Methodology for clinical practice guidelines for the management of arteriovenous access

Abstract

The Society for Vascular Surgery considers the placement and maintenance of arteriovenous hemodialysis access to be an important component of any vascular surgery practice. Therefore, the Society has long been involved in setting the standards for the management of arteriovenous access. Formulating clinical recommendations in this area is the latest effort by the Society to improve the management of arteriovenous access on a national level. To provide an unbiased study of the evidence and to help in formulating the recommendations, the Society used the Knowledge and Encounter Research (KER) Unit of the Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, Minn, to review the available evidence and advise a multidisciplinary group of access surgeons and nephrologists in formulating the clinical recommendations. To review the evidence, randomized and observational study designs were both considered. Whenever possible, systematic reviews and meta-analyses of the literature were used because, compared with individual studies, they generate more precise estimates of treatment effects and their results are applicable to a wider range of patients. On behalf of the Society, the group issued its recommendations following the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) format; this format disentangles the strength of recommendations from the quality of the evidence and encourages statements about the underlying values and preferences relevant to the particular recommendation. The recommendations are classified as strong (denoted by the phrase "we recommend") or weak (denoted by the phrase "we suggest"); and the quality of evidence is classified as high, moderate, low, or very low. These recommendations are not meant to supersede clinical judgment; rather, they should be used as a guide for the practicing surgeon and nephrologist as the decision is being made for the placement and subsequent procedures and management of arteriovenous hemodialysis access are being considered.

Endovascular Treatment of Intracranial Aneurysms in Elderly Patients

“…[31][32][33] Our results were also associated with the possibility of publication bias. Therefore, it is plausible that some studies with worse outcomes have been performed and not published, distorting the evidence base.…”

The effect of appendectomy in future tubal infertility and ectopic pregnancy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

“…Meta-analysis was completed using a comprehensive meta-analysis version 2.2 (Biostat Inc, Englewood, NJ). The quality of evidence was evaluated using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation methods [7,8].…”

Endovascular Treatment of Distal Anterior Cerebral Artery Aneurysms: Single-Center Experience and a Systematic Review

“…The quality of evidence (confidence) is limited because of imprecision, heterogeneity, and methodologic limitations with the use of the GRADE framework (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation). [24][25][26] Our systematic review and case series has several strengths. We followed a comprehensive systematic review process and searched multiple data bases in an attempt to improve the precision of estimates derived from our own data.…”