To develop the second evidence-based Brazilian Society of Rheumatology consensus for diagnosis and treatment of lupus nephritis (LN).
Two methodologists and 20 rheumatologists from Lupus Comittee of Brazilian Society of Rheumatology participate in the development of this guideline. Fourteen PICO questions were defined and a systematic review was performed. Eligible randomized controlled trials were analyzed regarding complete renal remission, partial renal remission, serum creatinine, proteinuria, serum creatinine doubling, progression to end-stage renal disease, renal relapse, and severe adverse events (infections and mortality). The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to develop these recommendations. Recommendations required ≥82% of agreement among the voting members and were classified as strongly in favor, weakly in favor, conditional, weakly against or strongly against a particular intervention. Other aspects of LN management (diagnosis, general principles of treatment, treatment of comorbidities and refractory cases) were evaluated through literature review and expert opinion.
All SLE patients should undergo creatinine and urinalysis tests to assess renal involvement. Kidney biopsy is considered the gold standard for diagnosing LN but, if it is not available or there is a contraindication to the procedure, therapeutic decisions should be based on clinical and laboratory parameters. Fourteen recommendations were developed. Target Renal response (TRR) was defined as improvement or maintenance of renal function (±10% at baseline of treatment) combined with a decrease in 24-h proteinuria or 24-h UPCR of 25% at 3 months, a decrease of 50% at 6 months, and proteinuria < 0.8 g/24 h at 12 months. Hydroxychloroquine should be prescribed to all SLE patients, except in cases of contraindication. Glucocorticoids should be used at the lowest dose and for the minimal necessary period. In class III or IV (±V), mycophenolate (MMF), cyclophosphamide, MMF plus tacrolimus (TAC), MMF plus belimumab or TAC can be used as induction therapy. For maintenance therapy, MMF or azathioprine (AZA) are the first choice and TAC or cyclosporin or leflunomide can be used in patients who cannot use MMF or AZA. Rituximab can be prescribed in cases of refractory disease. In cases of failure in achieving TRR, it is important to assess adherence, immunosuppressant dosage, adjuvant therapy, comorbidities, and consider biopsy/rebiopsy.
This consensus provides evidence-based data to guide LN diagnosis and treatment, supporting the development of public and supplementary health policies in Brazil.

UNASSIGNED: A comprehensive review of the evidence exploring the outcomes of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) guidelines has not been completed.
UNASSIGNED: To evaluate if ERAS guidelines are associated with improved hospital length of stay, hospital readmission, complications, and mortality compared with usual surgical care, and to understand differences in estimates based on study and patient factors.
UNASSIGNED: MEDLINE, Embase, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, and Cochrane Central were searched from inception until June 2021.
UNASSIGNED: Titles, abstracts, and full-text articles were screened by 2 independent reviewers. Eligible studies were randomized clinical trials that examined ERAS-guided surgery compared with a control group and reported on at least 1 of the outcomes.
UNASSIGNED: Data were abstracted in duplicate using a standardized data abstraction form. The study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses. Risk of bias was assessed in duplicate using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. Random-effects meta-analysis was used to pool estimates for each outcome, and meta-regression identified sources of heterogeneity within each outcome.
UNASSIGNED: The primary outcomes were hospital length of stay, hospital readmission within 30 days of index discharge, 30-day postoperative complications, and 30-day postoperative mortality.
UNASSIGNED: Of the 12 047 references identified, 1493 full texts were screened for eligibility, 495 were included in the systematic review, and 74 RCTs with 9076 participants were included in the meta-analysis. Included studies presented data from 21 countries and 9 ERAS-guided surgical procedures with 15 (20.3%) having a low risk of bias. The mean (SD) Reporting on ERAS Compliance, Outcomes, and Elements Research checklist score was 13.5 (2.3). Hospital length of stay decreased by 1.88 days (95% CI, 0.95-2.81 days; I2 = 86.5%; P < .001) and the risk of complications decreased (risk ratio, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.59-0.87; I2 = 78.6%; P < .001) in the ERAS group. Risk of readmission and mortality were not significant.
UNASSIGNED: In this meta-analysis, ERAS guidelines were associated with decreased hospital length of stay and complications. Future studies should aim to improve implementation of ERAS and increase the reach of the guidelines.

UNASSIGNED: Red blood cell (RBC) transfusion is a common medical intervention to treat anemia in very preterm neonates; however, best transfusion practices, such as thresholds, remain uncertain.
UNASSIGNED: To develop recommendations for clinicians on the use of RBC transfusions in very preterm neonates.
UNASSIGNED: An international steering committee reviewed evidence from a systematic review of 6 randomized clinical trials (RCTs) that compared high vs low hemoglobin-based or hematocrit-based transfusion thresholds. The steering committee reached consensus on certainty-of-evidence ratings and worked with a panel from stakeholder organizations on reviewing the evidence. With input from parent representatives and the stakeholder panel, the steering committee used the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach to develop recommendations.
UNASSIGNED: A systematic review of 6 RCTs encompassing 3483 participants (1759 females [51.3%]; mean [SD] age range, 25.9-29.8 [1.5-3.0] weeks) was used as the basis of the recommendations. The ranges for higher hemoglobin concentration (liberal) vs lower hemoglobin concentration (restrictive) threshold study arms were similar across the trials. However, specific thresholds differed based on the severity of illness, which was defined using variable criteria in the trials. There was moderate certainty of evidence that low transfusion thresholds likely had little to no difference in important short-term and long-term outcomes. The recommended hemoglobin thresholds varied on the basis of postnatal week and respiratory support needs. At postnatal weeks 1, 2, and 3 or more, for neonates on respiratory support, the recommended thresholds were 11, 10, and 9 g/dL, respectively; for neonates on no or minimal respiratory support, the recommended thresholds were 10, 8.5, and 7 g/dL, respectively (to convert hemoglobin to grams per liter, multiply by 10.0).
UNASSIGNED: This consensus statement recommends a restrictive RBC transfusion strategy, with moderate certainty of evidence, for preterm neonates with less than 30 weeks\' gestation.

. The management of diabetic foot: the new guidelines of the International Working Group on Diabetic Foot. The publication of the new guidelines on the diabetic foot are an opportunity for a fine-tuning of the (few) new developments, but of the soundness of the evidence and knowledge known so far. Compared to the previous 2019 guidelines, the 2023 update included the analysis of randomised clinical trials only, a more accurate application of the GRADE method, a leaner and more current bibliography, and an update of the strength of some recommendations from low to conditional. The real big news in the 2023 update is the publication of a specific guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of Charcot neuro-osteoarthropathy in people with diabetes, neuropathy and in the absence of skin lesions.

BACKGROUND: The SAVVY project aims to improve the analyses of adverse events (AEs) in clinical trials through the use of survival techniques appropriately dealing with varying follow-up times and competing events (CEs). This paper summarizes key features and conclusions from the various SAVVY papers.
METHODS: Summarizing several papers reporting theoretical investigations using simulations and an empirical study including randomized clinical trials from several sponsor organizations, biases from ignoring varying follow-up times or CEs are investigated. The bias of commonly used estimators of the absolute (incidence proportion and one minus Kaplan-Meier) and relative (risk and hazard ratio) AE risk is quantified. Furthermore, we provide a cursory assessment of how pertinent guidelines for the analysis of safety data deal with the features of varying follow-up time and CEs.
RESULTS: SAVVY finds that for both, avoiding bias and categorization of evidence with respect to treatment effect on AE risk into categories, the choice of the estimator is key and more important than features of the underlying data such as percentage of censoring, CEs, amount of follow-up, or value of the gold-standard.
CONCLUSIONS: The choice of the estimator of the cumulative AE probability and the definition of CEs are crucial. Whenever varying follow-up times and/or CEs are present in the assessment of AEs, SAVVY recommends using the Aalen-Johansen estimator (AJE) with an appropriate definition of CEs to quantify AE risk. There is an urgent need to improve pertinent clinical trial reporting guidelines for reporting AEs so that incidence proportions or one minus Kaplan-Meier estimators are finally replaced by the AJE with appropriate definition of CEs.

International guidelines recommend a target protein intake of ≥1.2 g/kg/day to all critically ill patients for optimal outcomes. There are however various conflicting data related to this recommendation. The primary objective of this review was to compare a protein intake group (≥1.2 g/kg/day) with a lower protein intake group (<1.2 g/kg/day) in critically ill adult patients on mortality, length of intensive care unit (ICU) and hospital stay. Secondly, the effect of protein intake on length of mechanical ventilation, adverse nutrition-related events and muscle mass and strength parameters were investigated. Sixteen randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of adult patients admitted to an intensive or high care unit and receiving nutrition support in the form of enteral- and/or parenteral nutrition were selected against prespecified eligibility criteria. Two independent reviewers extracted relevant data and assessed the risk of bias of the included studies. Review Manager 5.4.1 was used to analyse data and GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations) was used to evaluate the certainty of the evidence. The higher protein group, when compared to the lower protein group, probably results in little to no difference in mortality (risk ratio [RR] 1.01; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.89 to 1.14; moderate-certainty evidence); with a probable slight increase in length of ICU stay (mean difference [MD] 0.33; 95% CI -0.57 to 1.23; moderate-certainty) and length of hospital stay (MD 1.72; 95% CI -0.58 to 4.01; moderate-certainty evidence), on average. For secondary outcomes, it was found that the higher protein group probably does not reduce the length of mechanical ventilation (MD 0.08; 95% CI -0.38 to 0.53; moderate-certainty evidence). Higher protein group probably reduces the occurrence of diarrhoea and high gastric residual volume and may reduce the occurrence of constipation. It may also increase nitrogen balance (MD 3.66; 95% CI 1.81 to 5.51; low-certainty evidence). Importantly, there does not seem to be harm associated with the higher protein group, though it should be mentioned that for many of the adverse events in this study, the certainty of evidence was low or very low.

UNASSIGNED: There is a lack of randomized clinical trial (RCT) data to guide many routine decisions in the care of children hospitalized for common conditions. A first step in addressing the shortage of RCTs for this population is to identify the most pressing RCT questions for children hospitalized with common conditions.
UNASSIGNED: To identify the most important and feasible RCT questions for children hospitalized with common conditions.
UNASSIGNED: For this consensus statement, a 3-stage modified Delphi process was used in a virtual conference series spanning January 1 to September 29, 2022. Forty-six individuals from 30 different institutions participated in the process. Stage 1 involved construction of RCT questions for the 10 most common pediatric conditions leading to hospitalization. Participants used condition-specific guidelines and reviews from a structured literature search to inform their development of RCT questions. During stage 2, RCT questions were refined and scored according to importance. Stage 3 incorporated public comment and feasibility with the prioritization of RCT questions.
UNASSIGNED: The main outcome was RCT questions framed in a PICO (population, intervention, control, and outcome) format and ranked according to importance and feasibility; score choices ranged from 1 to 9, with higher scores indicating greater importance and feasibility.
UNASSIGNED: Forty-six individuals (38 who shared demographic data; 24 women [63%]) from 30 different institutions participated in our modified Delphi process. Participants included children\'s hospital (n = 14) and community hospital (n = 13) pediatricians, parents of hospitalized children (n = 4), other clinicians (n = 2), biostatisticians (n = 2), and other researchers (n = 11). The process yielded 62 unique RCT questions, most of which are pragmatic, comparing interventions in widespread use for which definitive effectiveness data are lacking. Overall scores for importance and feasibility of the RCT questions ranged from 1 to 9, with a median of 5 (IQR, 4-7). Six of the top 10 selected questions focused on determining optimal antibiotic regimens for 3 common infections (pneumonia, urinary tract infection, and cellulitis).
UNASSIGNED: This consensus statementhas identified the most important and feasible RCT questions for children hospitalized with common conditions. This list of RCT questions can guide investigators and funders in conducting impactful trials to improve care and outcomes for hospitalized children.

BACKGROUND: Although AIDS-related deaths have reduced with increased access to antiretroviral care, cardiovascular disease-related morbidities among persons living with HIV are rising. Contributing to this is the higher incidence of Hypertension among Persons Living with HIV. The duration of exposure to the virus and antiretroviral drugs plays a vital role in the pathogenesis, putting perinatally infected children and adolescents at higher risk than behaviorally-infected ones, supporting the calls for increased surveillance of Hypertension among them. Despite the availability of guidelines to support this surveillance, the blood pressure (BP) of adolescents living with HIV (ADLHIV) is not checked during clinical visits. This study aims to assess the effect of a theory-based intervention on healthcare workers\' adherence to the guidelines for hypertension screening among adolescents.
METHODS: A multi-facility cluster-randomized study will be conducted. The clusters will be 20 antiretroviral therapy sites in the Greater Accra Region of Ghana with the highest adolescent caseload. Data will be extracted from the folders of adolescents (10-17 years) who received care in these facilities six months before the study. The ART staff of intervention facilities will receive a multicomponent theory of planned behaviour-based intervention. This will include orientation on hypertension risk among ADLHIV, provision of job aids and pediatric sphygmomanometers. Six months after the intervention, the outcome measure will be the change from baseline in the proportion of ADLHIV whose BP was checked during clinical visits. The calculated sample size is 400 folders.
UNASSIGNED: This study will generate evidence on the effectiveness of a multicomponent theory-based intervention for improving the implementation of clinical practice guidelines.
BACKGROUND: PACTR202205641023383.

ARISE (Aneurysm/AVM/cSDH Roundtable Discussion With Industry and Stroke Experts) organized a one-and-a-half day meeting and workshop and brought together representatives from academia, industry, and government to discuss the most promising approaches to improve outcomes for patients with chronic subdural hematoma (cSDH). The emerging role of middle meningeal artery embolization in clinical practice and the design of current and potential future trials were the primary focuses of discussion. Existing evidence for imaging, indications, agents, and techniques was reviewed, and areas of priority for study and key questions surrounding the development of new and existing treatments for cSDH were identified. Multiple randomized, controlled trials have met their primary efficacy end points, providing high-level evidence that middle meningeal artery embolization is a potent adjunctive therapy to the standard (surgical and nonsurgical) management of neurologically stable cSDH patients in terms of reducing rates of disease recurrence. Pooled data analyses following the formal conclusion and publication of these trials will form a robust foundation upon which guidelines can be strengthened for cSDH treatment modalities and optimal patient selection, as well as delineate future lines of investigation.

OBJECTIVE: Actively addressing issues of equity, diversity, and inclusion (EDI) in healthcare guidelines provides an important avenue ensure that individuals and communities receive high-quality healthcare that meets their needs. In 2020, the National Clinical Evidence Taskforce was charged with developing Australian living guidelines for COVID-19 (the Guidelines). It was intended that the Guidelines would consider the biological and social determinants of health (BSDH) underpinning evidence-based recommendations for of the treatment of COVID-19. The objective of this paper is to describe the evidence available on BSDH that is reported in published trials of disease-modifying therapies for COVID-19.
METHODS: Published papers of randomized controlled trials that informed clinical recommendations (for and against drug therapies for COVID-19) in the Guidelines were reviewed retrospectively using a case series design. We extracted reported characteristics relating to BSDH. These included age, sex, gender, geographical location, ethnicity (including indigenous), disability, migrant status, income, education, employment, and social support. A descriptive analysis was conducted to illustrate the characteristics available for use in guideline development.
RESULTS: A total of 115 peer-reviewed papers describing randomized control trials of drug interventions for the treatment of COVID-19 were included. BSDH characteristics were poorly reported. Geographical location of the study was the only category reported in all papers. While age and sex were reported in most papers (n = 109 and 108, respectively), ethnicity was reported in only one-third of papers (n = 40), social support was reported in only three papers, and employment in one paper. No paper reported on gender, disability, migrant status, income, or education.
CONCLUSIONS: Consideration of EDI issues is a crucial component of guideline development. Although these issues were widely recognized to impact on health outcomes from COVID-19, reporting of these characteristics was poor in COVID trials. Urgent action is needed to improve reporting of EDI characteristics if they are to be meaningfully considered in guideline processes, and health inequity is overcome.