Inherited retinal diseases (IRDs) are a group of severe retinal degenerative diseases leading to permanent visual impairment. IRDs are the major cause of irreversible blindness in children and working age groups. Gene therapy is a new clinical treatment method and currently the only clear and effective treatment for IRDs, while, there are still risks in clinical research and application. How to standardize perioperative management and reduce the potential risks of treatment is one of the keys to ensure the safety and effectiveness of treatment. However, there is no systematic and standardized guidance on the perioperative management for IRDs gene therapy. Therefore, in order to standardize the perioperative management, the Fundus Disease Group of Ophthalmology Society of Chinese Medical Association and Chinese Medical Doctor Association organized domestic experts to put forward standardized opinions on the perioperative management of IRDs gene therapy in China after repeated discussion and combined with domestic and foreign research experience, so as to provide clinicians with reference and application in clinical research and practice.
In 2014, The International Diabetes Federation (IDF), American Diabetes Association (ADA), International Society for Paediatric and Adolescent Diabetes (ISPAD), and Chinese Diabetes Society (CDS) published several guidelines and consensuses in the clinical diagnosis, treatment and comprehensive management of diabetes mellitus. In addition, guidelines and consensuses published by the American Stroke Association (ASA), American National Lipid Association (ANLA), Chinese Society for Metabolic & Bariatric Surgery (CSMB) and European Association for the Study of Obesity (EASO) also included some contents related to the management and control of diabetes mellitus. In order to further strengthen the clinical management and treatment of diabetes mellitus, this paper reviewed the important advantages of clinical practice guidelines and consensuses published in 2014 in the field of diabetes mellitus.
ObjectivesTo evaluate the methodological and reporting quality of clinical guidelines and consensus for esophageal cancer.MethodsDatabases including PubMed, EMbase, Web of Science, CBM, WanFang Data and CNKI were electronically searched and major guideline websites such as GIN, NICE, NGC and Yimaitong were also searched to collect guidelines and consensus for esophageal cancer from inception to August 2018. Two reviewers independently screened the literatures and extracted data according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria and then evaluated the quality of the included guidelines using the AGREE II and RIGHT instruments.ResultsA total of 26 esophageal cancer guidelines and consensus were included. The mean scores for each domain of AGREE II was 49.63% for scope and purpose, 25.16% for stakeholder involvement, 23.42% for rigor of development, 49.25% for clarity of presentation, 16.91% for applicability, and 21.07% for editorial independence. The item with the highest reporting rate among the RIGHT evaluation items was 5 (84.62%), followed by 1a (80.77%), 1c (65.38%), 13a (65.38%), and 4 (61.54%), and the remaining items were all reported below 50%. Results of subgroup analysis showed that the guidelines and consensus developed based on the evidence-based medicine method had higher average scores in the six domains of AGREE II and the RIGHT score than the guidelines and consensus developed based on expert opinions or reviews. The foreign guidelines and consensus had higher average scores in the three domains of AGREE II (formulation rigor, clarity, editorial independence) and the RIGHT score than the domestic guidelines.ConclusionsThe methodological and reporting quality of the guidelines and consensus on esophageal cancer is low, with the guidelines and consensus in China even lower, requiring further improvement. It is suggested that the guideline developers should refer to the standards such as AGREE II and RIGHT to develop high-quality guidelines and promote their application, so as to better guide the standardized diagnosis and treatment of esophageal cancer.
Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) developed rapidly since firstly introduced to clinical practice in 2002. In 2015, Experts Consensus for Transeatheter Aortic Valve Replacement (abbreviated as the Consensus) helped TAVR develop normatively and safely in China. This article interpreted the Consensus in combination of new evolutions of TAVR field: first, the indications of TAVR expand from inoperative and high risk patients to the intermediate risk patients; second, although the Consensus recommended pre-dilation with balloon of modest size, the necessity of pre-dilation is under debate; third, the Consensus pointed out main complications of TAVR, and the main strategies to avoid complications are careful pre-procedural analysis and development of new device; fourth, our experts had made outstanding contribution to TAVR in the treatment of patients with bicuspid aortic valve, which still has many problems to be solved urgently.
Objective To evaluate quality and current status of traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) guidelines and consensus, and to promote the improvements in the quality of guidelines and consensus. Methods A systematic collection of TCM guidelines and consensus published in medical journals in 2022 was conducted. We used scientific, transparent, and applicable ranking tools (STAR) for evaluation, analyzed the scoring rates (%), and assessed the quality level and influencing factors of guidelines and consensus through methods such as comparison and stratification. Results A total of 130 TCM guidelines and consensus were included. Guideline areas with higher scores included recommendations (65.3%), evidence (55.9%), and guideline development groups (54.2%). In the case of consensus, higher scores were observed in recommendations (38.7%), guideline development groups (37.0%), and funding (30.0%). The total score rate of TCM guidelines exceeded that of national guidelines, while the consensus rate was lower. Stratified analysis revealed statistical differences in guideline score rates among journals and issuing institutions, as well as significant differences in consensus score rates among journals, formulation institutions, subjects, and funding categories. Conclusion The quantity and quality of TCM guidelines and consensus are on a positive trajectory, with higher quality levels in guidelines than in consensus. The overall quality of TCM guidelines surpasses that of national guidelines, particularly emphasizing the scientificity of guideline formulation. However, the overall quality of consensus remains lower than that of the national consensus. Factors such as journals, formulation institutions, subjects, and funding categories are identified as potential influences on the quality of TCM guidelines and consensus.
With the rapid development of fundus imaging technology, it is of great significance to establish a new naming system for neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD) based on the multi-mode imaging. In 2020, an international panel of retina specialists, imaging and image reading center experts, and ocular pathologists reached a consensus after repeated discussions, a new name for nAMD subtype and related lesions was established based on the previous knowledge of fundus fluorescein angiography and pathology, combining indocyanine green angiography, optical coherence tomography and optical coherence tomography angiography with current pathological knowledge, in order to help ophthalmologists to study nAMD. The consensus proposed the term "macular neovascularization" and classified it into type 1, type 2 and type 3. Many lesions related to macular neovascularization, such as pigment epithelial detachment, hemorrhage, fibrosis, rip of retinal pigment epithelium and so on, were named. The new designation will help improve clinical communication between different studies, establish standard definitions and terms between reading centers and researchers, and further promote the understanding and communication of nAMD among ophthalmologists.
As a tool for building consensus among groups, Delphi technique has been widely used in healthcare research which is appropriate for clinical questions where quantitative methods are unlikely to yield results that can be successfully implemented in practice. Researchers in palliative care developed standards for conducting and reporting Delphi studies (CREDES). This paper introduces and interprets the specific content of CREDES standards, with a view to providing reference for the evaluation of Delphi research design quality and report transparency.
Laparoscopy has become a commonly used approach to diagnosis and treatment of acute abdomen, and it has good diagnostic value and therapeutic effect in selective cases. It should be practiced by experienced surgeons in laparoscopic surgery and emergency abdominal surgery. Hemodynamic instability, severe abdominal distension, fecal peritonitis, and tumor perforation are contraindications to laparoscopy. In recent years, more and more acute abdominal diseases can be successfully treated by laparoscopy. Randomized controlled trials have proved the laparoscopic treatment in acute appendicitis, acute cholecystitis, peptic ulcer perforation, acute gynecological diseases was comparable to open surgery, and had advantages of fewer complications and faster postoperative recovery. The utilization of laparoscopy in other diseases such as blunt and penetrating abdominal trauma, small intestinal obstruction, and diverticulitis with perforation remains controversial, and needs more randomized controlled trials to investigate the feasibility of laparoscopic surgery.
Neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorder (NMOSD) is a rare debilitating autoimmune disease of the central nervous system. Three monoclonal antibodies were recently approved as maintenance therapies for aquaporin-4 immunoglobulin G (AQP4-IgG) seropositive NMOSD (eculizumab, inebilizumab, and satralizumab). Neurol Neuroimmunol Neuroinflamm published international Delphi consensus on the management of AQP4-IgG+ NMOSD in May 31, 2023. Twenty-five statements reached consensus after two voting rounds by 24 Delphi panel experts. Inebilizumab and satralizumab have been listed in China, and off-label immunosuppressants and biologics are also used in clinical practice. However, there are no standard treatment recommendations in use of these biologics and maintenance therapy of NMOSD. Therefore, the interpretation of this consensus, focusing on the initial use of monoclonal drugs, the conversion between monoclonal drugs and immunosuppressants, as well as the application and safety of special populations, is conducive to improving the normative and effective use of of monoclonal drugs in NMOSD y ophthalmologists and neurologists
Massive cerebral infarction with malignant brain edema has poor prognosis with very high mortality, despite aggressive medical treatment. Surgical decompression is recommended by Chinese and international clinical guidelines for patients with massive cerebral infarction, however, there is no standardized diagnosis and treatment protocol in clinical practice. Following the principle of evidence-based medicine and based on the diagnosis and treatment norms of the participating hospitals of Severe Ischaemic Stroke Collaboration in recent years, we recommend this consensus statement of the standardized surgical decompression for malignant brain edema in massive cerebral infarction.