1 ESGE recommends endoscopic en bloc resection for superficial esophageal squamous cell cancers (SCCs), excluding those with obvious submucosal involvement (strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence). Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) may be considered in such lesions when they are smaller than 10mm if en bloc resection can be assured. However, ESGE recommends endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) as the first option, mainly to provide an en bloc resection with accurate pathology staging and to avoid missing important histological features (strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence). \ud \ud 2 ESGE recommends endoscopic resection with a curative intent for visible lesions in Barrett's esophagus (strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence). ESD has not been shown to be superior to EMR for excision of mucosal cancer, and for that reason EMR should be preferred. ESD may be considered in selected cases, such as lesions larger than 15mm, poorly lifting tumors, and lesions at risk for submucosal invasion (strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence). \ud \ud 3 ESGE recommends endoscopic resection for the treatment of gastric superficial neoplastic lesions that possess a very low risk of lymph node metastasis (strong recommendation, high quality evidence). EMR is an acceptable option for lesions smaller than 10-15mmwith a very low probability of advanced histology (Paris 0-IIa). However, ESGE recommends ESD as treatment of choice for most gastric superficial neoplastic lesions (strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence). \ud \ud 4 ESGE states that the majority of colonic and rectal superficial lesions can be effectively removed in a curative way by standard polypectomy and/or by EMR (strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence). ESD can be considered for removal of colonic and rectal lesions with high suspicion of limited submucosal invasion that is based on two main criteria of depressed morphology and irregular or nongranular surface pattern, particularly if the lesions are larger than 20 mm; or ESD can be considered for colorectal lesions that otherwise cannot be optimally and radically removed by snare-based techniques (strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence)

Tumor budding is a well-established independent prognostic factor in colorectal cancer but a standardized method for its assessment has been lacking. The primary aim of the International Tumor Budding Consensus Conference (ITBCC) was to reach agreement on an international, evidence-based standardized scoring system for tumor budding in colorectal cancer.The ITBCC included 9 sessions with presentations, a pre-meeting survey, and an e-book covering the key publications on tumor budding in colorectal cancer. The "Grading of Recommendation Assessment, Development and Evaluation" method was used to determine the strength of recommendations and quality of evidence.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

This study showed that endoscopic therapy was highly effective and safe, with an excellent long-term survival rate. The risk factors identified may help stratify patients who are at risk for recurrence and those requiring more intensified follow-up.

No abstract

The histologic examination of endoscopic biopsies or resection specimens remains a key step in the work-up of affected inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients and can be used for diagnosis and differential diagnosis, particularly in the differentiation of UC from CD and other non-IBD related colitides. The introduction of new treatment strategies in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) interfering with the patients' immune system may result in mucosal healing, making the pathologists aware of the impact of treatment upon diagnostic features. The European Crohn's and Colitis Organisation (ECCO) and the European Society of Pathology (ESP) jointly elaborated a consensus to establish standards for histopathology diagnosis in IBD. The consensus endeavors to address: (i) procedures required for a proper diagnosis, (ii) features which can be used for the analysis of endoscopic biopsies, (iii) features which can be used for the analysis of surgical samples, (iv) criteria for diagnosis and differential diagnosis, and (v) special situations including those inherent to therapy. Questions that were addressed include: how many features should be present for a firm diagnosis? What is the role of histology in patient management, including search for dysplasia? Which features if any, can be used for assessment of disease activity? The statements and general recommendations of this consensus are based on the highest level of evidence available, but significant gaps remain in certain areas.