V Spanish Consensus Conference on Helicobacter pylori infection treatment

Helicobacter pylori infection is very common in the Spanish population and represents the main cause of chronic gastritis, peptic ulcer, and gastric cancer. The last iteration of Spanish consensus guidelines on H. pylori infection was conducted in 2016. Recent changes in therapeutic schemes along with increasing supporting evidence were key for developing the V Spanish Consensus Conference (May 2021). Fourteen experts performed a systematic review of the scientific evidence and developed a series of recommendations that were subjected to an anonymous Delphi process of iterative voting. Scientific evidence and the strength of the recommendation were classified using GRADE guidelines. An eradication therapy, when prescribed empirically, is considered acceptable when it reliably achieves, or preferably surpass, 90% cure rates. Currently, only quadruple therapies (with or without bismuth) and generally lasting 14 days, accomplish this goal in first- and second-line therapies. A non-bismuth quadruple concomitant regimen (proton pump inhibitor, clarithromycin, amoxicillin, and metronidazole) or a quadruple bismuth-based combination (proton pump inhibitor, bismuth, tetracycline, and metronidazole), are recommended as first-line regimens. Rescue therapies after eradication failure and management of H. pylori infection in peptic ulcer disease were also reviewed.

Methodological quality and transparency of clinical practice guidelines for difficult airway management using the appraisal of guidelines research & evaluation II instrument: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Complications arising from airway management represent an important cause of morbidity and mortality. Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) are systematically created documents that summarise knowledge and assist the delivery of high-quality medical care by identifying evidence that supports best clinical care.

OBJECTIVE

Using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation II instrument, we aimed to evaluate the methodological rigour and transparency of unanticipated difficult airway management CPGs in adults.

DESIGN

Using PUBMED without language restrictions, we identified eligible CPGs between 1 January 1996 and 30 June 2019. All versions of a CPG were included as independent guidelines to assess improvements over time or the methodological limitations of each version. CPGs-related obstetrics or paediatrics or the management extubation in cases of difficult airway were excluded.

RESULTS

Fourteen CPGs were included. Of the six domains suggested by the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation II instrument, 'applicability' had the lowest score (23%) and 'scope and objectives' had the highest score (88%). The remaining domains (stakeholder involvement, editorial independence, rigour of development and clarity of presentation) had scores ranging between 56 and 81%. Overall, the highest scored CPG was the Difficult Airway Society 2015.

CONCLUSION

Future updates of CPGs for difficult airway management in adults and severely ill patients should consider more emphasis on the applicability of their recommendations to real clinical practice.

IV Spanish Consensus Conference on Helicobacter pylori infection treatment

Helicobacter pylori approximately infect 50% of Spanish population and causes chronic gastritis, peptic ulcer and gastric cancer. Until now, three consensus meetings on H.pylori infection had been performed in Spain (the last in 2012). The changes in the treatment schemes, and the increasing available evidence, have justified organizing the IVSpanish Consensus Conference (March 2016), focused on the treatment of this infection. Nineteen experts participated, who performed a systematic review of the scientific evidence and developed a series of recommendation that were subjected to an anonymous Delphi process of iterative voting. Scientific evidence and the strength of the recommendation were classified using GRADE guidelines. As starting point, this consensus increased the minimum acceptable efficacy of recommended treatments that should reach, or preferably surpass, the 90% cure rate when prescribed empirically. Therefore, only quadruple therapies (with or without bismuth), and generally lasting 14 days, are recommended both for first and second line treatments. Non-bismuth quadruple concomitant regimen, including a proton pump inhibitor, clarithromycin, amoxicillin and metronidazole, is recommended as first line. In the present consensus, other first line alternatives and rescue treatments are also reviewed and recommended.

Current concepts on microscopic colitis: evidence-based statements and recommendations of the Spanish Microscopic Colitis Group

BACKGROUND

Microscopic colitis (MC) is an underdiagnosed inflammatory bowel disease.

AIM

To develop an evidence-based clinical practice guide on MC current concepts.

METHODS

Literature search was done on the Cochrane Library, EMBASE and MEDLINE electronic databases, which were consulted covering the period up until March 2015. Work groups were selected for each of the reviewed topics, with the purpose of drafting the initial statements and recommendations. They subsequently underwent a voting process based on the Delphi method. Each statement/recommendation was accompanied by the result of the vote the level of evidence, and discussion of the corresponding evidence. The grade of recommendation (GR) using the GRADE approach was established for diagnosis and treatment recommendations.

RESULTS

Some key statements and recommendations are: advancing age increases the risk of developing MC, mainly in females. The symptoms of MC and IBS-D may be similar. If MC is suspected, colonoscopy taking biopsies is mandatory. Treatment with oral budesonide is recommended to induce clinical remission in patients with MC. Oral mesalazine is not recommended in patients with collagenous colitis for the induction of clinical remission. The use of anti-TNF-alpha drugs (infliximab, adalimumab) is recommended for the induction of remission in severe cases of MC that fail to respond to corticosteroids or immunomodulators, as an alternative to colectomy.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first consensus paper on MC based on GRADE methodology. This initiative may help physicians involved in care of these patients in taking decisions based on evidence.

[Clinical practice guideline on the management of patients with dyspepsia. Update 2012]

The aim of the Clinical Practice Guideline (CPG) on the Management of Patients with Dyspepsia is to generate recommendations on the optimal approach to dyspepsia in the primary care and specialized outpatient setting. The main objective of this CPG is to help to optimize the diagnostic process, identifying patients with a low risk of a serious organic disease (mainly tumoral), who could be safely managed without the need for invasive diagnostic tests and/or referral to a specialist. The importance of this aim lies in the need to accurately diagnose patients with esophagogastric cancer and correctly treat peptic ulcer while, at the same time, reduce negative endoscopies in order to appropriately use the available healthcare resources. This CPG reviews the initial strategies that can be used in patients with uninvestigated dyspepsia and evaluates the possible decision to begin empirical therapy or to investigate the existence of a lesion that could explain the symptoms. This CPG also discusses functional dyspepsia, which encompasses all patients with dyspepsia with no demonstrable cause on endoscopy. Recommendations for the diagnosis and treatment of peptic ulcer and Helicobacter pylori infection are also made. To classify the scientific evidence and strengthen the recommendations, the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation Working Group) system has been used (http://www.gradeworkinggroup.org/).

[Managing of the patient with dyspepsia. Clinical Practice Guideline. Update 2012]

The "Preparation of Clinical Practice Guidelines in Digestive Diseases, from Primary Care to Specialist Care" Program, is a joint project by the Spanish Gastroenterology Association (AEG), the Spanish Society of Family and Community Medicine (SEMFyC), and the IberoAmerican Cochrane Center (CCI). We present the update of the Guidelines on the Management of Dyspepsia, which was published in 2003. The essential criteria provided in the AGREE (Appraisal of Guidelines, Research and Evaluation for Europe) Instrument were taken into account in the preparation of this document. The GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) system was used to classify the scientific evidence and strengthen the recommendations.

[Clinical practice guideline on the management of patients with dyspepsia. Update 2012]

The aim of the Clinical Practice Guideline (CPG) on the Management of Patients with Dyspepsia is to generate recommendations on the optimal approach to dyspepsia in the primary care and specialized outpatient setting. The main objective of this CPG is to help to optimize the diagnostic process, identifying patients with a low risk of a serious organic disease (mainly tumoral), who could be safely managed without the need for invasive diagnostic tests and/or referral to a specialist. The importance of this aim lies in the need to accurately diagnose patients with esophagogastric cancer and correctly treat peptic ulcer while, at the same time, reduce negative endoscopies in order to appropriately use the available healthcare resources.This CPG reviews the initial strategies that can be used in patients with uninvestigated dyspepsia and evaluates the possible decision to begin empirical therapy or to investigate the existence of a lesion that could explain the symptoms. This CPG also discusses functional dyspepsia, which encompasses all patients with dyspepsia with no demonstrable cause on endoscopy. Recommendations for the diagnosis and treatment of peptic ulcer and Helicobacter pylori infection are also made. To classify the scientific evidence and strengthen the recommendations, the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation Working Group) system has been used (http://www.gradeworkinggroup.org/).