The quality of clinical trials is essential to advance treatment, inform regulatory decisions and meta-analysis. With the increased incidence of idiopathic intracranial hypertension and the... Show moreThe quality of clinical trials is essential to advance treatment, inform regulatory decisions and meta-analysis. With the increased incidence of idiopathic intracranial hypertension and the emergence of clinical trials for novel therapies in this condition, the International Headache Society Guidelines for Controlled Clinical Trials in Idiopathic Intracranial Hypertension aims to establish guidelines for designing state-of-the-art controlled clinical trials for idiopathic intracranial hypertension. Show less
Youssef, A.; Lashley, E.E.L.O.; Vermeulen, N.; Hoorn, M.L.P. van der 2023
BackgroundPractice variation in recurrent pregnancy loss (RPL) care is common. International guidelines vary in their recommendations for the management of RPL couples, which could lead to an... Show moreBackgroundPractice variation in recurrent pregnancy loss (RPL) care is common. International guidelines vary in their recommendations for the management of RPL couples, which could lead to an increase of cross border reproductive care. Currently, the Dutch RPL guideline is being adapted from the European Society for Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE) guideline. We aim to identify discrepancies between RPL guidelines and RPL practice. These discrepancies could be considered in the development of a new guideline and implementation strategies to promote adherence to new recommendations.MethodsA nationwide survey on the management of RPL patients was conducted across all 107 hospital-based obstetrics and gynaecology practices in the Netherlands. The survey was sent via the Dutch Society for Obstetricians and Gynaecologists to all affiliated clinicians. The questionnaire consisted of 36 questions divided in four sections: clinician's demographics, RPL definition, investigations and therapy. The data were compared to the recommendations given by the Dutch national guideline and the most recent guideline of the ESHRE.ResultsAll hospital-based practices (100%; n = 107) filled in the online questionnaire. The majority of respondents defined RPL similarly, as two or more pregnancy losses (87.4%), not obligatory consecutive (93.1%). More than half of respondents routinely perform thrombophilia screening ( 58%), although not advised by the ESHRE, while thyroid function (57%), thyroid auto-immunity (27%) and & beta;2-glycoprotein antibodies (42%) in the context of antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) are recommended but investigated less often. Regarding parental karyotyping, 20% of respondents stated they always perform parental karyotyping, without prior risk assessment. because of RPL. Treatment for hereditary thrombophilia was frequently (43.8% (n = 137)) prescribed although not recommended. And finally, a considerable part (12-16%) of respondents prescribe medication in case of unexplained RPL.ConclusionWhile many clinicians perform investigations recommended by the ESHRE, there is a considerable variation of RPL practice in the Netherlands. We identified discrepancies between RPL guidelines and RPL practice, providing possibilities to focus on multifaceted implementation strategies, such as educational intervention, local consensus processes and auditing and feedback. This will improve the quality of care provided to RPL patients and may diminish the necessity felt by patients to turn to multiple opinions or cross border reproductive care. Show less
Sudden cardiac death and ventricular arrhythmias are a global health issue. Recently, a new guideline for the management of ventricular arrhythmias and prevention of sudden cardiac death has been... Show moreSudden cardiac death and ventricular arrhythmias are a global health issue. Recently, a new guideline for the management of ventricular arrhythmias and prevention of sudden cardiac death has been published by the European Society of Cardiology that serves as an update to the 2015 guideline on this topic. This review focuses on 10 novel key aspects of the current guideline: As new aspects, public basic life support and access to defibrillators are guideline topics. Recommendations for the diagnostic evaluation of patients with ventricular arrhythmias are structured according to frequently encountered clinical scenarios. Management of electrical storm has become a new focus. In addition, genetic testing and cardiac magnetic resonance imaging significantly gained relevance for both diagnostic evaluation and risk stratification. New algorithms for antiarrhythmic drug therapy aim at improving safe drug use. The new recommendations reflect increasing relevance of catheter ablation of ventricular arrhythmias, especially in patients without structural heart disease or stable coronary artery disease with only mildly impaired ejection fraction and haemodynamically tolerated ventricular tachycardias. Regarding sudden cardiac death risk stratification, risk calculators for laminopathies, and long QT syndrome are now considered besides the already established risk calculator for hypertrophic cardiomyopathy. Generally, ‘new’ risk markers beyond left ventricular ejection fraction are increasingly considered for recommendations on primary preventive implantable cardioverter defibrillator therapy. Furthermore, new recommendations for diagnosis of Brugada syndrome and management of primary electrical disease have been included. With many comprehensive flowcharts and practical algorithms, the new guideline takes a step towards a user-oriented reference book. Show less
AimsTo evaluate the effect of the ESC/EAS 2019 dyslipidaemia guidelines on patient management of lipid-lowering therapyin patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS), through a survey designed to... Show moreAimsTo evaluate the effect of the ESC/EAS 2019 dyslipidaemia guidelines on patient management of lipid-lowering therapyin patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS), through a survey designed to compare post-ACS patient management in 2022 with that in 2018.MethodsOnline questionnaires focused on lipid profile and medications were used to gather data from 2650 ACS patients in 6 European countries, treated between March–June 2022 (ACS EuroPath IV survey). These data were compared with data collected from 2650 patients who participated in the ACS EuroPath I survey (conducted in 2018).ResultsLipid testing was performed in 90% of patients and was done sooner after admission in 2022 versus 2018 (mean 1.4 vs 1.7 days). Increased testing for non-HDL-C, lipoprotein(a), and ApoB was observed over time. At discharge, most patients (≥90%) were receiving lipid-lowering therapy. Prescribing patterns differed, with a higher proportion of patients receiving statin plus ezetimibe combination therapy in 2022 versus 2018 (34% vs 13%). LDL-C levels were lower in 2022 versus 2018 at admission and at 1st, 2nd and 3rd post-discharge follow-up points. More patients achieved low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) goals in 2022 versus 2018 at the first follow-up (average 14 vs 16 weeks since discharge; <70 mg/dL [1.8 mmol/L]: 34% vs 20%; <55 mg/dL [1.4 mmol/L]: 18% vs 10%) and at subsequent follow-up points.ConclusionLDL-C goal achievement has improved since the release of the 2019 guidelines, but lipid management in post-ACS patients remains suboptimal. Show less
Suboptimal diet is a major modifiable risk factor in cardiovascular disease. Governments, individuals, educational institutes, healthcare facilities and the industry all share the responsibility to... Show moreSuboptimal diet is a major modifiable risk factor in cardiovascular disease. Governments, individuals, educational institutes, healthcare facilities and the industry all share the responsibility to improve dietary habits. Healthcare facilities in particular present a unique opportunity to convey the importance of healthy nutrition to patients, visitors and staff. Guidelines on cardiovascular disease do include policy suggestions for population-based approaches to diet in a broad list of settings. Regrettably, healthcare facilities are not explicitly included in this list. The authors propose to explicitly include healthcare facilities as a setting for policy suggestions in the current and future ESC Guidelines for cardiovascular disease prevention in clinical practice. (c) 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Show less
Zeppenfeld, K.; Tfelt-Hansen, J.; Riva, M. de; Winkel, B.G.; Behr, E.R.; Blom, N.A.; ... ; ESC Scientific Document Group 2022
In 1995, a committee of the International Headache Society developed and published the first edition of the Guidelines for Controlled Trials of Drugs in Cluster Headache. These have not been... Show moreIn 1995, a committee of the International Headache Society developed and published the first edition of the Guidelines for Controlled Trials of Drugs in Cluster Headache. These have not been revised. With the emergence of new medications, neuromodulation devices and trial designs, an updated version of the International Headache Society Guidelines for Controlled Clinical Trials in Cluster Headache is warranted. Given the scarcity of evidence-based data for cluster headache therapies, the update is largely consensus-based, but takes into account lessons learned from recent trials and demands by patients. It is intended to apply to both drug and neuromodulation treatments, with specific proposals for the latter when needed. The primary objective is to propose a template for designing high quality, state-of-the-art, controlled clinical trials of acute and preventive treatments in episodic and chronic cluster headache. The recommendations should not be regarded as dogma and alternative solutions to particular methodological problems should be explored in the future and scientifically validated. Show less
Background The Dutch Working Party on Antibiotic Policy (SWAB) in collaboration with relevant professional societies, has updated their evidence-based guidelines on empiric antibacterial therapy of... Show moreBackground The Dutch Working Party on Antibiotic Policy (SWAB) in collaboration with relevant professional societies, has updated their evidence-based guidelines on empiric antibacterial therapy of sepsis in adults. Methods Our multidisciplinary guideline committee generated ten population, intervention, comparison, and outcome (PICO) questions relevant for adult patients with sepsis. For each question, a literature search was performed to obtain the best available evidence and assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system. The quality of evidence for clinically relevant outcomes was graded from high to very low. In structured consensus meetings, the committee formulated recommendations as strong or weak. When evidence could not be obtained, recommendations were provided based on expert opinion and experience (good practice statements). Results Fifty-five recommendations on the antibacterial therapy of sepsis were generated. Recommendations on empiric antibacterial therapy choices were differentiated for sepsis according to the source of infection, the potential causative pathogen and its resistance pattern. One important revision was the distinction between low, increased and high risk of infection with Enterobacterales resistant to third generation cephalosporins (3GRC-E) to guide the choice of empirical therapy. Other new topics included empirical antibacterial therapy in patients with a reported penicillin allergy and the role of pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics to guide dosing in sepsis. We also established recommendations on timing and duration of antibacterial treatment. Conclusions Our multidisciplinary committee formulated evidence-based recommendations for the empiric antibacterial therapy of adults with sepsis in The Netherlands. Show less
Aims: European guidelines set low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) treatment goals <1.4 mmol/L after acute coronary syndrome (ACS), and <1.0 mmol/L for patients with recurrent... Show moreAims: European guidelines set low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) treatment goals <1.4 mmol/L after acute coronary syndrome (ACS), and <1.0 mmol/L for patients with recurrent cardiovascular events <= 2 years. Many ACS patients do not achieve these goals on statin alone. We examined actual goal achievement with alirocumab and projected achievement with ezetimibe, either added to optimized statin therapy. Methods and results: The ODYSSEY OUTCOMES trial (NCT01663402) compared alirocumab with placebo in 18 924 patients with recent ACS and hyperlipidaemia despite high-intensity or maximum-tolerated statin therapy. This subanalysis comprised 17 589 patients with LDL-C >= 1.4 mmol/L at baseline who did not receive ezetimibe treatment. High-intensity statin treatment was used in 88.8%. Median (interquartile range) baseline LDL-C was 2.3 (1.9-2.7) mmol/L. With alirocumab, 94.6% of patients achieved LDL-C <1.4 mmol/L at >= 1 post-baseline measurement vs. 17.3% with placebo. Among 2236 patients with a previous cardiovascular event within 2 years (before the qualifying ACS), 85.2% vs. 3.5%, respectively, achieved LDL-C <1.0 mmol/L. Among patients not treated with ezetimibe, we projected that its use would have achieved LDL-C <1.4 and <1.0 mmol/L in 10.6 and 0%, respectively, at baseline (assuming 18 +/- 3% reduction of LDL-C). Conclusion: Among patients with recent ACS and LDL-C >= 1.4 mmol/L despite optimized statin therapy, the addition of alirocumab allowed 94.6% to achieve the 2019 European guideline LDL-C goal <1.4 mmol/L, and 85.2% of those with recurrent cardiovascular events to achieve <1.0 mmol/L. In contrast, the addition of ezetimibe to optimized statin therapy was projected to achieve LDL-C <1.4 mmol/L in only 10.6% of patients at baseline. Show less
Background Structured, systematic methods to formulate consensus recommendations, such as the Delphi process or nominal group technique, among others, provide the opportunity to harness the... Show moreBackground Structured, systematic methods to formulate consensus recommendations, such as the Delphi process or nominal group technique, among others, provide the opportunity to harness the knowledge of experts to support clinical decision making in areas of uncertainty. They are widely used in biomedical research, in particular where disease characteristics or resource limitations mean that high-quality evidence generation is difficult. However, poor reporting of methods used to reach a consensus - for example, not clearly explaining the definition of consensus, or not stating how consensus group panellists were selected - can potentially undermine confidence in this type of research and hinder reproducibility. Our objective is therefore to systematically develop a reporting guideline to help the biomedical research and clinical practice community describe the methods or techniques used to reach consensus in a complete, transparent, and consistent manner. Methods The ACCORD (ACcurate COnsensus Reporting Document) project will take place in five stages and follow the EQUATOR Network guidance for the development of reporting guidelines. In Stage 1, a multidisciplinary Steering Committee has been established to lead and coordinate the guideline development process. In Stage 2, a systematic literature review will identify evidence on the quality of the reporting of consensus methodology, to obtain potential items for a reporting checklist. In Stage 3, Delphi methodology will be used to reach consensus regarding the checklist items, first among the Steering Committee, and then among a broader Delphi panel comprising participants with a range of expertise, including patient representatives. In Stage 4, the reporting guideline will be finalised in a consensus meeting, along with the production of an Explanation and Elaboration (E&E) document. In Stage 5, we plan to publish the reporting guideline and E&E document in open-access journals, supported by presentations at appropriate events. Dissemination of the reporting guideline, including a website linked to social media channels, is crucial for the document to be implemented in practice. Discussion The ACCORD reporting guideline will provide a set of minimum items that should be reported about methods used to achieve consensus, including approaches ranging from simple unstructured opinion gatherings to highly structured processes. Show less
BackgroundStructured, systematic methods to formulate consensus recommendations, such as the Delphi process or nominal group technique, among others, provide the opportunity to harness the... Show moreBackgroundStructured, systematic methods to formulate consensus recommendations, such as the Delphi process or nominal group technique, among others, provide the opportunity to harness the knowledge of experts to support clinical decision making in areas of uncertainty. They are widely used in biomedical research, in particular where disease characteristics or resource limitations mean that high-quality evidence generation is difficult. However, poor reporting of methods used to reach a consensus – for example, not clearly explaining the definition of consensus, or not stating how consensus group panellists were selected – can potentially undermine confidence in this type of research and hinder reproducibility. Our objective is therefore to systematically develop a reporting guideline to help the biomedical research and clinical practice community describe the methods or techniques used to reach consensus in a complete, transparent, and consistent manner.MethodsThe ACCORD (ACcurate COnsensus Reporting Document) project will take place in five stages and follow the EQUATOR Network guidance for the development of reporting guidelines. In Stage 1, a multidisciplinary Steering Committee has been established to lead and coordinate the guideline development process. In Stage 2, a systematic literature review will identify evidence on the quality of the reporting of consensus methodology, to obtain potential items for a reporting checklist. In Stage 3, Delphi methodology will be used to reach consensus regarding the checklist items, first among the Steering Committee, and then among a broader Delphi panel comprising participants with a range of expertise, including patient representatives. In Stage 4, the reporting guideline will be finalised in a consensus meeting, along with the production of an Explanation and Elaboration (E&E) document. In Stage 5, we plan to publish the reporting guideline and E&E document in open-access journals, supported by presentations at appropriate events. Dissemination of the reporting guideline, including a website linked to social media channels, is crucial for the document to be implemented in practice.DiscussionThe ACCORD reporting guideline will provide a set of minimum items that should be reported about methods used to achieve consensus, including approaches ranging from simple unstructured opinion gatherings to highly structured processes. Show less
Haalen, F.M. van; Kaya, M.; Pelsma, I.C.M.; Dekkers, O.M.; Biermasz, N.R.; Cannegieter, S.C.; ... ; Endo-ERN Cushing Thrombosis study 2022
Background Cushing's syndrome (CS) is associated with an hypercoagulable state and an increased risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE). Evidence-based guidelines on thromboprophylaxis strategies in... Show moreBackground Cushing's syndrome (CS) is associated with an hypercoagulable state and an increased risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE). Evidence-based guidelines on thromboprophylaxis strategies in patients with CS are currently lacking. We aimed to map the current clinical practice for thromboprophylaxis management in patients with CS across reference centers (RCs) of the European Reference Network on Rare Endocrine Conditions (Endo-ERN), which are endorsed specifically for the diagnosis and treatment of CS. Using the EU survey tool, a primary screening survey, and subsequently a secondary, more in-depth survey were developed. Results The majority of the RCs provided thromboprophylaxis to patients with CS (n = 23/25), although only one center had a standardized thromboprophylaxis protocol (n = 1/23). RCs most frequently started thromboprophylaxis from CS diagnosis onwards (n = 11/23), and the majority stopped thromboprophylaxis based on individual patient characteristics, rather than standardized treatment duration (n = 15/23). Factors influencing the initiation of thromboprophylaxis were 'medical history of VTE' (n = 15/23) and 'severity of hypercortisolism' (n = 15/23). Low-Molecular-Weight-Heparin was selected as the first-choice anticoagulant drug for thromboprophylaxis by all RCs (n = 23/23). Postoperatively, the majority of RCs reported 'severe immobilization' as an indication to start thromboprophylaxis in patients with CS (n = 15/25). Most RCs (n = 19/25) did not provide standardized testing for variables of hemostasis in the postoperative care of CS. Furthermore, the majority of the RCs provided preoperative medical treatment to patients with CS (n = 23/25). About half of these RCs (n = 12/23) took a previous VTE into account when starting preoperative medical treatment, and about two-thirds (n = 15/23) included 'reduction of VTE risk' as a goal of treatment. Conclusions There is a large practice variation regarding thromboprophylaxis management and perioperative medical treatment in patients with CS, even in Endo-ERN RCs. Randomized controlled trials are needed to establish the optimal prophylactic anticoagulant regimen, carefully balancing the increased risk of (perioperative) bleeding, and the presence of additional risk factors for thrombosis. Show less
Background The 2019 ESC-guidelines on chronic coronary syndromes (ESC-CCS) recommend computed tomographic coronary angiography (CTCA) or non-invasive functional imaging instead of exercise ECG as... Show moreBackground The 2019 ESC-guidelines on chronic coronary syndromes (ESC-CCS) recommend computed tomographic coronary angiography (CTCA) or non-invasive functional imaging instead of exercise ECG as initial test to diagnose obstructive coronary artery disease. Since impact and challenges of these guidelines are unknown, we studied the current utilisation of CTCA-services, status of CTCA-protocols and modeled the expected impact of these guidelines in the Netherlands. Methods and results A survey on current practice and CTCA utilisation was disseminated to every Dutch hospital organisation providing outpatient cardiology care and modeled the required CTCA capacity for implementation of the ESC guideline, based on these national figures and expert consensus. Survey response rate was 100% (68/68 hospital organisations). In 2019, 63 hospital organisations provided CTCA-services (93%), CTCA was performed on 99 CTCA-capable CT-scanners, and 37,283 CTCA-examinations were performed. Between the hospital organisations, we found substantial variation considering CTCA indications, CTCA equipment and acquisition and reporting standards. To fully implement the new ESC guideline, our model suggests that 70,000 additional CTCA-examinations would have to be performed in the Netherlands. Conclusions Despite high national CTCA-services coverage in the Netherlands, a substantial increase in CTCA capacity is expected to be able to implement the 2019 ESC-CCS recommendations on the use of CTCA. Furthermore, the results of this survey highlight the importance to address variations in image acquisition and to standardise the interpretation and reporting of CTCA, as well as to establish interdisciplinary collaboration and organisational alignment. Show less
Opgenhaffen, L.; Revello Lami, M.; Mickelburgh, H. 2021
In this study, we introduce the themes of the Special Issue on Art, Creativity and Automation. Sharing 3D Visualization Practices in Archaeology, and present the most important outcomes of a... Show moreIn this study, we introduce the themes of the Special Issue on Art, Creativity and Automation. Sharing 3D Visualization Practices in Archaeology, and present the most important outcomes of a roundtable session involving prominent researchers in the field, organized by the authors during the Archon Winter School in February 2020. By assessing the diversity of research aims, artistic projects, creative practices and technology used in the contributions to the Special Issue, and drawing on the thoughts and perspectives generated during the roundtable discussion, we seek to identify shared challenges within the community of visualizers which could ultimately pave the way to shared practices. In this light, we assess whether established charters and guidelines are still relevant in a now matured digital archaeology, where visualization techniques have attained a central position in archaeological knowledge production. Although parts of the guidelines have become common practice, the remainder did not keep up with the fast pace of development of digital practice and its current fundamental role in archaeology, and as a result some of the guidelines risk becoming obstructive in archaeological creative practice. Show less
Purpose Despite the rapidly expanding knowledge in the field of Geriatric Emergency Medicine in Europe, widespread implementation of change is still lacking. Many opportunities in everyday clinical... Show morePurpose Despite the rapidly expanding knowledge in the field of Geriatric Emergency Medicine in Europe, widespread implementation of change is still lacking. Many opportunities in everyday clinical care are missed to improve care for this susceptible and growing patient group. The aim was to develop expert clinical recommendations on Geriatric Emergency Medicine to be disseminated across Europe.Methods A group of multi-disciplinary experts in the field of Geriatric Emergency Medicine in Europe was assembled. Using a modified Delphi procedure, a prioritized list of topics related to Geriatric Emergency Medicine was created. Next, a multi-disciplinary group of nurses, geriatricians and emergency physicians performed a review of recent guidelines and literature to create recommendations. These recommendations were voted upon by a group of experts and placed on visually attractive posters. The expert group identified the following eight subject areas to develop expert recommendations on: Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment in the Emergency Department (ED), age/frailty adjusted risk stratification, delirium and cognitive impairment, medication reviews in the ED for older adults, family involvement, ED environment, silver trauma, end of life care in the acute setting.Results Eight posters with expert clinical recommendations on the most important topics in Geriatric Emergency Medicine are now available through https://posters.geriemeurope.eu/.Conclusion Expert clinical recommendations for Geriatric Emergency Medicine may help to improve care for older patients in the Emergency Department and are ready for dissemination across Europe. Show less
Ray, K.K.; Molemans, B.; Schoonen, W.M.; Giovas, P.; Bray, S.; Kiru, G.; ... ; VINCI study da 2021
Aims To provide contemporary data on the implementation of European guideline recommendations for lipid-lowering therapies (LLTs) across different settings and populations and how this impacts low... Show moreAims To provide contemporary data on the implementation of European guideline recommendations for lipid-lowering therapies (LLTs) across different settings and populations and how this impacts low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) goal achievement.Methods and results An 18 country, cross-sectional, observational study of patients prescribed LLT for primary or secondary prevention in primary or secondary care across Europe. Between June 2017 and November 2018, data were collected at a single visit, including LLT in the preceding 12 months and most recent LDL-C. Primary outcome was the achievement of risk-based 2016 European Society of Cardiology (ESC)/European Atherosclerosis Society (EAS) LDL-C goal while receiving stabilized LLT; 2019 goal achievement was also assessed. Overall, 5888 patients (3000 primary and 2888 secondary prevention patients) were enrolled; 54% [95% confidence interval (CI) 52-56] achieved their risk-based 2016 goal and 33% (95% CI 32-35) achieved their risk-based 2019 goal. High-intensity statin monotherapy was used in 20% and 38% of very high-risk primary and secondary prevention patients, respectively. Corresponding 2016 goal attainment was 22% and 45% (17% and 22% for 2019 goals) for very high-risk primary and secondary prevention patients, respectively. Use of moderate-high-intensity statins in combination with ezetimibe (9%), or any LLT with PCSK9 inhibitors (1%), was low; corresponding 2016 and 2019 goal attainment was 53% and 20% (ezetimibe combination), and 67% and 58% (PCSK9i combination).Conclusion Gaps between clinical guidelines and clinical practice for lipid management across Europe persist, which will be exacerbated by the 2019 guidelines. Even with optimized statins, greater utilization of non-statin LLT is likely needed to reduce these gaps for patients at highest risk. Show less
