Guidance on how to efficiently find, choose, and use available systematic reviews was developed.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this paper is to provide clinicians and authors of clinical guidelines or patient information with practical guidance on searching and choosing systematic reviews(s) (SR[s]) and, where adequate, on making use of SR(s). STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: At the German conference of the EBM-Network a workshop on the topic was held to identify the most important areas where guidance for practice appears necessary. After the workshop, we established working groups. These included SR users with different backgrounds (e. g. information specialists, epidemiologists) and working areas. Each working group developed and consented a draft guidance based on their expert knowledge and experiences. The results were presented to the entire group and finalized in an iterative process. RESULTS: We developed a practical guidance that answers questions that usually arise when choosing and using SR(s). 1: How to efficiently find high-quality SRs? 2: How to choose the most appropriate SR? 3: What to do if no SR of sufficient quality could be identified? In addition, we developed an algorithm that links these steps and accounts for their interaction. The resulting guidance is primarily directed at clinicians and developers of clinical practice guidelines or patient information resources. CONCLUSION: We suggest practical guidance for making the best use of SRs when answering a specific research question. The guidance may contribute to the efficient use of existing SRs. Potential benefits when using existing SRs should be always weighted against potential limitations.

Italian S3-Guideline on the treatment of Atopic Eczema - Part 1: Systemic therapy, adapted from EuroGuiDerm by the Italian Society of Dermatology and STD (SIDEMAST), the Italian Association of Hospital Dermatologists (ADOI) and the Italian Society of Allergological and Environmental Dermatology (SIDAPA).

SIDeMaST (Società Italiana di Dermatologia Medica, Chirurgica, Estetica e delle Malattie Sessualmente Trasmesse) contributed to the development of the present guideline on the systemic treatment of chronic plaque psoriasis. With the permission of EuroGuiDerm, SIDeMaST adapted the guideline to the Italian healthcare context to supply a reliable and affordable tool to Italian physicians who take care of patients affected by atopic dermatitis. The evidence- and consensus-based guideline on atopic eczema was developed in accordance with the EuroGuiDerm Guideline and Consensus Statement Development Manual. Four consensus conferences were held between December 2020 and July 2021. Twenty-nine experts (including clinicians and patient representatives) from 12 European countries participated. This first part of the guideline includes general information on its scope and purpose, the health questions covered, target users and a methods section. It also provides guidance on which patients should be treated with systemic therapies, as well as recommendations and detailed information on each systemic drug. The systemic treatment options discussed in the guideline comprise conventional immunosuppressive drugs (azathioprine, ciclosporin, glucocorticosteroids, methotrexate and mycophenolate mofetil), biologics (dupilumab, lebrikizumab, nemolizumab, omalizumab and tralokinumab) and janus kinase inhibitors (abrocitinib, baricitinib and upadacitinib). Part two of the guideline will address avoidance of provocation factors, dietary interventions, immunotherapy, complementary medicine, educational interventions, occupational and psychodermatological aspects, patient perspective and considerations for pediatric, adolescent, pregnant and breastfeeding patients.

Italian S3-Guideline on the treatment of Atopic Eczema - First Update, adapted from EuroGuiDerm by the Italian Society of Dermatology and STD (SIDEMAST), the Italian Association of Hospital Dermatologists (ADOI) and the Italian Society of Allergological and Occupational Dermatology (SIDAPA).

The evidence- and consensus-based guideline on atopic eczema, published in JEADV on 18 August 2022 (part 1) and 3 September 2022 (part 2) was developed in accordance with the EuroGuiDerm Guideline and Consensus Statement Development Manual. Four consensus conferences were held between December 2020 and July 2021. Twenty-nine experts (including clinicians and patient representatives) from 12 European countries participated. To reflect the most recent evidence on novel systemic medications, an update was published in October 2022. According to the purpose of the Italian Society of Dermatology and STD (SIDEMAST), the Italian Association of Hospital Dermatologists (ADOI) and the Italian Society of Allergological and Environmental Dermatology (SIDAPA) to adapt the EuroGuiDerm guideline on the treatment of atopic eczema into the Italian Healthcare setting, the original update has been supplemented by inserting notes, well highlighted by the original text, to emphasize the laws, rules, procedures and suggestions of the Italian Ministry of Health and regional Health authorities.

Italian S3-Guideline on the treatment of Atopic Eczema - Part 2: non-systemic treatments and treatment recommendations for special AE patient populations, adapted from EuroGuiDerm by the Italian Society of Dermatology and STD (SIDEMAST), the Italian Association of Hospital Dermatologists (ADOI) and the Italian Society of Allergological and Occupational Dermatology (SIDAPA).

SIDeMaST (Società Italiana di Dermatologia Medica, Chirurgica, Estetica e delle Malattie Sessualmente Trasmesse) contributed to the development of the present guideline on the systemic treatment of chronic plaque psoriasis. With the permission of EuroGuiDerm, SIDeMaST adapted the guideline to the Italian healthcare context to supply a reliable and affordable tool to Italian physicians who take care of patients affected by atopic dermatitis. The evidence- and consensus-based guideline on atopic eczema was developed in accordance with the EuroGuiDerm Guideline and Consensus Statement Development Manual. Four consensus conferences were held between December 2020 and July 2021. Twenty-nine experts (including clinicians and patient representatives) from 12 European countries participated. This second part of the guideline includes recommendations and detailed information on basic therapy with emollients and moisturizers, topical anti-inflammatory treatment, antimicrobial and antipruritic treatment and UV phototherapy. Furthermore, this part of the guideline covers techniques for avoiding provocation factors, as well as dietary interventions, immunotherapy, complementary medicine and educational interventions for patients with atopic eczema and deals with occupational and psychodermatological aspects of the disease. It also contains guidance on treatment for pediatric and adolescent patients and pregnant or breastfeeding women, as well as considerations for patients who want to have a child. A chapter on the patient perspective is also provided. The first part of the guideline, published separately, contains recommendations and guidance on systemic treatment with conventional immunosuppressive drugs, biologics and janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors, as well as information on the scope and purpose of the guideline, and a section on guideline methodology.

3D bioprinting of liver models: A systematic scoping review of methods, bioinks, and reporting quality.

Background: Effective communication is crucial for broad acceptance and applicability of alternative methods in 3R biomedical research and preclinical testing. 3D bioprinting is used to construct intricate biological structures towards functional liver models, specifically engineered for deployment as alternative models in drug screening, toxicological investigations, and tissue engineering. Despite a growing number of reviews in this emerging field, a comprehensive study, systematically assessing practices and reporting quality for bioprinted liver models is missing. Methods: In this systematic scoping review we systematically searched MEDLINE (Ovid), EMBASE (Ovid) and BioRxiv for studies published prior to June 2nd, 2022. We extracted data on methodological conduct, applied bioinks, the composition of the printed model, performed experiments and model applications. Records were screened for eligibility and data were extracted from included articles by two independent reviewers from a panel of seven domain experts specializing in bioprinting and liver biology. We used RAYYAN for the screening process and SyRF for data extraction. We used R for data analysis, and R and Graphpad PRISM for visualization. Results: Through our systematic database search we identified 1042 records, from which 63 met the eligibility criteria for inclusion in this systematic scoping review. Our findings revealed that extrusion-based printing, in conjunction with bioinks composed of natural components, emerged as the predominant printing technique in the bioprinting of liver models. Notably, the HepG2 hepatoma cell line was the most frequently employed liver cell type, despite acknowledged limitations. Furthermore, 51% of the printed models featured co-cultures with non-parenchymal cells to enhance their complexity. The included studies offered a variety of techniques for characterizing these liver models, with their primary application predominantly focused on toxicity testing. Among the frequently analyzed liver markers, albumin and urea stood out. Additionally, Cytochrome P450 (CYP) isoforms, primarily CYP3A and CYP1A, were assessed, and select studies employed nuclear receptor agonists to induce CYP activity. Conclusion: Our systematic scoping review offers an evidence-based overview and evaluation of the current state of research on bioprinted liver models, representing a promising and innovative technology for creating alternative organ models. We conducted a thorough examination of both the methodological and technical facets of model development and scrutinized the reporting quality within the realm of bioprinted liver models. This systematic scoping review can serve as a valuable template for systematically evaluating the progress of organ model development in various other domains. The transparently derived evidence presented here can provide essential support to the research community, facilitating the adaptation of technological advancements, the establishment of standards, and the enhancement of model robustness. This is particularly crucial as we work toward the long-term objective of establishing new approach methods as reliable alternatives to animal testing, with extensive and versatile applications.

Ingrown Toenails: A Survey Among Dermatologists on Current Treatments.

BACKGROUND: To date, there is no formal consensus on how to treat ingrown toenails. Despite the risk of causing irreparable damage to the nail, highly invasive procedures are still common. Less-invasive, matrix-directed techniques with shorter downtime and high cure rates exist, but, perhaps because of a lack of awareness, appear not to have been universally adopted. OBJECTIVE: The authors' study sought to generate data on common practices in the treatment of ingrown toenails. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The authors developed and conducted an online survey to ask dermatologists/dermatosurgeons how they would proceed in 9 different cases of ingrown toenails based on photographs. RESULTS: The authors received 154 replies. Nonsurgical interventions, including advice on nail care/foot baths/ointments/wraps/padding, were always the most frequently chosen option. Removal of the lateral nail plate followed by chemical partial matricectomy (phenolization) was the most or second-most frequently chosen surgical intervention. The answers were highly heterogeneous, and there was no unanimity based on morphology alone. CONCLUSION: Except for a preference for nonsurgical interventions, the authors could not identify any clear treatment standards. The heterogeneity of treatment approaches suggests the need for a guideline.

Interdisciplinary collaboration in critical care alarm research: A bibliometric analysis.

BACKGROUND: Alarm fatigue in nurses is a major patient safety concern in the intensive care unit. This is caused by exposure to high rates of false and non-actionable alarms. Despite decades of research, the problem persists, leading to stress, burnout, and patient harm resulting from true missed events. While engineering approaches to reduce false alarms have spurred hope, they appear to lack collaboration between nurses and engineers to produce real-world solutions. The aim of this bibliometric analysis was to examine the relevant literature to quantify the level of authorial collaboration between nurses, physicians, and engineers. METHODS: We conducted a bibliometric analysis of articles on alarm fatigue and false alarm reduction strategies in critical care published between 2010 and 2022. Data were extracted at the article and author level. The percentages of author disciplines per publication were calculated by study design, journal subject area, and other article-level factors. RESULTS: A total of 155 articles with 583 unique authors were identified. While 31.73 % (n = 185) of the unique authors had a nursing background, publications using an engineering study design (n = 46), e.g., model development, had a very low involvement of nursing authors (mean proportion at 1.09 %). Observational studies (n = 58) and interventional studies (n = 33) had a higher mean involvement of 52.27 % and 47.75 %, respectively. Articles published in nursing journals (n = 32) had the highest mean proportion of nursing authors (80.32 %), while those published in engineering journals (n = 46) had the lowest (9.00 %), with 6 (13.04 %) articles having one or more nurses as co-authors. CONCLUSION: Minimal involvement of nursing expertise in alarm research utilizing engineering methodologies may be one reason for the lack of successful, real-world solutions to ameliorate alarm fatigue. Fostering a collaborative, interdisciplinary research culture can promote a common publication culture across fields and may yield sustainable implementation of technological solutions in healthcare.

S3 Guideline Urticaria. Part 1: Classification and diagnosis of urticaria - German-language adaptation of the international S3 Guideline.

The lifetime prevalence of urticaria, a severe allergic disease, is almost 20%. It not only limits the quality of life of those affected, but also their general performance at work and in their daily activities. This publication is the first section of the Urticaria Guideline. It covers the classification and diagnosis of urticaria, taking into account the major advances in research into its causes, triggering factors and pathomechanisms. It also addresses strategies for the efficient diagnosis of the different subtypes of urticaria. This is crucial for individual, patient-oriented treatment, which is covered in the second part of the guideline, published separately. This German-language guideline was developed according to the criteria of the AWMF on the basis of the international English-language S3 guideline with special consideration of health system characteristics in the German-speaking countries. This first part of the guideline describes the classification of urticaria, distinguishing spontaneously occurring wheals (hives) and angioedema from forms of urticaria with inducible symptoms. Urticaria is defined as sudden onset of wheals, angioedema, or both, but is to be distinguished from conditions in which wheals occur as a short-term symptom, such as anaphylaxis. The diagnosis is based on (a limited number of) laboratory tests, but especially on medical history. In addition, validated instruments are available to measure the severity, activity and course of the disease.

Methods used for indirect comparisons of systemic treatments for psoriasis. A systematic review.

Background: Indirect comparisons (including network meta-analyses [NMAs]) allow us to compare benefits and risks of multiple interventions for the same clinical condition when head-to-head comparisons are not feasible. Objective: To provide guidance to the clinical community on better understanding indirect comparison methods to help them to interpret their results by applying two quality standards to published indirect comparisons of systemic biologics for moderate to severe psoriasis. Methods: A systematic literature review (SLR) of published indirect comparisons of biologics for the treatment of moderate to severe psoriasis in adults was conducted. Data extraction was performed using a predefined subset of NICE TSD7 (National Institute for Health and Care Excellence Technical Support Document 7) checklist questions and methods used to perform each analysis were descriptively compared. Methodological quality of the SLR underlying each indirect comparison was assessed using AMSTAR 2 (A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews version 2). Results: Twenty-two NMAs and four adjusted indirect comparisons (AICs) were identified. Although there were some similarities, for example, application of Bayesian random-effects models, several important methodological aspects varied considerably across NMAs identified, for example, classes of drugs, number of treatments and studies included, reporting and handling of different doses, and reporting of both checks for and investigations of inconsistency. Methodological comparisons across AICs were limited by the small number. The quality of most underlying SLRs described, assessed as overall level of confidence in the results, was 'critically low'. Conclusions: Understanding that there are different methodologies employed to answer differing research questions is key to helping clinicians to interpret the indirect evidence currently available in psoriasis.

S3 Guideline Urticaria. Part 2: Treatment of urticaria - German-language adaptation of the international S3 guideline.

This publication is the second part of the German-language S3 guideline on urticaria. It covers the management of urticaria and should be used together with Part 1 of the guideline on classification and diagnosis. This publication was prepared according to the criteria of the AWMF on the basis of the international English-language S3 guideline with special consideration of health system conditions in German-speaking countries. Chronic urticaria has a high impact on the quality of life and daily activities of patients. Therefore, if causal factors cannot be eliminated, effective symptomatic treatment is necessary. The recommended first-line treatment is to administer new generation, non-sedating H1 antihistamines. If the standard dose is not sufficiently effective, the dose should be increased up to fourfold. For patients who do not respond to this treatment, the second-line treatment in addition to antihistamines in the treatment algorithm is omalizumab and, if this treatment fails, ciclosporin. Other low-evidence therapeutic agents should only be used if all treatments in the treatment algorithm agreed upon by the guideline group fail. Both the benefit-risk profile and cost should be considered. Corticosteroids are not recommended for long-term treatment due to their inevitable severe side effects.

Perioperatives Management von Antithrombotika in der Dermatochirurgie - Eine Umfrage unter Dermatologen in Deutschland.

Hintergrund und Zielsetzung: Wir haben in zwei Querschnittsumfragen in den Jahren 2012 und 2017 eine erhebliche Heterogenität im perioperativen Management von Antithrombotika unter Dermatologen in Deutschland festgestellt. Die erste deutsche Leitlinie zu diesem Thema wurde 2014 veröffentlicht und im Jahr 2021 aktualisiert. Wir wollten herausfinden, wie sich der Umgang mit Antithrombotika verändert hat. Methodik: Wir haben eine papierbasierte Umfrage an 1115 Dermatologen in ganz Deutschland versandt und sie zu ihrem perioperativen Management von Antithrombotika bei Operationen an der Haut sowie zu ihrer Vertrautheit mit der Leitlinie befragt. Ergebnisse: Wir erhielten Antworten von 65 stationär tätigen und 202 niedergelassenen Dermatologen. Die meisten Dermatologen gaben an, Antithrombotika bei kleineren Operationen fortzuführen. Ein nennenswerter Anteil der Dermatologen gab an, bei invasiveren Operationen die Behandlung mit Phenprocoumon perioperativ zu pausieren und mit Heparin zu überbrücken. Bei Kombinationstherapien war das Fortführen der Behandlung weniger verbreitet. Schlussfolgerungen: Der Anteil der Dermatologen in Deutschland, die angaben, Antithrombotika bei Operationen an der Haut leitlinienkonform zu managen, ist seit 2012 gestiegen. Das Fortführen von Antithrombotika bei großen Exzisionen und Wächterlymphknotenexstirpationen, der Verzicht auf die Überbrückung von Phenprocoumon mit Heparin und das perioperative Fortführen antithrombotischer Kombinationstherapien müssen jedoch weiterhin propagiert werden, insbesondere unter niedergelassenen Dermatologen.

Perioperative management of antithrombotic drugs in skin surgery - A survey of dermatologists in Germany.

BACKGROUND: We identified substantial heterogeneity in the perioperative management of antithrombotic drugs in skin surgery in Germany in 2012 and 2017 in two cross-sectional surveys. The first national guideline on this subject was published in 2014 and updated in 2021. We sought to identify whether the management of these drugs had changed. METHODS: We sent a paper-based survey to 1115 dermatologists throughout Germany asking them about their perioperative management of antithrombotic drugs in skin surgery, as well as their familiarity with the guideline. RESULTS: We received responses from 65 hospital- and 202 office-based dermatologists. Most dermatologists reported continuing antithrombotic drugs in their patients when performing minor surgeries. A notable proportion of dermatologists reported discontinuing phenprocoumon treatment perioperatively and bridging patients with heparin when performing more invasive surgeries. Continuation was less common during combination therapies. CONCLUSIONS: The proportion of physicians in Germany who reported managing antithrombotic drugs during skin surgery in ways that are in concordance with the national guideline has increased since 2012. However, continuing antithrombotic drugs during large excisions and sentinel lymph node biopsies, abstaining from bridging patients on phenprocoumon with heparin, and continuing antithrombotic combination therapies perioperatively need to be further encouraged, especially among office-based dermatologists.

Systemic pharmacological treatments for chronic plaque psoriasis: a network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Psoriasis is an immune-mediated disease with either skin or joints manifestations, or both, and it has a major impact on quality of life. Although there is currently no cure for psoriasis, various treatment strategies allow sustained control of disease signs and symptoms. The relative benefit of these treatments remains unclear due to the limited number of trials comparing them directly head-to-head, which is why we chose to conduct a network meta-analysis. OBJECTIVES: To compare the efficacy and safety of non-biological systemic agents, small molecules, and biologics for people with moderate-to-severe psoriasis using a network meta-analysis, and to provide a ranking of these treatments according to their efficacy and safety. SEARCH METHODS: For this update of the living systematic review, we updated our searches of the following databases monthly to October 2021: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, and Embase. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of systemic treatments in adults over 18 years with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis, at any stage of treatment, compared to placebo or another active agent. The primary outcomes were: proportion of participants who achieved clear or almost clear skin, that is, at least Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) 90; proportion of participants with serious adverse events (SAEs) at induction phase (8 to 24 weeks after randomisation). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We conducted duplicate study selection, data extraction, risk of bias assessment and analyses. We synthesised data using pairwise and network meta-analysis (NMA) to compare treatments and rank them according to effectiveness (PASI 90 score) and acceptability (inverse of SAEs). We assessed the certainty of NMA evidence for the two primary outcomes and all comparisons using CINeMA, as very low, low, moderate, or high. We contacted study authors when data were unclear or missing. We used the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) to infer treatment hierarchy, from 0% (worst for effectiveness or safety) to 100% (best for effectiveness or safety). MAIN RESULTS: This update includes an additional 19 studies, taking the total number of included studies to 167, and randomised participants to 58,912, 67.2% men, mainly recruited from hospitals. Average age was 44.5 years, mean PASI score at baseline was 20.4 (range: 9.5 to 39). Most studies were placebo-controlled (57%). We assessed a total of 20 treatments. Most (140) trials were multicentric (two to 231 centres). One-third of the studies (57/167) had high risk of bias; 23 unclear risk, and most (87) low risk. Most studies (127/167) declared funding by a pharmaceutical company, and 24 studies did not report a funding source. Network meta-analysis at class level showed that all interventions (non-biological systemic agents, small molecules, and biological treatments) showed a higher proportion of patients reaching PASI 90 than placebo. Anti-IL17 treatment showed a higher proportion of patients reaching PASI 90 compared to all the interventions, except anti-IL23. Biologic treatments anti-IL17, anti-IL12/23, anti-IL23 and anti-TNF alpha showed a higher proportion of patients reaching PASI 90 than the non-biological systemic agents. For reaching PASI 90, the most effective drugs when compared to placebo were (SUCRA rank order, all high-certainty evidence): infliximab (risk ratio (RR) 50.19, 95% CI 20.92 to 120.45), bimekizumab (RR 30.27, 95% CI 25.45 to 36.01), ixekizumab (RR 30.19, 95% CI 25.38 to 35.93), risankizumab (RR 28.75, 95% CI 24.03 to 34.39). Clinical effectiveness of these drugs was similar when compared against each other. Bimekizumab, ixekizumab and risankizumab showed a higher proportion of patients reaching PASI 90 than other anti-IL17 drugs (secukinumab and brodalumab) and guselkumab. Infliximab, anti-IL17 drugs (bimekizumab, ixekizumab, secukinumab and brodalumab) and anti-IL23 drugs (risankizumab and guselkumab) except tildrakizumab showed a higher proportion of patients reaching PASI 90 than ustekinumab and three anti-TNF alpha agents (adalimumab, certolizumab and etanercept). Ustekinumab was superior to certolizumab; adalimumab and ustekinumab were superior to etanercept. No significant difference was shown between apremilast and two non-biological drugs: ciclosporin and methotrexate. We found no significant difference between any of the interventions and the placebo for the risk of SAEs. The risk of SAEs was significantly lower for participants on methotrexate compared with most of the interventions. Nevertheless, the SAE analyses were based on a very low number of events with low- to moderate-certainty for all the comparisons (except methotrexate versus placebo, which was high-certainty). The findings therefore have to be viewed with caution. For other efficacy outcomes (PASI 75 and Physician Global Assessment (PGA) 0/1), the results were similar to the results for PASI 90. Information on quality of life was often poorly reported and was absent for several of the interventions. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Our review shows that, compared to placebo, the biologics infliximab, bimekizumab, ixekizumab, and risankizumab were the most effective treatments for achieving PASI 90 in people with moderate-to-severe psoriasis on the basis of high-certainty evidence. This NMA evidence is limited to induction therapy (outcomes measured from 8 to 24 weeks after randomisation), and is not sufficient for evaluating longer-term outcomes in this chronic disease. Moreover, we found low numbers of studies for some of the interventions, and the young age (mean 44.5 years) and high level of disease severity (PASI 20.4 at baseline) may not be typical of patients seen in daily clinical practice. We found no significant difference in the assessed interventions and placebo in terms of SAEs, and the safety evidence for most interventions was low to moderate quality. More randomised trials directly comparing active agents are needed, and these should include systematic subgroup analyses (sex, age, ethnicity, comorbidities, psoriatic arthritis). To provide long-term information on the safety of treatments included in this review, an evaluation of non-randomised studies and postmarketing reports from regulatory agencies is needed. Editorial note: This is a living systematic review. Living systematic reviews offer a new approach to review updating, in which the review is continually updated, incorporating relevant new evidence as it becomes available. Please refer to the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews for the current status of this review.

The international EAACI/GA²LEN/EuroGuiDerm/APAAACI guideline for the definition, classification, diagnosis, and management of urticaria.

This update and revision of the international guideline for urticaria was developed following the methods recommended by Cochrane and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) working group. It is a joint initiative of the Dermatology Section of the European Academy of Allergology and Clinical Immunology (EAACI), the Global Allergy and Asthma European Network (GA²LEN) and its Urticaria and Angioedema Centers of Reference and Excellence (UCAREs and ACAREs), the European Dermatology Forum (EDF; EuroGuiDerm), and the Asia Pacific Association of Allergy, Asthma and Clinical Immunology with the participation of 64 delegates of 50 national and international societies and from 31 countries. The consensus conference was held on 3 December 2020. This guideline was acknowledged and accepted by the European Union of Medical Specialists (UEMS). Urticaria is a frequent, mast cell-driven disease that presents with wheals, angioedema, or both. The lifetime prevalence for acute urticaria is approximately 20%. Chronic spontaneous or inducible urticaria is disabling, impairs quality of life, and affects performance at work and school. This updated version of the international guideline for urticaria covers the definition and classification of urticaria and outlines expert-guided and evidence-based diagnostic and therapeutic approaches for the different subtypes of urticaria.

Risk of complications due to antithrombotic agents in cutaneous surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: We aimed to determine the risk of complications during cutaneous surgery for the perioperative discontinuation in comparison to the continuation of antithrombotic agents and the bridging of vitamin K antagonists with heparin in comparison to their continuation. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review, searching three databases for eligible studies. Methods followed the Cochrane Handbook. We used RoB 2 and ROBINS-I to assess risk of bias. The quality of evidence was judged (GRADE). Fixed-effect meta-analyses were performed. RESULTS: Two randomized-controlled trials and 19 prospective cohort studies were included. It is uncertain whether, compared to its discontinuation, continuing acetylsalicylic acid (risk difference (RD) 0.004, 95 % confidence interval (CI) -0.003 to 0.019) perioperatively increases the risk of significant postoperative bleedings (SPB). Compared to its discontinuation, continuing phenprocoumon perioperatively may increase the risk of SPB (RD 0.02, 95 % CI 0.00 to 0.05). Bridging phenprocoumon with heparin perioperatively may increase the risk of SPB when compared to its continuation (RD 0.07, 95 % CI 0.01 to 0.22). No evidence was found regarding bleeding risks for direct oral anticoagulants. CONCLUSIONS: No clear indications of major risks of bleedings when continuing antithrombotic agents during minor skin surgeries were identified. However, the quality of evidence was very low.