AGREEing on clinical practice guidelines for idiopathic steroid-sensitive nephrotic syndrome in children

• Main Authors: Khalid Abdulaziz Alhasan, Reem Al Khalifah, Majed Aloufi, Weiam Almaiman, Muddathir Hamad, Naif Abdulmajeed, Abdullah Al Salloum, Jameela A. Kari, Muneera AlJelaify, Rolan K. Bassrawi, Turki Al Hussain, Adi Alherbish, Abdulhadi Al Talhi, Mohamad-Hani Temsah, Sidharth Kumar Sethi, Rupesh Raina, Reny Joseph, Yasser Sami Amer, on behalf of the Saudi Society of Nephrology and Transplantation
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Published: BMC 2021-05-01
• Series: Systematic Reviews
• Subjects: Nephrotic syndrome; Pediatrics; Clinical practice guidelines; Systematic review; AGREE II Instrument; Quality assessment
• Online Access: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-021-01666-w

Abstract Background Nephrotic syndrome is the most common kidney disease in children worldwide. Our aim was to critically appraise the quality of recent Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPGs) for idiopathic steroid-sensitive nephrotic syndrome (SSNS) in children in addition to summarize and compare their recommendations. Methods Systematic review of CPGs. We identified clinical questions and eligibility criteria and searched and screened for CPGs using bibliographic and CPG databases. Each included CPG was assessed by four independent appraisers using the Appraisal of Guidelines for REsearch & Evaluation II (AGREE-II) instrument. We summarized the recommendations in a comparison practical table. Results Our search retrieved 282 citations, of which three CPGs were eligible and appraised: Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) 2012, Japan Society for Pediatric Nephrology (JSPN) 2014, and American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) 2009. Among these, the overall assessment of two evidence-based CPGs scored > 70% (KDIGO and JSPN), which was consistent with their higher scores in the six domains of the AGREE II Instrument. In domain 3 (rigor of development), KDIGO, JSPN, and AAP scored 84%, 74%, and 41%, respectively. In domain 5 (applicability), they scored 22%, 16%, and 19%, respectively, and in domain 6 (editorial independence), they scored 94%, 65%, and 88%, respectively. Conclusions The methodological quality of the KDIGO CPG was superior, followed by JSPN and AAP CPGs with the relevant recommendations for use in practice. Systematic review registration The protocol was registered in the Center for Open Science (OSF) DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/6QTMD and in the International prospective register of systematic reviews PROSPERO 2020 CRD42020197511 .