JOURNAL ARTICLE

Diagnosis of Primary Ciliary Dyskinesia. An Official American Thoracic Society Clinical Practice Guideline

Adam J Shapiro, Stephanie D Davis, Deepika Polineni, Michele Manion, Margaret Rosenfeld, Sharon D Dell, Mark A Chilvers, Thomas W Ferkol, Maimoona A Zariwala, Scott D Sagel, Maureen Josephson, Lucy Morgan, Ozge Yilmaz, Kenneth N Olivier, Carlos Milla, Jessica E Pittman, M Leigh Anne Daniels, Marcus Herbert Jones, Ibrahim A Janahi, Stephanie M Ware, Sam J Daniel, Matthew L Cooper, Lawrence M Nogee, Billy Anton, Tori Eastvold, Lynn Ehrne, Elena Guadagno, Michael R Knowles, Margaret W Leigh, Valery Lavergne
American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine 2018 June 15, 197 (12): e24-e39
29905515

BACKGROUND: This document presents the American Thoracic Society clinical practice guidelines for the diagnosis of primary ciliary dyskinesia (PCD).

TARGET AUDIENCE: Clinicians investigating adult and pediatric patients for possible PCD.

METHODS: Systematic reviews and, when appropriate, meta-analyses were conducted to summarize all available evidence pertinent to our clinical questions. Evidence was assessed using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach for diagnosis and discussed by a multidisciplinary panel with expertise in PCD. Predetermined conflict-of-interest management strategies were applied, and recommendations were formulated, written, and graded exclusively by the nonconflicted panelists. Three conflicted individuals were also prohibited from writing, editing, or providing feedback on the relevant sections of the manuscript.

RESULTS: After considering diagnostic test accuracy, confidence in the estimates for each diagnostic test, relative importance of test results studied, desirable and undesirable direct consequences of each diagnostic test, downstream consequences of each diagnostic test result, patient values and preferences, costs, feasibility, acceptability, and implications for health equity, the panel made recommendations for or against the use of specific diagnostic tests as compared with using the current reference standard (transmission electron microscopy and/or genetic testing) for the diagnosis of PCD.

CONCLUSIONS: The panel formulated and provided a rationale for the direction as well as for the strength of each recommendation to establish the diagnosis of PCD.

Full Text Links

Find Full Text Links for this Article

Discussion

You are not logged in. Sign Up or Log In to join the discussion.

Related Papers

Remove bar
Read by QxMD icon Read
29905515
×

Save your favorite articles in one place with a free QxMD account.

×

Search Tips

Use Boolean operators: AND/OR

diabetic AND foot
diabetes OR diabetic

Exclude a word using the 'minus' sign

Virchow -triad

Use Parentheses

water AND (cup OR glass)

Add an asterisk (*) at end of a word to include word stems

Neuro* will search for Neurology, Neuroscientist, Neurological, and so on

Use quotes to search for an exact phrase

"primary prevention of cancer"
(heart or cardiac or cardio*) AND arrest -"American Heart Association"

We want to hear from doctors like you!

Take a second to answer a survey question.