First world consensus conference on pancreas transplantation: Part I—Methods and results of literature search
Boggi U., Vistoli F., Marchetti P., Kandaswamy R., Berney T., Andres A., Arbogast HP., Badet L., Baronti W., Bartlett ST., Benedetti E., Branchereau J., Burke GW3., Buron F., Caldara R., Cardillo M., Casanova D., Cipriani F., Cooper M., Cupisti A., de Koning EJP., Davide J., Drachenberg C., Ettorre GM., Fernandez Cruz L., Fridell JA., Friend PJ., Furian L., Gaber OA., Gruessner AC., Gruessner RWG., Gunton JE., Han DJ., Iacopi S., Kauffmann EF., Kaufman D., Kenmochi T., Khambalia HA., Lai Q., Langer RM., Maffi P., Marselli L., Menichetti F., Miccoli M., Mittal S., Morelon E., Napoli N., Neri F., Oberholzer J., Odorico JS., Öllinger R., Oniscu G., Orlando G., Ortenzi M., Perosa M., Perrone VG., Redfield RR., Ricci C., Rigotti P., Robertson RP., Ross LF., Rossi M., Saudek F., Scalea JR., Schenker P., Secchi A., Socci C., Sousa Silva D., Squifflet JP., Stock PG., Stratta RJ., Terrenzio C., Uva P., Watson CCE., White SA.
Comprehensive evidence-based guidelines for the practice of pancreas transplantation are yet to be established. The First World Consensus Conference on Pancreas Transplantation was convened for this purpose. A steering committee selected the participants and defined the questions to be addressed. A group of literature reviewers identified 597 studies to be included in summaries for guidelines production. Expert groups formulated the first draft of recommendations. Two rounds of discussion and voting occurred online, using the Delphi method (agreement rate ≥85%). After each round, critical responses of experts were reviewed, and recommendations were amended accordingly. Recommendations were finalized after live discussions. Each session was preceded by expert presentations and a summary of results of systematic literature review. Up to three voting rounds were allowed for each recommendation. To avoid potential conflicts of interest, deliberations on issues regarding the impact of pancreas transplantation on the management of diabetes were conducted by an independent jury. Recommendations on technical issues were determined by experts and validated using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) II instrument. Quality of evidence was assessed using the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) methodology. Each recommendation received a GRADE rating (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations).