Search

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY This article presents the evidence and the rationale for the recommendations for surgical treatment of degenerative lumbar stenosis (DLS) and spondylolisthesis that were recently developed as a part of the Czech Clinical Practice Guideline (CPG) “The Surgical Treatment of the Degenerative Diseases of the Spine”. MATERIAL AND METHODS The Guideline was drawn up in line with the Czech National Methodology of the CPG Development, which is based on the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. We used an innovative GRADE-adolopment method that combines adoption and adaptation of the existing guidelines with de novo development of recommendations. In this paper, we present three adapted recommendations on DLS and a recommendation on spondy-lolisthesis developed de novo by the Czech team. RESULTS Open surgical decompression in DLS patients has been evaluated in three randomized controlled trials (RCTs). A recommendation in favour of decompression was made based on a statistically significant and clinically evident improvement in the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and leg pain. Decompression may be recommended for patients with symptoms of DLS in the event of correlation of significant physical limitation and the finding obtained via imaging. The authors of a systematic review of observational studies and one RCT conclude that fusion has a negligible role in the case of a simple DLS. Thus, spondylodesis should only be chosen as an adjunct to decompression in selected DLS patients. Two RCTs compared supervised rehabilitation with home or no exercise, showing no statistically significant difference between the procedures. The guideline group considers the post-surgery physical activity beneficial and suggests supervised rehabilitation in patients who have undergone surgery for DLS for the beneficial effects of exercise in the absence of known adverse effects. Four RCTs were found comparing simple decompression and decompression with fusion in patients with degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis. None of the outcomes showed clinically significant improvement or deterioration in favour of either intervention. The guideline group concluded that for stable spondylolisthesis the results of both methods are comparable and, when other parameters are considered (balance of benefits and risks, or costs), point in favour of simple decompression. Due to the lack of scientific evidence, no recommendation has been formulated regarding unstable spondylolisthesis. The certainty of the evidence was rated as low for all recommendations. DISCUSSION Despite the unclear definition of stable/unstable slip, the inclusion of apparently unstable cases of DS in stable studies limits the conclusions of the studies. Based on the available literature, however, it can be summarized that in simple degenerative lumbar stenosis and static spondylolisthesis, fusion of the given segment is not justified. However, its use in the case of unstable (dynamic) vertebral slip is undisputable for the time being. CONCLUSIONS The guideline development group suggests decompression in patients with DLS in whom previous conservative treatment did not lead to improvement, spondylodesis only in selected patients, and post-surgical supervised rehabilitation. In patients with degenerative lumbar stenosis and spondylolisthesis with no signs of instability, the guideline development group suggests simple decompression (without fusion). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: To assess the efficacy and safety of pharmacological interventions for preventing upper gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding in people admitted to intensive care units (ICUs)., Design and Setting: Systematic review and frequentist network meta-analysis using standard methodological procedures as recommended by Cochrane for screening of records, data extraction and analysis. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to assess the certainty of evidence., Participants: Randomised controlled trials involving patients admitted to ICUs for longer than 24 hours were included., Search Methods: The Cochrane Gut Specialised Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase and Latin American and Caribbean Health Science Information database (LILACS) databases were searched from August 2017 to March 2022. The search in MEDLINE was updated in April 2023. We also searched ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (WHO ICTRP)., Main Outcome Measures: The primary outcome was the prevention of clinically important upper GI bleeding., Results: We included 123 studies with 46 996 participants. Cimetidine (relative risk (RR) 0.56, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.77, moderate certainty), ranitidine (RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.38 to 0.76, moderate certainty), antacids (RR 0.48, 95% CI 0.33 to 0.68, moderate certainty), sucralfate (RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.39 to 0.75, moderate certainty) and a combination of ranitidine and antacids (RR 0.13, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.62, moderate certainty) are likely effective in preventing upper GI bleeding.The effect of any intervention on the prevention of nosocomial pneumonia, all-cause mortality in the ICU or the hospital, duration of the stay in the ICU, duration of intubation and (serious) adverse events remains unclear., Conclusions: Several interventions seem effective in preventing clinically important upper GI bleeding while there is limited evidence for other outcomes. Patient-relevant benefits and harms need to be assessed under consideration of the patients' underlying conditions., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Objective: To determine the efficacy of adding instrumented spinal fusion to decompression to treat degenerative spondylolisthesis (DS)., Design: Systematic review with meta-analysis., Data Sources: MEDLINE, Embase, Emcare, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, Scopus, ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global, ClinicalTrials.gov and WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform from inception to May 2022., Eligibility Criteria for Study Selection: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing decompression with instrumented fusion to decompression alone in patients with DS. Two reviewers independently screened the studies, assessed the risk of bias and extracted data. We provide the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation assessment of the certainty of evidence (COE)., Results: We identified 4514 records and included four trials with 523 participants. At a 2-year follow-up, adding fusion to decompression likely results in trivial difference in the Oswestry Disability Index (range 0-100, with higher values indicating greater impairment) with mean difference (MD) 0.86 (95% CI -4.53 to 6.26; moderate COE). Similar results were observed for back and leg pain measured on a scale of 0 to 100, with higher values indicating more severe pain. There was a slightly increased improvement in back pain (2-year follow-up) in the group without fusion shown by MD -5·92 points (95% CI -11.00 to -0.84; moderate COE). There was a trivial difference in leg pain between the groups, slightly favouring the one without fusion, with MD -1.25 points (95% CI -6.71 to 4.21; moderate COE). Our findings at 2-year follow-up suggest that omitting fusion may increase the reoperation rate slightly (OR 1.23; 0.70 to 2.17; low COE)., Conclusions: Evidence suggests no benefits of adding instrumented fusion to decompression for treating DS. Isolated decompression seems sufficient for most patients. Further RCTs assessing spondylolisthesis stability are needed to determine which patients would benefit from fusion., Prospero Registration Number: CRD42022308267., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.)

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY This article presents the evidence and the rationale for the recommendations for surgical treatment of degenerative lumbar stenosis (DLS) and spondylolisthesis that were recently developed as a part of the Czech Clinical Practice Guideline (CPG) "The Surgical Treatment of the Degenerative Diseases of the Spine". MATERIAL AND METHODS The Guideline was drawn up in line with the Czech National Methodology of the CPG Development, which is based on the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. We used an innovative GRADE-adolopment method that combines adoption and adaptation of the existing guidelines with de novo development of recommendations. In this paper, we present three adapted recommendations on DLS and a recommendation on spondylolisthesis developed de novo by the Czech team. RESULTS Open surgical decompression in DLS patients has been evaluated in three randomized controlled trials (RCTs). A recommendation in favour of decompression was made based on a statistically significant and clinically evident improvement in the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and leg pain. Decompression may be recommended for patients with symptoms of DLS in the event of correlation of significant physical limitation and the finding obtained via imaging. The authors of a systematic review of observational studies and one RCT conclude that fusion has a negligible role in the case of a simple DLS. Thus, spondylodesis should only be chosen as an adjunct to decompression in selected DLS patients. Two RCTs compared supervised rehabilitation with home or no exercise, showing no statistically significant difference between the procedures. The guideline group considers the post-surgery physical activity beneficial and suggests supervised rehabilitation in patients who have undergone surgery for DLS for the beneficial effects of exercise in the absence of known adverse effects. Four RCTs were found comparing simple decompression and decompression with fusion in patients with degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis. None of the outcomes showed clinically significant improvement or deterioration in favour of either intervention. The guideline group concluded that for stable spondylolisthesis the results of both methods are comparable and, when other parameters are considered (balance of benefits and risks, or costs), point in favour of simple decompression. Due to the lack of scientific evidence, no recommendation has been formulated regarding unstable spondylolisthesis. The certainty of the evidence was rated as low for all recommendations. DISCUSSION Despite the unclear definition of stable/unstable slip, the inclusion of apparently unstable cases of DS in stable studies limits the conclusions of the studies. Based on the available literature, however, it can be summarized that in simple degenerative lumbar stenosis and static spondylolisthesis, fusion of the given segment is not justified. However, its use in the case of unstable (dynamic) vertebral slip is undisputable for the time being. CONCLUSIONS The guideline development group suggests decompression in patients with DLS in whom previous conservative treatment did not lead to improvement, spondylodesis only in selected patients, and post-surgical supervised rehabilitation. In patients with degenerative lumbar stenosis and spondylolisthesis with no signs of instability, the guideline development group suggests simple decompression (without fusion). Key words: degenerative lumbar stenosis, degenerative spondylolisthesis, spinal fusion, Clinical Practice Guideline, GRADE, adolopment.

Objective: The objective of this review is to synthesize the findings of economic evaluations of preventing or treating pressure ulcers., Introduction: Pressure ulcers are one of the most common preventable complications characterized by local tissue injury. Pressure ulcers increase mortality rates, impair quality of life, increase the length of hospital stay, and alter overall health outcomes. Published studies have found higher costs associated with treating pressure ulcers than preventing them, with treatment cost varying based on the pressure ulcer category (the greater the category, the higher the cost). We will systematically review the evidence on preventing or treating pressure ulcers from an economic perspective., Inclusion Criteria: We will include systematic reviews that investigate both the cost and outcomes associated with the prevention or treatment of pressure ulcers. Systematic reviews dealing with economic evaluation of wound care or management will be excluded if they have not provided separate information for pressure ulcers., Methods: Epistemonikos, MEDLINE, NHS Economic Evaluation Database, and the Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health (CADTH) website will be searched for relevant systematic reviews from inception and without any language restrictions. Titles and abstracts will be screened at the initial stage, followed by full-text screening. Quality assessment will be done using the standard JBI critical appraisal instrument for systematic reviews and research syntheses. Article screening, data extraction, and quality assessment will be performed by two reviewers independently. All economic health outcomes will be considered under the primary outcomes of the study., Systematic Review Registration Number: Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/9y2a7/)., Competing Interests: MK is an associate editor for JBI Evidence Synthesis. He had no input into the editorial processes for this protocol. The other authors declare no conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2021 JBI.)

This is a protocol for a scoping review that aims to determine how guideline authors using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE) approach have addressed previously identified challenges related to public health. The Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) methodology for scoping reviews will be followed. We will search and screen titles of guidelines for all languages published in 2013-2021 in: the GIN library, BIGG database, Epistemonikos GRADE guidelines repository, GRADEpro Database, MAGICapp, NICE and WHO websites. Two reviewers will independently screen full texts of the documents identified. The following information will be extracted: methods used for identifying different stakeholders and incorporating their perspectives; methods for identification and prioritization of non-health outcomes; methods for determining thresholds for decision-making; methods for incorporating and grading evidence from non-randomized studies; methods for addressing concerns with conditional recommendations in public health; methods for reaching consensus; additional methodological concerns; and any modifications made to GRADE. A combination of directed content analysis and descriptive statistics will be used for data analysis, and the findings presented narratively in a tabular and graphical form. In this protocol, we present the pilot results from 13 identified eligible guidelines issued between January and August 2021. We will publish the full review results when they become available.

Introduction: Perioperative care is a broad field covering an array of elective and emergency procedures. Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for perioperative care exist with various degrees of methodological quality. We intend to critically appraise them using AGREE II instrument and investigate the use of Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE)., Methods and Analysis: We searched MEDLINE (Ovid), Epistemonikos, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and PROSPERO and did not identify any similar systematic review in this area. We will search databases, repositories and websites of guideline developers and medical societies, including MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), DynaMed, the GIN international guideline library and registry of guidelines in development, BIGG international database of GRADE guidelines, ECRI Guideline Trust or National Institute for Clinical Evidence to identify all CPGs for perioperative care in an adult population in a general clinical setting. We will include CPGs, expert guidance, position papers, guidance documents and consensus statements published in the last 5 years by experts or international organisations that provide guidance or recommendations in the available full text with no geographical or language limitation. Excluded will be those containing only good practice statements. Two independent reviewers will perform critical appraisal using the AGREE II tool. The data presented in a narrative and tabular form will include the results of the critical appraisal for all identified CPGs for all AGREE II domains and an assessment of the use of the GRADE approach., Ethics and Dissemination: Ethics approval is not required. We will disseminate the findings through professional networks and conference presentations and will publish the results., Competing Interests: Competing interests: JK is a director of Centre of Evidence-Based Education & Arts Therapies, Faculty of Education, Palacky University, MK and LK are director and acting deputy director of the Czech National Centre for Evidence-Based Healthcare and Knowledge Translation. LK, MK (head methodologist), PB, JB, SS and TN are involved in a Czech national project for the development of clinical practice guidelines as methodologists., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Mucormycosis, a serious and rare fungal infection, has recently been reported in COVID-19 patients worldwide. This study aims to map all the emerging evidence on the COVID-19-associated mucormycosis (CAM) with a special focus on clinical presentation, treatment modalities, and patient outcomes. An extensive literature search was performed in MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), Cochrane COVID-19 Study Register, and WHO COVID-19 database till 9 June 2021. The primary outcome was to summarize the clinical presentation, treatment modalities, and patient outcomes of CAM. Data were summarized using descriptive statistics and presented in tabular form. This evidence mapping was based on a total of 167 CAM patients with a mean age of 51 ± 14.62 years, and 56.28% of them were male. Diabetes mellitus (73.65% (n = 123)), hypertension (22.75% (n = 38)), and renal failure (10.77% (n = 18)) were the most common co-morbidities among CAM patients. The most common symptoms observed in CAM patients were facial pain, ptosis, proptosis, visual acuity, and vision loss. Survival was higher in patients who underwent both medical and surgical management (64.96%). Overall mortality among CAM patients was found to be 38.32%. In conclusion, this study found a high incidence of CAM with a high mortality rate. Optimal glycemic control and early identification of mucormycosis should be the priority to reduce the morbidity and mortality related to CAM.

Background: Besides significant reduction in heroin consumption, weight gain is an accompanying phenomenon during methadone maintenance treatment. Priority of this on-going study was to find out, if it is stable, or transitory. We were also interested in possible contribution of pharmacological and socio-cultural factors on body weight changes., Methods and Results: It was a longitudinal, clinical, observational study. The sample consisted of 42 patients from methadone maintenance treatment program (MMTP) from the Centre for Treatment of Drug Dependencies in Bratislava. Their average age was 28.6 years (SD ± 6.0); 67 % were males. The weight (kg) and body mass index (BMI) were monitored in the series of five measurements during four years period in MMTP: at treatment entry after one year, after two, after three and after four years in the program. Relationship was also explored between daily dose of methadone and BMI. The average weight of the patients and their BMI were: before the entry into MMTP 65.2 kg (SD ± 13.9) and 22.2 (SD ± 3.9); after one year 72.7 kg (SD ± 15.3) and 24.7 (SD ± 4.1); after two 75.2 kg (SD ± 16.7) and 25.6 (SD ± 4.4); after three 74.2 kg (SD ± 17.1) and 25.1 (SD ± 4.5); after four years 75.0 kg (SD ± 16.5) and 25.2 (SD ± 4.2). Significant increase of BMI was detected after one year (t = 5.03; p < 0.001) and less significant between one and two years (t = 2.5; p < 0.05) in MMTP. Significant difference was also found between proportional distributions of the patients according to BMI categories: underweight, norm, overweight, obesity; at the time of entry to MMTP and after one year in it (χ² = 13.6; p < 0.01). No any other statistically significant changes were found later on, after 1 - 4 years from the entry to the treatment. The correlation between daily dose of methadone and BMI (r = 0.273) was not significant after four years in MMTP., Conclusions: The weight of the patients in MMTP has increased significantly after one year in the treatment, but remained stable from the second year. No substantial correlation was detected between methadone dose and BMI.

Background: Clinical experience reveals a weight increase among patients with opiate dependence after their admission to methadone maintenance treatment (MMT). The objective of the present study was to find out whether there was a significant weight increase among MMT patients, and if so, to what extent this change in weight differed from the existing statistical norm of the general population., Methods and Results: The sample consisted of 274 MMT patients of the CPLDZ Bratislava with the average age of 26.3 years, 69% were males. Only those patients were included into the study that had stayed in MMT for at least one year. Two main comparisons of their body mass index (BMI) were done: 1. at entry into MMT, and one year after entry; 2. a comparison of BMI one year after treatment entry with BMI of the general Slovak population. Underweight was present in 10% of the patients entering MMT, 72% had BMI within a normal range, 15% were overweight, and 3% were obese. A significant shift towards higher BMI categories was reported one year after treatment entry: 5%, 58%, 29% and 8%, respectively (p < 0.001), which is still significantly lower than in the general population: 4%, 49%, 34% a 13% (p < 0.001)., Conclusions: Our results indicate that weight increase in MMT patients should not be considered a direct side-effect, because it is not possible to differentiate between a drug effect and changed behavioural eating stereotypes that could be identical to those in the general population.