Background/Aims: Chronic constipation is prevalent yet under-diagnosed across Asia, compromising quality of life and burdening healthcare systems. Cultural stigma, varied diets, and limited access to standardized diagnostic tools delay timely care. Methods: The Bali Chronic Constipation Roundtable in November 2024, brought together experts from 11 Asian countries. The group reviewed epidemiological data, analyzed multinational questionnaire on clinical practice pattern, and conducted structured discussions to identify key barriers and propose region-specific recommendations. Results: Chronic constipation prevalence varies across Asia, ranging from 1.8% in India to 16.6% in Japan, with women and the elderly disproportionately affected. Under-reporting persists owing to cultural taboos and widespread self treatment with laxatives and traditional medications. Although the Rome IV criteria remains the global standard, they may not fully reflect Asian symptom profiles, and diagnosis is limited by scarce motility laboratories. First line therapies such as dietary-fiber optimization and osmotic laxatives are widely available, but newer pharmacotherapies (prucalopride, linaclotide, lubiprostone, and elobixibat) remain costly and unevenly accessible. Biofeedback for dyssynergic defecation is underutilized due to limited availability. Experts recommend expanded regional research on to refine diagnostic criteria, coupled with enhanced physician education and public awareness. They advocate accessibility to second-line and novel therapies that incorporate culturally attuned regional guidelines, and improved access to gastrointestinal motility testing. Conclusions The Bali Chronic Constipation Roundtable highlighted Asia’s need for region specific diagnostics and management. Addressing diagnostic and treatment gaps will improve outcomes, while ongoing researcher clinician policy collaboration must standardize guidelines, advance research, and ensure equitable care across Asia.

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), which is commonly encountered in clinical practice, has become increasingly prevalent in Asia in recent years. Definitive diagnosis of GERD requires upper gastrointestinal endoscopy and ambulatory pH monitoring and is therefore challenging. Endoscopic lesions are usually not incorporated into the diagnostic criteria, and pH monitoring is expensive, complicated, and uncomfortable for patients. Studies have investigated novel methods for diagnosis of GERD. Mucosal integrity, evaluated by mucosal admittance or impedance, is impaired in GERD owing to microscopic epithelial changes. Measurement of mucosal integrity is simple and can be performed endoscopically. Mucosal impedance has been investigated as a method to differentiate between GERD, non-GERD, and eosinophilic esophagitis, and mucosal admittance provides evidence to support diagnosis of GERD. Further research on these novel techniques is warranted to incorporate these into the diagnostic modalities used for GERD.