Sociedad Española de Ginecología y Obstetricia (SEGO)

Montosa, Jordi Xercavins; Bordoy, Javier Cortés

doi:10.1016/s0304-5013(12)73062-5

Cited by 2 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The AGREE II standardized domain scores for the first overall assessment (OA1) had a mean of 70% ± 11%. Six CPGs scored more than 60% [5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13]15,16 and revealed a consensus agreement between the reviewers on recommending the use of these CPGs.…”

Section: Methodological Quality Of Cpgsmentioning

confidence: 84%

“…4 The published literature on PAS show a certain degree of heterogeneity regarding several aspects of prenatal management of these conditions, including risk stratification, imaging assessment and timing at delivery and this is likely to affect the quality of the published CPGs. [5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17] The aim of this systematic review was to objectively evaluate the quality of the published CPGs on PAS disorders using the AGREE II tool.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Placenta accreta spectrum disorders clinical practice guidelines: A systematic review

Capannolo

D’Amico

Alameddine

et al. 2023

J of Obstet and Gynaecol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives To objectively assess the quality of the published clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) on the management of pregnancies complicated by placenta accreta spectrum (PAS)disorders. Methods MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, and ISI Web of Science databases were searched. The following aspects related to the management of pregnancies with suspected PAS disorders were evaluated: risk factors for PAS, prenatal diagnosis, role of interventional radiology and ureteral stenting, and optimal surgical management. The assessment of risk of bias and quality assessment of the CPGs were performed using the (AGREE II) tool (Brouwers et al., 2010). To define a CPG as of good quality we adopted a cut‐off score >60%. Results Nine CPGs were included. Specific risk factors for referral were assessed by 44.4% (4/9) of CPGs, mainly consisting in the presence of placenta previa and a prior cesarean delivery or uterine surgery. About 55.6% of CPGs (5/9) suggested ultrasound assessment of women with risk factors for PAS in the second and third trimester of pregnancy and 33.3% (3/9) recommended magnetic resonance imaging (MRI); 88.9% (8/9) of CPGs recommended cesarean delivery at 34–37 weeks of gestation. There was not generally consensus on the use of interventional radiology and ureteral stenting before surgery for PAS. Finally, hysterectomy was the recommend surgical approach by 77.8% (7/9) of the included CPGs. Conclusion Most of the published CPGs on PAS are generally of good quality. There was general agreement among the different CPGs on PAS as a regard as risk stratification, timing at diagnosis and delivery but not on the indication for MRI, use of interventional radiology and ureteral stenting.

show abstract