International expert agreement on World Scleroderma Foundation/Heart Failure Association consensus-based definition and guidance on screening, diagnosis, and follow-up assessment of systemic sclerosis-associated primary heart involvement.

IF 1.4 Q3 RHEUMATOLOGY
Vitalii Dubas, Maya H Buch, Petar Seferovic, Marco Matucci-Cerinic, Cosimo Bruni
{"title":"International expert agreement on World Scleroderma Foundation/Heart Failure Association consensus-based definition and guidance on screening, diagnosis, and follow-up assessment of systemic sclerosis-associated primary heart involvement.","authors":"Vitalii Dubas, Maya H Buch, Petar Seferovic, Marco Matucci-Cerinic, Cosimo Bruni","doi":"10.1177/23971983251321691","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The aim of this study was to evaluate the level of agreement among international experts on the World Scleroderma Foundation/Heart Failure Association consensus-based definition of systemic sclerosis-associated primary heart involvement (SSc-pHI) and on the guidance for its screening, diagnosis, and follow-up assessment, including feasibility and applicability assessments.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>An online survey was conducted to assess the level of agreement and feasibility/applicability using a 10-point scale (0 = <i>not at all</i>, 10 = <i>completely agree or completely feasible/applicable</i>). The weblink to the survey was shared with 1199 participants worldwide. A high level of agreement was defined by an average score over 7/10.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In total, 161 external experts completed the survey. Most of them were rheumatologists (80.7%), working in Europe (81.4%), and had > 10 years of clinical experience in managing SSc patients (59%). Overall agreement among external experts was high (mean 8.27, SD 1.86). The highest scores regarded items emphasizing the involvement of a multidisciplinary team, personalization of patient management, and initial evaluation techniques. A lower level of agreement was obtained in questions related to cardiac magnetic resonance imaging and endomyocardial biopsy. No factors associated with low level of agreement and feasibility/applicability were identified.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The consensus-based definition and guidance on screening, diagnosis, and follow-up assessment of SSc-pHI provides a basis for application by the wider community. A lower level of agreement on the use of advanced or more invasive diagnostic techniques likely reflects regional differences in access and the need for more evidence on its use. This emphasizes the importance of involving a multidisciplinary team.</p>","PeriodicalId":17036,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Scleroderma and Related Disorders","volume":" ","pages":"23971983251321691"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11924048/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Scleroderma and Related Disorders","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/23971983251321691","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"RHEUMATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate the level of agreement among international experts on the World Scleroderma Foundation/Heart Failure Association consensus-based definition of systemic sclerosis-associated primary heart involvement (SSc-pHI) and on the guidance for its screening, diagnosis, and follow-up assessment, including feasibility and applicability assessments.

Methods: An online survey was conducted to assess the level of agreement and feasibility/applicability using a 10-point scale (0 = not at all, 10 = completely agree or completely feasible/applicable). The weblink to the survey was shared with 1199 participants worldwide. A high level of agreement was defined by an average score over 7/10.

Results: In total, 161 external experts completed the survey. Most of them were rheumatologists (80.7%), working in Europe (81.4%), and had > 10 years of clinical experience in managing SSc patients (59%). Overall agreement among external experts was high (mean 8.27, SD 1.86). The highest scores regarded items emphasizing the involvement of a multidisciplinary team, personalization of patient management, and initial evaluation techniques. A lower level of agreement was obtained in questions related to cardiac magnetic resonance imaging and endomyocardial biopsy. No factors associated with low level of agreement and feasibility/applicability were identified.

Conclusion: The consensus-based definition and guidance on screening, diagnosis, and follow-up assessment of SSc-pHI provides a basis for application by the wider community. A lower level of agreement on the use of advanced or more invasive diagnostic techniques likely reflects regional differences in access and the need for more evidence on its use. This emphasizes the importance of involving a multidisciplinary team.

世界硬皮病基金会/心力衰竭协会关于系统性硬化症相关的原发性心脏受累的基于共识的定义和指南的国际专家协议。
目的:本研究的目的是评估国际专家对世界硬皮病基金会/心力衰竭协会共识的系统性硬化症相关原发性心脏受累(SSc-pHI)定义的一致程度,以及对其筛查、诊断和随访评估的指导,包括可行性和适用性评估。方法:采用10分制进行在线调查,评估同意程度和可行性/适用性(0 =完全不同意,10 =完全同意或完全可行/适用)。该调查的网页由全球1199名参与者共享。高水平的一致被定义为平均得分超过7/10。结果:共有161名外部专家完成了调查。他们中的大多数是风湿病学家(80.7%),在欧洲工作(81.4%),并且在管理SSc患者方面有10年的临床经验(59%)。外部专家的总体一致性很高(平均值8.27,标准差1.86)。得分最高的项目强调多学科团队的参与、患者管理的个性化和初步评估技术。在与心脏磁共振成像和心内膜肌活检相关的问题上获得了较低水平的一致性。没有发现与低水平一致性和可行性/适用性相关的因素。结论:基于共识的SSc-pHI定义及筛查、诊断和随访评估指南为更广泛的社区应用提供了基础。在使用先进或侵入性更强的诊断技术方面的共识较低,可能反映了在获取方面的区域差异,以及需要更多关于其使用的证据。这强调了多学科团队参与的重要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
31
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信