Survey-Based Assessment of the Quality of Reporting Guidelines of Carotid Artery Stenosis
Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 21, 2025

A Methodological Approach to Non-invasive Assessments of Vascular Function and Morphology
Published on: February 7, 2015
Mauricio Gonzalez-Urquijo1, Oliver Antonio Gómez-Gutiérrez2, David E Hinojosa-Gonzalez2
1Tecnologico de Monterrey, School of Medicine and Health Sciences, Monterrey, Nuevo León, México; Departamento de Cirugía Vascular y Endovascular, Escuela de Medicina, Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Chile, Santiago, Chile.
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.
More Related Videos
06:04Author Spotlight: Assessing the Cardiovascular Profile of Patients with Metabolic Syndrome
Published on: September 27, 2024
06:57Author Spotlight: Advancing Cardiovascular Imaging - Introducing the Spatially Weighted Calcium Score for Early Disease Detection
Published on: September 22, 2023
Related Concept Videos
Assessment of the Cardiovascular System I: Subjective Data
Initial Enquiry
Ask the patient about their primary concern and thoroughly explore all reported symptoms.
Medical History
Investigate past illnesses affecting the cardiovascular system, such as angina, anemia, rheumatic fever, congenital heart disease, stroke, thrombophlebitis, dysrhythmias, varicosities
Inquire about symptoms...
Assessment of the Cardiovascular System II: Inspection
Head and Neck
Assessment of blood pressure in brachial artery(two-step method)
Assessment of blood pressure in brachial artery(one-step method)
Prepare for the Procedure:
Pre-Procedural Guidelines for Assessing Blood Pressure
Assessment of apical pulse
Assessing the apical pulse is a critical nursing procedure, particularly indicated for: