0.032) in uHCC patients receiving HAIC combined with lenvatinib and PD-1 inhibitors.
ContextChallenges current practice by suggesting PD-1 inhibitor timing relative to LRT impacts survival, particularly in HAIC-treated uHCC patients compared to Post-LRT PD-1 inhibitors.
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.

He J … Chen Z · Liver International : Official Journal of the International Association for the Study of the Liver · IF 6.7 · PubMed ↗Permalink
Hepatology retrospective · n=25,782 · Oct 1, 2026 · J Gastro Hep · IF 3.5

Association of Aspirin With Improved Clinical Outcomes and Survival in Patients With Compensated Cirrhosis: A Propensity Score-Matched Study of 25 782 Individuals.

New evidencecirrhosisportal hypertensionvariceal bleedinghepatocellular carcinoma
Clinical takeawayConsider aspirin for adults with compensated cirrhosis without prior HCC, particularly those with high cardiovascular risk, after weighing bleeding risk.
What it foundAspirin reduced cirrhosis decompensation risk (HR 0.75 at 12 months, 17.8% vs 22.7%) and mortality (NNT 20 at 12 months) compared to no aspirin in adults with compensated cirrhosis without prior HCC, despite an increased risk of nonvariceal bleeding (NNH 143 at 12 months).
ContextChallenges current practice by suggesting aspirin may prevent decompensation in cirrhosis, a condition with limited pharmacologic options.
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.

Abbarh S … Siepmann T · Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology · IF 3.5 · PubMed ↗Permalink
Hepatology retrospective · n=116 · Sep 29, 2026 · Lancet GH · IF 39.1

Short-course prophylaxis with the Toronto HCV protocol for recipients of non-liver solid organ transplants from donors with hepatitis C viraemia: a retrospective, matched cohort study.

New evidenceviral hepatitisliver transplant
Clinical takeawayConsider adopting the Toronto HCV protocol (glecaprevir 300 mg/day, pibrentasvir 120 mg/day, and ezetimibe 10 mg/day for 8 days) for HCV-negative recipients of non-liver solid organ transplants from HCV NAT-positive donors, acknowledging the retrospective design and monitoring for adverse events.
What it foundThe Toronto HCV protocol achieved undetectable HCV RNA at 12 weeks post-transplantation in 100% of recipients (n=116) of non-liver solid organ transplants from HCV NAT-positive donors, compared to the standard 8-12 week course.
ContextThis study confirms the efficacy of a short-course (8-day) antiviral protocol in HCV-negative recipients of non-liver solid organ transplants from HCV NAT-positive donors, challenging the standard 8-12 week course, and supports its adoption as a new standard of care, though further prospective studies are needed.
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.

Aleyadeh W … Feld JJ · Lancet Gastroenterology & Hepatology · IF 39.1 · PubMed ↗Permalink

Esophagus/Reflux· 1

Esophagus/Reflux review · Oct 1, 2026 · Clin Gastro Hep · IF 16.2

Modern Diagnosis and Management of Acid-Related Disorders.

Guideline / reviewGERDBarrett's esophagusproton pump inhibitors
Clinical takeawayConsider using multiday pH measurement for refractory GERD cases where diagnosis is unclear, EET for BE in appropriate candidates, and updated Hp management strategies to address antimicrobial resistance. Continue empiric PPI therapy for classic GERD symptoms as per SOC.
What it foundThe review highlights advances in diagnostic algorithms and personalized therapy for acid-related disorders, including GERD, LPR, PUD, and BE, emphasizing multiday pH measurement, endoscopic eradication therapy (EET) for BE, and updated Hp management strategies in light of antimicrobial resistance.
ContextThis review refines current practices by emphasizing personalized diagnostic and therapeutic approaches, while acknowledging the continued role of empiric PPI therapy in certain cases as per SOC.
Emergingsuggested applicable standard· American College of Gastroenterology (ACG), ACG Clinical Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease (Katz PO, Dunbar KB, Schnoll-Sussman FH, Greer KB, Yadlapati R, Spechler SJ), Am J Gastroenterol 2022;117(1):27-56

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

In patients with classic GERD symptoms (heartburn, regurgitation) and no alarm symptoms, give an 8-week trial of empiric PPI ONCE DAILY before a meal (strong, moderate evidence); administer PPI 30-60 minutes before a meal rather than at bedtime (strong, moderate). Endoscopy is the FIRST test in patients presenting with dysphagia or other alarm symptoms, the guideline names weight loss and GI bleeding, and also in patients with multiple risk factors for Barrett's esophagus (strong, low). If classic symptoms respond to the 8-week trial, attempt to discontinue the PPI (conditional, low); for patients without erosive esophagitis or Barrett's whose symptoms resolved, an attempt at discontinuation should be made; patients requiring maintenance should take the lowest effective dose. If symptoms do not respond adequately to the 8-week trial, or return on discontinuation, perform diagnostic endoscopy, ideally after PPIs are stopped for 2-4 weeks (strong, low). Where GERD is suspected but unclear and endoscopy shows no objective evidence, perform reflux monitoring OFF therapy to establish the diagnosis (strong, low); conversely, do NOT perform off-therapy reflux monitoring solely as a diagnostic test in patients already known to have LA grade C or D esophagitis or long-segment Barrett's, because the diagnosis is already established (strong, low). In refractory GERD, optimize PPI therapy first (strong, moderate); then pH monitoring OFF PPIs if GERD was not previously established by pH study, long-segment Barrett's, or LA grade C/D esophagitis, versus impedance-pH ON PPIs where GERD is already established but symptoms persist on twice-daily PPI (both conditional, low). Before antireflux surgery or endoscopic therapy, HRM is recommended to rule out achalasia and absent contractility, with provocative testing (e.g., multiple rapid swallows) to identify contractile reserve in ineffective esophageal motility; on-therapy reflux monitoring is suggested before intervention in patients with prior objective GERD findings who remain symptomatic. Antireflux surgery by an experienced surgeon is an option for patients with OBJECTIVE evidence of GERD, with severe esophagitis (LA C/D), large hiatal hernia, or persistent troublesome symptoms benefiting most; TIF is suggested only for troublesome regurgitation or heartburn in patients who do not wish to undergo antireflux surgery and who are WITHOUT severe esophagitis (LA C/D) or hiatal hernia >2 cm. For extraesophageal symptoms WITHOUT typical GERD symptoms, perform reflux testing BEFORE starting PPI therapy (strong, moderate); with concomitant typical symptoms, consider twice-daily PPI for 8-12 weeks before further testing (conditional, low). Lifestyle: weight loss in overweight/obese patients (strong, moderate); avoid meals within 2-3 hours of bedtime, avoid tobacco, avoid trigger foods, and elevate the head of the bed for nighttime symptoms (all conditional, low).

American College of Gastroenterology (ACG), ACG Clinical Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease (Katz PO, Dunbar KB, Schnoll-Sussman FH, Greer KB, Yadlapati R, Spechler SJ), Am J Gastroenterol 2022;117(1):27-56 · reviewed 2026-07-23 ↗
Shaheen NJ … Katz PO · Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology : the Official Clinical Practice Journal of the American Gastroenterological Association · IF 16.2 · PubMed ↗Permalink

Endoscopy· 2

Endoscopy meta analysis · n=342 · Oct 1, 2026 · Dig Endosc · IF 5.2

Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Hepaticogastrostomy With Plastic Stent Versus Metallic Stent for Malignant Biliary Obstruction: A Meta-Analysis.

New evidenceEUSbiliary stricturemeta-analysisendoscopy quality
Clinical takeawayConsider using metal stents for EUS-HGS in malignant biliary obstruction after ERCP failure when prioritizing longer patency, but weigh the higher risk of adverse events compared to plastic stents.
What it foundIn EUS-HGS for malignant biliary obstruction after ERCP failure, metal stents had longer time to recurrent biliary obstruction (HR 1.83, 95% CI 1.42-2.36) but higher adverse event rates (OR 0.48, 95% CI 0.30-0.77) compared to plastic stents.
ContextRefines stent selection in EUS-HGS for malignant biliary obstruction after ERCP failure, confirming metal stents' longer patency but higher adverse event risk compared to plastic stents.
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.

Yamazaki H … Kitano M · Digestive Endoscopy : Official Journal of the Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society · IF 5.2 · PubMed ↗Permalink
Endoscopy meta analysis · n=1,442 · Oct 1, 2026 · J Clin Gastro · IF 2.9

Cold Versus Hot Endoscopic Mucosal Resection for ≥15 mm Large Nonpedunculated Colorectal Polyps: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis.

New evidencecost-effectivenesspolypectomyEMRcolorectal cancer screening
Clinical takeawayConsider C-EMR over H-EMR for LNPCPs ≥15 mm due to its cost-effectiveness and lower risk of adverse events, despite slightly higher recurrence rates compared to H-EMR.
What it foundCold EMR (C-EMR) was cost-effective vs hot EMR (H-EMR) for LNPCPs ≥15 mm, with an ICER of -$669,448 per QALY.
ContextRefines current practice by providing cost-effectiveness evidence favoring C-EMR over H-EMR, which is standard but carries higher risks of delayed bleeding and perforation.
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.

Sonaiya S … Mohan BP · Journal of Clinical Gastroenterology · IF 2.9 · PubMed ↗Permalink
Everything else this week75 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.

IBD· 15

Hepatology· 31

Also screened this week72 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 →

Hepatology· 20

Endoscopy· 28

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.