Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
Add more filters

Database
Country/Region as subject
Language
Publication year range
1.
J Urol ; : 101097JU0000000000004180, 2024 Aug 15.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-39145501

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: In 2023 the American Urological Association (AUA) requested an Update Literature Review (ULR) to incorporate new evidence generated since the 2020 publication of this Guideline. The resulting 2024 Guideline Amendment addresses updated recommendations to provide guidance on the appropriate evaluation and management of the male partner in an infertile couple. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In 2023, the Male Infertility Guideline was updated through the AUA amendment process in which newly published literature is reviewed and integrated into previously published guidelines. An updated literature search identified 4093 new abstracts. Following initial abstract screening, 125 eligible study abstracts met inclusion criteria. On data extraction, 22 studies of interest were included in the final evidence base to inform the Guideline amendment. RESULTS: The Panel developed evidence- and consensus-based statements based on an updated review to provide guidance on evaluation and management of male infertility. These updates are detailed herein. CONCLUSIONS: This update provides several new insights, including revised thresholds for Y-chromosome microdeletion testing, indications for pelvic MRI imaging in infertile males, and guidance regarding the use of testicular sperm in nonazoospermic males. This Guideline will require further review as the diagnostic and treatment options in this space continue to evolve.

2.
J Urol ; 209(6): 1091-1098, 2023 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37096580

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: The purpose of this guideline is to provide a clinical structure with which to approach the diagnosis, counseling, and treatment of female patients with stress urinary incontinence (SUI). MATERIALS/METHODS: The primary source of evidence for the 2017 version of the SUI guideline was the systematic literature review conducted by the ECRI Institute. The initial search spanned literature from January 2005 to December 2015, with an additional updated abstract search through September 2016. The current amendment represents the first update to the 2017 iteration and includes updated literature published through February 2022. RESULTS: This guideline has been amended to reflect changes in and additions to the literature since 2017. The Panel maintained that the differentiation between index and non-index patients remained important. The index patient is a healthy female with minimal or no prolapse who desires surgical therapy for treatment of pure SUI or stress-predominant mixed urinary incontinence. Non-index patients have factors that may affect their treatment options and outcomes, such as high grade prolapse (grade 3 or 4), urgency-predominant mixed incontinence, neurogenic lower urinary tract dysfunction, incomplete bladder emptying, dysfunctional voiding, SUI following anti-incontinence treatment, mesh complications, high body mass index, or advanced age. CONCLUSION: While gains have been made in the field to support new methods for the diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up of patients with SUI, the field continues to expand. As such, future reviews of this guideline will take place to stay in keeping with the highest levels of patient care.


Subject(s)
Urinary Incontinence, Stress , Urinary Incontinence , Female , Humans , Urinary Incontinence, Stress/diagnosis , Urinary Incontinence, Stress/surgery , Urinary Incontinence, Stress/complications , Urinary Bladder , Urinary Incontinence/complications , Urinary Incontinence, Urge/complications , Urologic Surgical Procedures/methods , Repressor Proteins
3.
Ann Intern Med ; 173(11): 895-903, 2020 12 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32866419

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Recent clinical trials suggest that treating patients with hypertension to lower blood pressure (BP) targets improves cardiovascular outcomes. PURPOSE: To summarize the effects of intensive (or targeted) systolic BP (SBP) and diastolic BP (DBP) lowering with pharmacologic treatment on cardiovascular outcomes and harms in adults with hypertension. DATA SOURCES: Multiple databases, including MEDLINE and EMBASE, were searched for relevant systematic reviews (SRs) published in English from 15 December 2013 through 25 March 2019, with updated targeted searches through 8 January 2020. STUDY SELECTION: 8 SRs of randomized controlled trials examining either a standardized SBP target of -10 mm Hg (1 SR) or BP lowering below a target threshold (7 SRs). DATA EXTRACTION: One investigator abstracted data, assessed study quality, and performed GRADE assessments; a second investigator checked abstractions and assessments. DATA SYNTHESIS: The main outcome of interest was reduction in composite cardiovascular outcomes. High-strength evidence showed benefit of a 10-mm Hg reduction in SBP for cardiovascular outcomes among patients with hypertension in the general population, patients with chronic kidney disease, and patients with heart failure. Evidence on reducing SBP for cardiovascular outcomes in patients with a history of cardiovascular disease (moderate strength) or diabetes mellitus (high strength) to a lower SBP target was mixed. Low-strength evidence supported intensive lowering to a 10-mm Hg reduction in SBP for cardiovascular outcomes in patients with a history of stroke. All reported harms were considered, including general adverse events, serious adverse events, cognitive impairment, fractures, falls, syncope, hypotension, withdrawals due to adverse events, and acute kidney injury. Safety results were mixed or inconclusive. LIMITATIONS: This was a qualitative synthesis of new evidence with existing meta-analyses. Data were sparse for outcomes related to treating DBP to a lower target or for patients older than 60 years. CONCLUSION: Overall, current clinical literature supports intensive BP lowering in patients with hypertension for improving cardiovascular outcomes. In most subpopulations, intensive lowering was favored over less-intensive lowering, but the data were less clear for patients with diabetes mellitus or cardiovascular disease. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, Veterans Health Administration.


Subject(s)
Cardiovascular Diseases/epidemiology , Hypertension/drug therapy , Practice Guidelines as Topic , Antihypertensive Agents/therapeutic use , Blood Pressure , Cardiovascular Diseases/prevention & control , Humans , United States/epidemiology , United States Department of Defense/standards , United States Department of Veterans Affairs/standards
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL