A comparison and AGREE II analysis of the revised SVS/AVF/AVLS and ESVS clinical practice guidelines in the management of varicose veins.

IF 2.8 2区医学 Q2 PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE

Journal of vascular surgery. Venous and lymphatic disorders Pub Date : 2025-03-26 DOI:10.1016/j.jvsv.2025.102238

Alexandra Tedesco, Thomas F O'Donnell, Isaac Gendelman, Payam Salehi

{"title":"A comparison and AGREE II analysis of the revised SVS/AVF/AVLS and ESVS clinical practice guidelines in the management of varicose veins.","authors":"Alexandra Tedesco, Thomas F O'Donnell, Isaac Gendelman, Payam Salehi","doi":"10.1016/j.jvsv.2025.102238","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective: To compare the SVS/AVF/AVLS and the ESVS revised CPGs for treatment of C2 VVs by an analysis of content, methodologic, level of evidence and strength of evidence as well as by AGREE II analysis.Methods: The 2022 SVS/AVF/AVLS (A) guidelines for VVs were compared to the 2022 ESVS (E) CPGs on VVs for: specific methodology, evidence development [ED], strength of recommendation (SOR), and level (quality) of evidence (LOE). Additionally, an AGREE II analysis was performed to compare the two guidelines. These guidelines were scored on 6 different domains as well as overall quality using a 7-point Likert scale according to the AGREE II methodology.Results: The two CPGs differed in methodology and scope of content. The two guidelines varied significantly on their ratings of levels of evidence as well as their overall strengths of recommendations. The AGREE II analysis found that both guidelines scored as high quality in the domains of scope and purpose, stakeholder involvement, rigour of development, clarity of presentation, editorial independence, and overall assessment. For the domain of applicability, ESVS (65.28%) scored significantly higher than SVS/AVF/AVLS guideline (51.39%), p=<.05.Conclusion: Although the methodology differed significantly between both guidelines, the overall conclusions remained similar and both guidelines were rated as high quality by AGREE II analysis.","PeriodicalId":17537,"journal":{"name":"Journal of vascular surgery. Venous and lymphatic disorders","volume":" ","pages":"102238"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of vascular surgery. Venous and lymphatic disorders","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvsv.2025.102238","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To compare the SVS/AVF/AVLS and the ESVS revised CPGs for treatment of C2 VVs by an analysis of content, methodologic, level of evidence and strength of evidence as well as by AGREE II analysis.

Methods: The 2022 SVS/AVF/AVLS (A) guidelines for VVs were compared to the 2022 ESVS (E) CPGs on VVs for: specific methodology, evidence development [ED], strength of recommendation (SOR), and level (quality) of evidence (LOE). Additionally, an AGREE II analysis was performed to compare the two guidelines. These guidelines were scored on 6 different domains as well as overall quality using a 7-point Likert scale according to the AGREE II methodology.

Results: The two CPGs differed in methodology and scope of content. The two guidelines varied significantly on their ratings of levels of evidence as well as their overall strengths of recommendations. The AGREE II analysis found that both guidelines scored as high quality in the domains of scope and purpose, stakeholder involvement, rigour of development, clarity of presentation, editorial independence, and overall assessment. For the domain of applicability, ESVS (65.28%) scored significantly higher than SVS/AVF/AVLS guideline (51.39%), p=<.05.

Conclusion: Although the methodology differed significantly between both guidelines, the overall conclusions remained similar and both guidelines were rated as high quality by AGREE II analysis.

查看原文本刊更多论文

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Journal of vascular surgery. Venous and lymphatic disorders SURGERYPERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE&n-PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE

CiteScore

6.30

自引率

18.80%

发文量

328

审稿时长

71 days

期刊介绍： Journal of Vascular Surgery: Venous and Lymphatic Disorders is one of a series of specialist journals launched by the Journal of Vascular Surgery. It aims to be the premier international Journal of medical, endovascular and surgical management of venous and lymphatic disorders. It publishes high quality clinical, research, case reports, techniques, and practice manuscripts related to all aspects of venous and lymphatic disorders, including malformations and wound care, with an emphasis on the practicing clinician. The journal seeks to provide novel and timely information to vascular surgeons, interventionalists, phlebologists, wound care specialists, and allied health professionals who treat patients presenting with vascular and lymphatic disorders. As the official publication of The Society for Vascular Surgery and the American Venous Forum, the Journal will publish, after peer review, selected papers presented at the annual meeting of these organizations and affiliated vascular societies, as well as original articles from members and non-members.