Quality Evaluation of Guidelines for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Liver Failure.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to systematically assess the methodological quality and key recommendations of the guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of liver failure (LF), furnishing constructive insights for guideline developers and equipping clinicians with evidence-based information to facilitate informed decision-making. DATA SOURCES: Electronic databases and manual searches from January 2011 to August 2023. STUDY SELECTION: Two reviewers independently screened titles and abstracts, then full texts for eligibility. Fourteen guidelines were included. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Two reviewers extracted data and checked by two others. Methodological quality of the guidelines was appraised using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II tool. Of the 14 guidelines, only the guidelines established by the Society of Critical Care Medicine and the American College of Gastroenterology (2023) achieved an aggregate quality score exceeding 60%, thereby meriting clinical recommendations. It emerged that there remains ample room for enhancement in the quality of the guidelines, particularly within the domains of stakeholder engagement, rigor, and applicability. Furthermore, an in-depth scrutiny of common recommendations and supporting evidence drawn from the 10 adult LF guidelines unveiled several key issues: controversy exists in the recommendation, the absence of supporting evidence and confusing use of evidence for recommendations, and a preference in evidence selection. CONCLUSIONS: There are high differences in methodological quality and recommendations among LF guidelines. Improving these existing problems and controversies will benefit existing clinical practice and will be an effective way for developers to upgrade the guidelines.

Evaluation of guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of achalasia.

Due to the unclear quality of the current guidelines, users may be confused about how to diagnose and treat achalasia. The objective of this work is to systematically evaluate the methodological quality of the current guidelines for diagnosing and treating achalasia and to determine the heterogeneity among recommendations. We systematically searched literature databases to retrieve relevant guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of achalasia. The Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II tool was used to evaluate the quality of the included guidelines. Key recommendations in the guidelines were extracted, and the reasons for the heterogeneity of the key recommendations between different guidelines were further analyzed. Seven guidelines on the diagnosis and treatment of achalasia are included in this study. The overall score of three guidelines exceeded 60%. The average score in domain 5 was the lowest, at 41.8%. The average scores in domain 2, domain 3, and domain 6 were also low, at 45.4%, 57.1% and 56.9%, respectively. The main recommendations and quality of evidence for different guidelines vary greatly, mainly due to the different emphases among different guidelines, the lack of systematic retrieval, or the unfairness of evidence use in some guidelines. There are considerable differences in the methodological quality of diagnosis and treatment guidelines for achalasia. Additionally, the differences in the main recommendations and evidence support among guidelines are also obvious. Guideline developers should improve the above related factors to decrease the heterogeneity, and they should further formulate or update the guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of achalasia.

Evaluation of pharmacotherapy recommendations in guidelines for inflammatory bowel disease.

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to systematically assess drug therapy in the guidelines for inflammatory bowel disease and to provide recommendations for the development of such guidelines. STUDY DESIGN: A systematic search was conducted in databases and on websites to identify guidelines for the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease. Qualified guidelines were assessed through the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE II). Evidence from the guidelines was extracted from the guidelines themselves. The Oxford Centre for Evidence-based Medicine (OCEBM) evidence grading system was used to regrade and assess this evidence. RESULTS: A total of 11 guidelines for the medical treatment of inflammatory bowel disease (Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis) (2015-2019) were finally included, and after scoring using the AGREE II tool, the median scores in each domain were as follows: Ⅰ. scope and purpose (median score=88.9%, range: 76.4%-91.7%), Ⅱ. stakeholder involvement (median =38.9%, range: 18.1%-61.1%), Ⅲ. rigour of development (median =69.3%, range: 39.6%-77.6%), Ⅳ. clarity and presentation (median =97.2%, range: 91.7%-100%), Ⅴ. applicability (median =45.8%, range: 24%-68.8%) and Ⅵ. editorial independence (median =94.0%, range: 0-100%). Most of the guidelines scored over 60%, which is worthy of clinical recommendation, but different guidelines suggest that there is a great difference in drug therapy, mainly due to various populations, diverse focuses of attention, distinct efficacy of drugs between Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis, and the preference of guiding developers for select evidence. WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION: The quality of medical treatment guidelines for inflammatory bowel disease varies considerably. Over the past 5 years, medical treatment has been heterogeneous among different guidelines. Consideration of factors leading to heterogeneity of recommendations for drug treatment, especially preferences for evidence selection, will help upgrade the guidelines.

An Approach to the Synthesis of 1-Propenylnaphthols and 3-Arylnaphtho[2,1-b]furans.

A simple and efficient strategy for the synthesis of 1-propenylnaphthols from readily accessible 3-arylallylnaphthyl ethers has been developed. By using K2CO3 as base and 2-methoxyethanol as solvent, direct access to a wide range of 1-propenylnaphthols can be achieved in generally good yield (up to 99%) with high stereoselectivity toward the Z isomer. The control experiments indicate that the reaction proceeds through a sequential Claisen rearrangement/isomerization process. Furthermore, starting from the same material, the highly valuable 3-arylnaphtho[2,1-b]furans can be obtained in N,N-dimethylformamide and in the presence of Ag2O as the oxidant via a one-pot sequential Claisen rearrangement/isomerization/cyclization reaction. Mechanistic studies confirm that 1-propenylnaphthols are the key intermediates to form the 3-arylnaphtho[2,1-b]furans. In addition, these two operationally simple and practical protocols could be scaled up to a gram level.

Effect of the extrahepatic bile duct anatomy on choledocholithiasis and its clinical significance.

BACKGROUND: A comprehensive understanding of the extrahepatic bile duct anatomy is vital to guide surgical procedures and perform endoscopic retrograde cholangiography. Anatomical irregularities within the extrahepatic bile duct may increase susceptibility to bile duct stones. AIM: To investigate the anatomical risk factors associated with extrahepatic bile ducts in patients diagnosed with choledocholithiasis, with a specific focus on preventing stone recurrence after surgical intervention and endoscopic lithotomy. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed the medical records of 124 patients without choledocholithiasis and 108 with confirmed choledocholithiasis who underwent magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography examinations at our center between January 2022 and October 2022. Logistic regression analyses were conducted to identify the anatomical risk factors influencing the incidence of common bile duct stones. RESULTS: Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that several factors independently contributed to choledocholithiasis risk. Significant independent risk factors for choledocholithiasis were diameter of the common hepatic [adjusted odds ratio (aOR) = 1.43, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.07-1.92, adjusted P value = 0.016] and common bile (aOR = 1.68, 95%CI: 1.27-2.23, adjusted P value < 0.001) ducts, length of the common hepatic duct (aOR = 0.92, 95%CI: 0.84-0.99, adjusted P value = 0.034), and angle of the common bile duct (aOR = 0.92, 95%CI: 0.89-0.95, adjusted P value < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The anatomical features of the extrahepatic bile duct were directly associated with choledocholithiasis risk. Key risk factors include an enlarged diameter of the common hepatic and bile ducts, a shorter length of the common hepatic duct, and a reduced angle of the common bile duct.

Quality evaluation of guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of radiation enteritis.

OBJECTIVE: To systematically evaluate the guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of radioactive enteritis, compare their differences and reasons and provide some reference for updating them. METHODS: This study used guidelines related to radiation enteritis by searching a database. Four independent reviewers used the AGREE II evaluation tool to evaluate the quality of the included guidelines, collate their main recommendations, and analyze the highest evidence supporting the main recommendations. RESULTS: Six diagnostic and therapeutic guidelines for radiation enteritis were included in this study, one of which, the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy guidelines, had an overall score of over 60%, which is worthy of clinical recommendation. In the diagnosis and treatment of radioactive rectal injury, the recommendations for hemorrhagic endoscopic treatment are mature and mainly include (I) argon plasma coagulation; (II) formalin treatment; (III) bipolar electrocoagulation; (IV) heater probe; (V) radiofrequency ablation; and (VI) cryoablation. CONCLUSION: The methodological quality of radioactive enteritis guidelines is unequal; even in the same guidelines, different domains have a large difference. For radioactive rectal damage diagnosis, a type of endoscopic treatment recommendation is more mature, but the overall diagnosis and treatment of radioactive enteritis still lacks high-quality research evidence.

Integrative analysis reveals marker genes for intestinal mucosa barrier repairing in clinical patients.

This study aims to identify biomarkers of intestinal repair and provide potential therapeutic clues for improving functional recovery and prognostic performance after intestinal inflammation or injury. Here, we conducted a large-scale screening of multiple transcriptomic and scRNA-seq datasets of patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), and identified 10 marker genes that potentially contribute to intestinal barrier repairing: AQP8, SULT1A1, HSD17B2, PADI2, SLC26A2, SELENBP1, FAM162A, TNNC2, ACADS, and TST. Analysis of a published scRNA-seq dataset revealed that expression of these healing markers were specific to absorptive cell types in intestinal epithelium. Furthermore, we conducted a clinical study where 11 patients underwent ileum resection demonstrating that upregulation of post-operative AQP8 and SULT1A1 expression were associated with improved recovery of bowel functions after surgery-induced intestinal injury, making them confident biomarkers of intestinal healing as well as potential prognostic markers and therapeutic targets for patients with impaired intestinal barrier functions.

Systematic review of guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of Clostridioides difficile infection.

Objective: To systematically assess the current related methodological quality of guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI), revealing the heterogeneity and reasons for guideline recommendations for the diagnosis and treatment of CDI. Methods: We searched electronic databases systematically between 2017 and 2021 to find the latest guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of CDI. The Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE II) tool was used for quality assessment of the included guidelines. The main recommendations for the diagnosis and treatment of CDI in the guidelines were extracted and evaluated for consistency, and the level of evidence supporting these recommendations was further extracted and analysed. Results: Fourteen guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of CDI were finally included in this study. There were four guidelines, BSG and HIS, ASCRS, IDSA AND SHEA, and NICE, with an overall score of more than 60%, which is worthy of clinical recommendation. Further analysis of the consistency of the main recommendations for the diagnosis and treatment of CDI in the guidelines showed that the recommendations differed among guidelines. There are no unified classification criteria for the severity of CDI in current studies; some recommendations for the diagnosis and treatment of CDI do not provide evidence to support the recommendations, most recommendations cite low levels of evidence, and there is a lack of high-quality research evidence. Conclusion: The quality of guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of CDI is uneven. Recommendations on the diagnosis and treatment of CDI have also varied in the guidelines for the past 5 years. Improvements of the aforementioned factors associated with causing heterogeneity would be a rational approach by guideline developers to further update guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of CDI.