Exploration of a Bayesian updating methodology to monitor the safety of interventional cardiovascular procedures

Medical Decision Making

Volumn 24, Issue 4, 2004, Pages 399-407

  Resnic, Frederic S ^a   Zou, Kelly H ^a   Do, Daihung V ^a   Apostolakis, George ^b   Ohno Machado, Lucila ^a  

^a BRIGHAM AND WOMEN S HOSPITAL   (United States)

^b USA   (United States)

Author keywords

Bayesian statistics; Coronary angioplasty; Procedural safety

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; ATHERECTOMY; BAYES THEOREM; CLINICAL PRACTICE; DEVICE; FEASIBILITY STUDY; HIGH RISK POPULATION; INTERVENTIONAL CARDIOVASCULAR PROCEDURE; METHODOLOGY; MONITORING; PROBABILITY; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; RISK ASSESSMENT; SAFETY; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; TRANSLUMINAL CORONARY ANGIOPLASTY;

ATHERECTOMY, CORONARY; BAYES THEOREM; EQUIPMENT SAFETY; HUMANS; LIKELIHOOD FUNCTIONS; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES;

EID: 3242684955     PISSN: 0272989X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0272989X04267012     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. Siu N, Apostolakis G. Modeling the detection rates of fires in nuclear plants: development and application of a methodology for treating imprecise evidence. Risk Anal. 1986;6(1):43-59.
2. Austin PC. A comparison of Bayesian methods for profiling hospital performance. Med Decis Making. 2002;22(2):163-72.
3. Weinstein M, Horev AD, Nussbaum SA, Schimpf S. Cardiovascular Device Handbook: An Investors' Guide to Interventional Cardiology. Industry Update. New York: J. P. Morgan Chase; 2002.
4. McGrath PD, Malenka DJ, Wennberg DE, et al. Changing outcomes in percutaneous coronary interventions: a study of 34,752 procedures in northern New England, 1990 to 1997. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1999;34(3):674-80.
5. Holmes DR, Berger PB, Garratt KN, et al. Application of the New York State PTCA mortality model in patients undergoing stent implantation. Circulation. 2000;102:517-22.
6. O'Connor GT, Malenka DJ, Quinton HQ, et al. Multivariate prediction of in-hospital mortality after percutaneous coronary interventions in 1994-1996. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1999;34(3):681-91.
7. Moscucci M, O'Connor GT, Ellis SG, et al. Validation of risk adjustment models for in-hospital percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty mortality on an independent data set. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1999;34(3):692-7.
8. Budde T, Haude M, Hopp W, et al. A prognostic computer model to predict individual outcome in interventional cardiology. The INTERVENT Project. Eur Heart J. 1997;18:1611-9.
9. Bergelson BA, lacobs AK, Cupples LA, et al. Prediction of risk for hemodynamic compromise during percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty. Am J Cardiol. 1992;70:1540-5.
10. Hannan EL, Racz M, Ryan TJ, et al. Coronary angioplasty volume-outcome relationships for hospitals and cardiologists. JAMA. 1997;277(11):892-8.
11. Resnic FS, Ohno-Machado L, Selwyn AP, Simon DI, Popma JJ. Simplified risk score models accurately predict the risk of major in-hospital complications following percutaneous coronary intervention. Am J Cardiol. 2001;88(1):5-9.
12. Moscucci M, Kline-Rogers E, Share D, et al. Simple bedside additive tool for prediction of in-hospital mortality after percutaneous coronary interventions. Circulation. 2001;104:263-8.
13. Food and Drug Administration. FDA product warning notification. NIR on Ranger w/SOX premounted stent system. Rockville (MD): Office of Surveillance and Biometrics, Center for Devices and Radiological Health, Food and Drug Administration; 8 October 1998.
14. Spiegelhalter DI, Myles JP, Jones DR, Abrams KR. Bayesian methods in health technology assessment: a review. Health Technol Assess. 2000;4(38):1-130.
15. Siu NO, Kelly DL. Bayesian parameter estimation in probabilistic risk assessment. Reliability Engineering and System Safety. 199;62:89-116.
16. Winkler RL. Introduction to Bayesian Inference and Decision. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston; 1972.
17. Safian RD, Feldman T, Muller DW, et al. Coronary angioplasty and rotablator atherectomy trial (CARAT): immediate and late results of a prospective multi-center randomized trial. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2001;53(2):213-20.
18. Vom Dahl J, Dietz U, Haager PK, et al. Rotational atherectomy does not reduce recurrent in-stent restenosis: results of the angioplasty versus rotational atherectomy for treatment of diffuse instent restenosis trial (ARTIST). Circulation. 2002;105(5):583-8.
19. Whitlow PL, Bass TA, Kipperman RM, et al. Results of the study to determine rotablator and transluminal angioplasty strategy (STRATAS). Am J Cardiol. 2001;87(6)699-705.
20. Reisman M, Buchbinder M, Sharma SK. A multicenter randomized trial of rotational atherectomy vs. PTCA: DART. Circulation. 1997;96:I467 A.
21. Reifart N, Vandormael M, Krajcar M, et al. Randomized comparison of angioplasty of complex coronary lesions at a single center. Excimer Laser, Rotational Atherectomy, and Balloon Angioplasty Comparison (ERBAC) Study. Circulation. 1997;96(1):91-8.
22. Ang AHS, Tang WH. Probability Concepts in Engineering Planning and Design: Volume I. New York: John Wiley and Sons; 1975.
23. Normand ST, Zou KH. Sample size considerations in observational health care quality studies. Stat Med. 2002;21:331-45.
24. O'Malley AJ, Normand ST, Kuntz RE. Sample size calculation for a historically controlled clinical trial with adjustment for covariates. J Biopharm Stat. 2002;12(2):227-47.