Survey-Based Assessment of the Quality of Reporting Guidelines of Carotid Artery Stenosis.

BACKGROUND

No evaluation of the quality of different carotid guidelines using validated scales has been performed to date. The present study aims to analyze 3 carotid stenosis guidelines, apprizing their quality and reporting using validated tools.

METHODS

A survey-based assessment of the quality of the European Society for Vascular Surgery (ESVS) 2023, European Stroke Organisation (ESO) 2021, and the Society for Vascular Surgery (SVS) 2021 carotid stenosis guidelines, was performed by 43 vascular surgeons, cardiologists, neurologist or interventional radiologists using 2 validated appraisal tools for quality and reporting guidelines, the AGREE II instrument and the RIGHT statement.

RESULTS

Using the AGREE II tool, the ESVS, SVS, and ESO guidelines had overall quality scores of 87.3%, 79.4%, and 82.9%, respectively (P = 0.001) The ESVS and ESO had better scores in the scope and purpose domain, and the SVS in the clarity of presentation domain. In the RIGHT statement, the ESVS, SVS, and ESO guidelines had overall quality scores of 84.0.7%, 74.3%, and 79.0%, respectively (P = 0.001). All 3 guidelines stood out for their methodology for search of evidence and formulating evidence-based recommendations. On the contrary, were negatively evaluated mostly in the cost and resource implications in formulating the recommendations.

CONCLUSIONS

The 2023 ESVS carotid stenosis guideline was the best evaluated among the 3 guidelines, with scores over 5% higher than the other 2 guidelines. Efforts should be made by guideline writing committees to take the AGREE II and RIGHT statements into account in the development of future guidelines to produce high-quality recommendations.