Alexis M Cahalane1, Y M Purcell2, L P Lavelle2, S H McEvoy2, E R Ryan2, E O'Toole3, D E Malone2. 1. St. Vincent's University Hospital, Elm Park, Dublin 4, Ireland. alexiscahalane@yahoo.co.uk. 2. St. Vincent's University Hospital, Elm Park, Dublin 4, Ireland. 3. National Cancer Control Programme, King's Inns House, 200 Parnell Street, Dublin 1, Ireland.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIM: Cystic pancreatic neoplasms (CPNs) are an increasingly diagnosed entity. Their heterogeneity poses complex diagnostic and management challenges. Despite frequently encountering these entities, particularly in the context of the increased imaging of patients in modern medicine, doctors have to rely on incomplete and ambiguous published literature. The aim of this project was to review the guidelines relating to CPNs using evidence-based practice (EBP) methods. METHODS: A search of both the primary and secondary literature was performed. Five sets of guidelines were identified which were then methodologically appraised by the AGREE II instrument, a validated and widely utilised tool for guideline development assessment. RESULTS: The 2014 'Italian consensus guidelines for the diagnostic work-up and follow-up of cystic pancreatic neoplasms' were found to be the most methodologically sound guidelines, on the basis of both the overall score and average weighted domain score. CONCLUSIONS: The current best guidelines were identified. The Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE II) instrument can be used for retrospective review of published guidelines or as a roadmap for guideline-writing groups. All guidelines found were methodologically limited. Further longitudinal/prospective studies are required to improve the level of evidence. KEY POINTS: • Cystic pancreatic neoplasms (CPNs) are an increasingly encountered entity in modern medicine. • Clinical uncertainty remains with regard to optimal diagnostic and management strategies. • The Italian consensus guidelines for cystic pancreatic neoplasms are currently the best guidelines.
BACKGROUND AND AIM: Cystic pancreatic neoplasms (CPNs) are an increasingly diagnosed entity. Their heterogeneity poses complex diagnostic and management challenges. Despite frequently encountering these entities, particularly in the context of the increased imaging of patients in modern medicine, doctors have to rely on incomplete and ambiguous published literature. The aim of this project was to review the guidelines relating to CPNs using evidence-based practice (EBP) methods. METHODS: A search of both the primary and secondary literature was performed. Five sets of guidelines were identified which were then methodologically appraised by the AGREE II instrument, a validated and widely utilised tool for guideline development assessment. RESULTS: The 2014 'Italian consensus guidelines for the diagnostic work-up and follow-up of cystic pancreatic neoplasms' were found to be the most methodologically sound guidelines, on the basis of both the overall score and average weighted domain score. CONCLUSIONS: The current best guidelines were identified. The Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE II) instrument can be used for retrospective review of published guidelines or as a roadmap for guideline-writing groups. All guidelines found were methodologically limited. Further longitudinal/prospective studies are required to improve the level of evidence. KEY POINTS: • Cystic pancreatic neoplasms (CPNs) are an increasingly encountered entity in modern medicine. • Clinical uncertainty remains with regard to optimal diagnostic and management strategies. • The Italian consensus guidelines for cystic pancreatic neoplasms are currently the best guidelines.
Entities:
Keywords:
AGREE II; Cystic pancreatic neoplasms; Guidelines; Neoplasms, cystic, mucinous, and serous/diagnosis; Practice guidelines as topic/standards
Authors: Melissa C Brouwers; Michelle E Kho; George P Browman; Jako S Burgers; Francoise Cluzeau; Gene Feder; Béatrice Fervers; Ian D Graham; Jeremy Grimshaw; Steven E Hanna; Peter Littlejohns; Julie Makarski; Louise Zitzelsberger Journal: CMAJ Date: 2010-07-05 Impact factor: 8.262
Authors: Christopher J Coroneos; Sophocles H Voineskos; Sylvie D Cornacchi; Charlie H Goldsmith; Teegan A Ignacy; Achilleas Thoma Journal: Can J Surg Date: 2014-08 Impact factor: 2.089
Authors: Sebastian Schmidt; Markus Follmann; Nisar Malek; Michael P Manns; Tim F Greten Journal: J Gastroenterol Hepatol Date: 2011-12 Impact factor: 4.029