Impact on clinical practice of updated guidelines on iodinated contrast material: CINART.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Nijssen EC
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7305084 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Jul
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Impact on clinical practice of updated guidelines on iodinated contrast material: CINART.
Nijssen E C EC Nelemans P J PJ Rennenberg R J RJ van der Molen A J AJ van Ommen G V GV Wildberger J E JE
European radiology 20200227 7
<h4>Objective</h4>Guidelines on safe use of iodinated contrast material recommend intravenous prophylactic hydration to prevent post-contrast adverse (renal) effects. Recently, guidelines have been updated and standard prophylaxis is no longer recommended for the majority of patients. The current study aims to evaluate the consequences for clinical practice of the updated guidelines in terms of complications, hospitalisations, and costs.<h4>Methods</h4>The Contrast-Induced Nephropathy After Redu ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:To determine whether intravenous low-osmolality iodinated contrast material is associated with post-computed tomography (CT) acute kidney injury (AKI).Institutional review board approval was obtained and patient consent waived for this HIPAA-compliant retrospective study. CT examinations performed over a 10-year period in adult inpatients with sufficient serum creatinine (SCr) data were identified. A one-to-one propensity-matched matched cohort analysis with multivariate analysis of effects was performed with post-CT AKI as the primary outcome measure (10,121 unenhanced and 10,121 intravenous contrast-enhanced CT examinations in 20,242 patients). Propensity matching was performed with respect to likelihood of patient receiving intravenous contrast material (36 tested covariates). The primary endpoint was post-CT AKI by using Acute Kidney Injury Network SCr criteria; the secondary endpoint was post-CT AKI by using traditional SCr criteria for contrast material-induced nephrotoxicity (CIN; SCr increase ≥0.5 mg/dL [44.20 μmol/L] or ≥25%). Multivariate subgroup threshold analysis was performed (SCr <1.5 [<132.60 μmol/L]; ≥1.5 to ≥2.0 mg/dL [≥132.60 to ≥176.80 μmol/L]) and adjusted for assigned propensity scores.Intravenous low-osmolality iodinated contrast material had a significant effect on the development of post-CT AKI for patients with pre-CT SCr levels of 1.6 mg/dL (141.44 μmol/L) or greater (odds ratio, 1.45; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.11, 1.89;P = .007). This effect strengthened as pre-CT SCr increased. Patients with stable SCr less than 1.5 mg/dL (132.60 μmol/L) were not at risk for developing CIN (P = .25, power > 95%). Both endpoints demonstrated similar results (eg, SCr ≥1.6 mg/dL [141.44 μmol/L] by using traditional CIN criteria: odds ratio, 1.64; 95% CI: 1.18, 2.28; P = .003). Post-CT AKI was prevalent in both the unenhanced and contrast-enhanced CT subgroups, and it increased with increases in pre-CT SCr. Many risk factors contributed to development of post-CT AKI, regardless of iodinated contrast material.Intravenous low-osmolality iodinated contrast material is a nephrotoxic risk factor, but not in patients with a stable SCr level less than 1.5 mg/dL. Many factors other than contrast material can affect post-CT AKI rates.
| S-EPMC3606541 | biostudies-other
Project description:Hereditary diffuse gastric cancer (HDGC) is an autosomal dominant cancer syndrome that is characterised by a high prevalence of diffuse gastric cancer and lobular breast cancer. It is largely caused by inactivating germline mutations in the tumour suppressor gene CDH1, although pathogenic variants in CTNNA1 occur in a minority of families with HDGC. In this Policy Review, we present updated clinical practice guidelines for HDGC from the International Gastric Cancer Linkage Consortium (IGCLC), which recognise the emerging evidence of variability in gastric cancer risk between families with HDGC, the growing capability of endoscopic and histological surveillance in HDGC, and increased experience of managing long-term sequelae of total gastrectomy in young patients. To redress the balance between the accessibility, cost, and acceptance of genetic testing and the increased identification of pathogenic variant carriers, the HDGC genetic testing criteria have been relaxed, mainly through less restrictive age limits. Prophylactic total gastrectomy remains the recommended option for gastric cancer risk management in pathogenic CDH1 variant carriers. However, there is increasing confidence from the IGCLC that endoscopic surveillance in expert centres can be safely offered to patients who wish to postpone surgery, or to those whose risk of developing gastric cancer is not well defined.
| S-EPMC7116190 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe 2017 Infectious Diseases Society of America/Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America (IDSA/SHEA) Clostridium (Clostridioides) difficile infection (CDI) guideline update recommended treatment with fidaxomicin or vancomycin for CDI. We aimed to examine outpatient CDI treatment utilization before and after the guideline update and compare clinical outcomes associated with fidaxomicin versus vancomycin use.MethodsA pre-post study design was employed using Medicare data. CDI treatment utilization and clinical outcomes (4- and 8-week sustained response, CDI recurrence) were compared between patients indexed from April-September 2017 (preguideline period) and those indexed from April-September 2018 (postguideline period). Clinical outcomes associated with fidaxomicin versus vancomycin were compared using propensity score-matched analyses.ResultsFrom the pre- to postguideline period, metronidazole use decreased (initial CDI: 81.2% to 53.5%; recurrent CDI: 49.7% to 27.6%) while vancomycin (initial CDI: 17.9% to 44.9%; recurrent CDI: 48.1% to 66.4%) and fidaxomicin (initial CDI: 0.87% to 1.63%; recurrent CDI: 2.2% to 6.0%) use increased significantly (P < .001 for all). However, clinical outcomes did not improve. In propensity score-matched analyses, fidaxomicin versus vancomycin users had 4-week sustained response rates that were higher by 13.5% (95% confidence interval [CI], 4.0%-22.9%; P = .0058) and 30.0% (95% CI, 16.8%-44.3%; P = .0002) in initial and recurrent CDI cohorts, respectively. Recurrence rates were numerically lower for fidaxomicin in both cohorts.ConclusionsVancomycin use increased and metronidazole use decreased after the 2017 guideline update. Fidaxomicin use increased but remained low. Improved outcomes associated with fidaxomicin relative to vancomycin suggest benefits from its greater use in Medicare patients.
| S-EPMC9578155 | biostudies-literature
Project description:"Long COVID" is a term used to describe a condition when the symptoms and signs associated with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) persist for more than three months among patients infected with COVID-19; this condition has been reported globally and poses a serious public health issue. Long COVID can manifest in various forms, highlighting the need for appropriate evaluation and management by experts from various fields. However, due to the lack of clear clinical definitions, knowledge of pathophysiology, diagnostic methods, and treatment protocols, it is necessary to develop the best standard clinical guidelines based on the scientific evidence reported to date. We developed this clinical guideline for diagnosing and treating long COVID by analyzing the latest research data collected from the start of the COVID-19 pandemic until June 2023, along with the consensus of expert opinions. This guideline provides recommendations for diagnosis and treatment that can be applied in clinical practice, based on a total of 32 key questions related to patients with long COVID. The evaluation of patients with long COVID should be comprehensive, including medical history, physical examination, blood tests, imaging studies, and functional tests. To reduce the risk of developing long COVID, vaccination and antiviral treatment during the acute phase are recommended. This guideline will be revised when there is a reasonable need for updates based on the availability of new knowledge on the diagnosis and treatment of long COVID.
| S-EPMC10990882 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo appraise the quality of guidelines on intravenous iodinated contrast media (ICM) use in patients with kidney disease, and to compare the recommendations among them.MethodsWe searched four literature databases, eight guideline libraries, and ten homepages of radiological societies to identify English and Chinese guidelines on intravenous ICM use in patients with kidney disease published between January 2018 and June 2023. The quality of the guidelines was assessed with the Scientific, Transparent, and Applicable Rankings (STAR) tool.ResultsTen guidelines were included, with a median STAR score of 46.0 (range 28.5-61.5). The guidelines performed well in "Recommendations" domain (31/40, 78%), while poor in "Registry" (0/20, 0%) and "Protocol" domains (0/20, 0%). Nine guidelines recommended estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) < 30 mL/min/1.73 m2 as the cutoff for referring patients to discuss the risk-benefit balance of ICM administration. Three guidelines further suggested that patients with an eGFR < 45 mL/min/1.73 m2 and high-risk factors also need referring. Variable recommendations were seen in the acceptable time interval between renal function test and ICM administration, and that between scan and repeated scan. Nine guidelines recommended to use iso-osmolar or low-osmolar ICM, while no consensus has been reached for the dosing of ICM. Nine guidelines supported hydration after ICM use, but their protocols varied. Drugs or blood purification therapy were not recommended as preventative means.ConclusionGuidelines on intravenous ICM use in patients with kidney disease have heterogeneous quality. The scientific societies may consider joint statements on controversial recommendations for variable timing and protocols.Critical relevance statementThe heterogeneous quality of guidelines, and their controversial recommendations, leave gaps in workflow timing, dosing, and post-administration hydration protocols of contrast-enhanced CT scans for patients with kidney diseases, calling for more evidence to establish a safer and more practicable workflow.Key points• Guidelines concerning iodinated contrast media use in kidney disease patients vary. • Controversy remains in workflow timing, contrast dosing, and post-administration hydration protocols. • Investigations are encouraged to establish a safer iodinated contrast media use workflow.
| S-EPMC10948651 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC3563887 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundScientific knowledge is in constant development. Consequently, regular review to assure the trustworthiness of clinical guidelines is required. However, there is still a lack of preferred reporting items of the updating process in updated clinical guidelines. The present article describes the development process of the Checklist for the Reporting of Updated Guidelines (CheckUp).Methods and findingsWe developed an initial list of items based on an overview of research evidence on clinical guideline updating, the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) II Instrument, and the advice of the CheckUp panel (n = 33 professionals). A multistep process was used to refine this list, including an assessment of ten existing updated clinical guidelines, interviews with key informants (response rate: 54.2%; 13/24), a three-round Delphi consensus survey with the CheckUp panel (33 participants), and an external review with clinical guideline methodologists (response rate: 90%; 53/59) and users (response rate: 55.6%; 10/18). CheckUp includes 16 items that address (1) the presentation of an updated guideline, (2) editorial independence, and (3) the methodology of the updating process. In this article, we present the methodology to develop CheckUp and include as a supplementary file an explanation and elaboration document.ConclusionsCheckUp can be used to evaluate the completeness of reporting in updated guidelines and as a tool to inform guideline developers about reporting requirements. Editors may request its completion from guideline authors when submitting updated guidelines for publication. Adherence to CheckUp will likely enhance the comprehensiveness and transparency of clinical guideline updating for the benefit of patients and the public, health care professionals, and other relevant stakeholders.
| S-EPMC5224740 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The incidence of hypersensitivity reactions (HSRs) to iodinated contrast media (ICM) has risen over last years, representing an important health problem. HSRs to ICMs are classified into immediate reactions (IRs) and non-immediate reactions (NIRs) according to if they occur within 1 h or longer after ICM administration. The diagnosis of HSRs to ICM is complex as skin test (ST) sensitivity ranges widely, and drug provocation test (DPT) protocols are heterogeneous. In this manuscript, we describe the clinical characteristics of a series of patients confirmed as HSR to ICM and the diagnosis procedure carried out, looking into those cases confirmed as HSRs to multiple ICMs. For this purpose, we prospectively evaluated patients suggestive of HSRs to ICMs and classified them as IRs or NIRs. STs were carried out using a wide panel of ICMs, and in those with a negative ST, a single-blind placebo controlled DPT was performed with the culprit. If ST or DPT were positive, then tolerance was assessed with an alternative negative ST ICM. We included 101 cases (12 IRs and 89 NIRs) confirmed as allergic. Among them, 36 (35.64%) cases were allergic to more than one ICM (8 IRs and 28 NIRs). The most common ICM involved were iomeprol and iodixanol. Although not statistically significant, the percentage of patients reporting anaphylaxis was higher in patients allergic to multiple ICMs compared with patients allergic to a single ICM (50 vs. 25%). Likewise, the percentage of positive results in STs was higher in patients allergic to multiple ICMs compared with those allergic to a single ICM (for IR 62.5 vs. 25%, p > 0.05; and for NIR, 85.71 vs. 24.59%, p < 0.000). In cases allergic to more than one ICM, DPT with negative-ST ICM was positive in more than 60% (24/36) of cases. Therefore, allergy to multiple ICMs is common, associated to severe reactions in IRs, and confirmed frequently by positive STs. The allergological work-up should include DPT not only to establish the diagnosis but also to identify safe alternative ICM, even if ICM is structurally unrelated and ST is negative. More studies are needed to clarify mechanisms underlying cross-reactivity among ICMs.
| S-EPMC7538657 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe Checklist for the Reporting of Updated Guidelines (CheckUp) was recently developed. However, so far, no systematic assessment of the reporting of updated clinical guidelines (CGs) exists. We aimed to examine (1) the completeness of reporting the updating process in CGs and (2) the inter-observer reliability of CheckUp.MethodsWe conducted a systematic assessment of the reporting of the updating process in a sample of updated CGs using CheckUp. We performed a systematic search to identify updated CGs published in 2015, developed by a professional society, reporting a systematic review of the evidence, and containing at least one recommendation. Three reviewers independently assessed the CGs with CheckUp (16 items). We calculated the median score per item, per domain, and overall, converting scores to a 10-point scale. Multiple linear regression analyses were used to identify differences according to country, type of organisation, scope, and health topic of updated CGs. We calculated the intraclass coefficient (ICC) and 95% confidence interval (95% CI) for domains and overall score.ResultsWe included in total 60 updated CGs. The median domain score on a 10-point scale for presentation was 5.8 (range 1.7 to 10), for editorial independence 8.3 (range 3.3 to 10), and for methodology 5.7 (range 0 to 10). The median overall score on a 10-point scale was 6.3 (range 3.1 to 10). Presentation and justification items at recommendation level (respectively reported by 27 and 38% of the CGs) and the methods used for the external review and implementing changes in practice were particularly poorly reported (both reported by 38% of the CGs). CGs developed by a European or international institution obtained a statistically significant higher overall score compared to North American or Asian institutions (p = 0.014). Finally, the agreement among the reviewers on the overall score was excellent (ICC 0.88, 95% CI 0.75 to 0.95).ConclusionsThe reporting of updated CGs varies considerably with significant room for improvement. We recommend using CheckUp to assess the updating process in updated CGs and as a blueprint to inform methods and reporting strategies in updating.
| S-EPMC5639761 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) is a form of chronic liver disease that is characterized by excessive fatty infiltration of the liver in the absence of significant alcohol consumption. As in the adult population, the etiology of NAFLD in children has been attributed to genetic predilection, insulin resistance, and obesity. The prevalence of NAFLD in the pediatric population has consistently increased over the past few decades, and it is currently considered the most common chronic liver disease in children. With increasing disease prevalence, NAFLD diagnosis and management have become more challenging. New guidelines for the management of pediatric NAFLD were published in 2017 by the North American Society for Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Nutrition. Additionally, the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases updated their guidelines on NAFLD and included a section dedicated to the pediatric population. This article provides an overall description of the burden and natural history of pediatric NAFLD, with a focus on diagnosis and management in light of the recently updated guidelines.
| S-EPMC6111502 | biostudies-other