ESGE and its publications

Significant variability in the technical performance of gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy, overuse of endoscopy for surveillance, an underuse of more advanced endoscopic interventions, such as endoscopic submucosal dissection or endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage, are only a few of the challenges that the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) has sought to address through society publications. Over the past decade, ESGE has developed a rigorous, evidence-based, and reproducible standard for ESGE publications. ESGE is an amalgam of 41 national gastroenterology/endoscopy member societies; thus, ESGE publications must be of sufficiently high quality to be either directly accepted as the equivalent to the local standards of our member societies or to influence the local standard of care and thereby standardize practice within our large and diverse ESGE community.

ESGE has strived to advance and improve the methodology of its publications to keep up with the technological advancements and innovations in GI endoscopy. For example, when the ESGE Guideline Committee was first established, its focus was exclusively on producing clinical guidelines as guidance on whether and when GI endoscopy was indicated. Later, quality standards in endoscopy were introduced and a more rigorous methodology for ESGE publications was created. Most recently, technology innovations, such as bariatric endoscopy, third-space endoscopy, and therapeutic endoscopic ultrasound, have resulted in additional training challenges for advanced endoscopy procedures; thus, ESGE has created procedure-specific curricula.

Today, ESGE publications cover the entire spectrum of guidance and training in GI endoscopy ([Fig. 1]), addressing the following fundamental questions.

Fig. 1 European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) publications on the ESGE website.

1. When is an endoscopic diagnostic evaluation and/or therapeutic intervention recommended?

2. What is the level of competence required for the endoscopist undertaking such intervention(s)?

3. How can we train an endoscopist to achieve such a level of competence?

4. How can we measure and improve quality of GI endoscopy performance?

These questions deserve to be addressed by specific methodologies for two main reasons: 1) the amount of published high level evidence is much lower for the level of competence and training required for endoscopic procedures than for clinically oriented issues; and 2) the output of such information has been primarily qualitative in the case of clinical recommendations (to do vs. not to do endoscopy) and quantitative for defining the level of endoscopist competence required and its acquisition. Thus, ESGE publications are currently divided into 1) clinical guidelines, 2) performance (quality) measures, and 3) curricula.

Publication History

Article published online:
30 January 2024

• References

• 1 Hassan C, Aabakken L, Ebigbo A. et al. Partnership with African countries: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) – Position Statement. Endosc Int Open 2018; 06: E1247-E1255
• 2 Hassan C, Ponchon T, Bisschops R. et al. European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Publications Policy – Update 2020. Endoscopy 2020; 52: 123-126
• 3 Bretthauer M, Løberg M, Wieszczy P. et al. Effect of colonoscopy screening on risks of colorectal cancer and related death. N Engl J Med 2022; 387: 1547-1556
• 4 Rutter MD, Senore C, Bisschops R. et al. The European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Quality Improvement Initiative: developing performance measures. Endoscopy 2016; 48: 81-89
• 5 Dekker E, Houwen BBSL, Puig I. et al. Curriculum for optical diagnosis training in Europe: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Position Statement. Endoscopy 2020; 52: 899-923