How appropriate for assessing quality are the 2009 appropriateness criteria for coronary revascularization

Journal of Invasive Cardiology

Volumn 21, Issue 11, 2009, Pages 558-562

  Klein, Lloyd W ^a  

^a ADVOCATE ILLINOIS MASONIC MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ACUTE CORONARY SYNDROME; CORONARY ARTERY BYPASS SURGERY; CORONARY ARTERY DISEASE; HEART INFARCTION; HEART MUSCLE REVASCULARIZATION; NOTE; PERCUTANEOUS CORONARY INTERVENTION; QUALITY CONTROL;

ANGIOPLASTY, TRANSLUMINAL, PERCUTANEOUS CORONARY; CORONARY ARTERY BYPASS; CORONARY ARTERY DISEASE; HUMANS; PATIENT SELECTION; PRACTICE GUIDELINES AS TOPIC; RISK FACTORS;

EID: 71049145600     PISSN: 10423931     EISSN: 15572501     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Note

References (19)

1. Patel MR, Dehmer GJ, Hirshfeld JW, et al. ACCF/SCAI/STS/AATS/AHA/ASNC Appropriateness Criteria for Coronary Revascularization. J Am Coll Cardiol 2009;53:530-553.
2. Brener SJ, Haq SA, Bose S, Sacchi TJ. Three-year survival after percutaneous coronary intervention according to appropriateness criteria for revascularization. J Invasive Cardiol 2009;21:554-557.
3. Anderson HV, Shaw RE, Brindis RG, et al. Relationship between procedure indications and outcomes of percutaneous coronary interventions by American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force Guidelines. Circulation 2005;112:2786-2791.
4. Anderson HV, Shaw RE, Brindis, RG, et al. Risk-adjusted mortality analysis of percutaneous coronary interventions by American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Guidelines recommendations. Am J Cardiol 2007;99:189-196.
5. Smith SC, Feldman TE, Hirshfeld JW Jr, et al. ACC/AHA/SCAI 2005 Guideline Update for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention-Summary Article: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (ACC/AHA/SCAI Writing Committee to Update the 2001 Guidelines for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention). J Am Coll Cardiol 2006;47:216-235.
6. Eagle KA, Guyton RA, Davidoff R, et al. ACC/AHA 2004 guideline update for coronary artery bypass graft surgery: A report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (Committee to Update the 1999 Guidelines for Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery). Circulation 2004;110:e340.
7. Boden WE, O'Rourke RA, Teo KK, et al for the COURAGE Trial Research Group. Optimal medical therapy with or without PCI for stable coronary disease. N Engl J Med 2007;356:1503-1516.
8. Myocardial infarction and mortality in the coronary artery surgery study (CASS) randomized trial. N Engl J Med 1984;310:750-758.
9. Chaitman BR, Ryan TJ, Kronmal RA, et al. Coronary Artery Surgery Study (CASS): Comparability of 10 year survival in randomized and randomizable patients. J Am Coll Cardiol 1990;16:1071-1078.
10. Passamani E, Davis KB, Gillespie MJ, Killip T. A randomized trial of coronary artery bypass surgery. Survival of patients with a low ejection fraction. N Engl J Med 1985;312:1665-1671.
11. Rogers WJ, Bourassa MG, Andrews TC, et al for the ACIP Investigators. Asymptomatic Cardiac Ischemia Pilot (ACIP) Study: Outcome at 1 year for patients with asymptomatic cardiac ischemia randomized to medical therapy or revascularization. J Am Coll Cardiol 1995:26:594-605.
12. Morrison DA. Extent of voronary snatomy and left ventricular function in choosing between PCI and CABG, Chapter 4. In: Topol EJ (ed). Textbook of Interventional Cardiology, 5th Edition. WB Saunders: Philadelphia, 2007.
13. Klein LW. Are drug eluting stents the preferred treatment for multivessel coronary artery disease? J Am Coll Cardiol 2006:47:22-26.
14. Sianos G, Morel MA, Kappetein AP, et al. The SYNTAX Score: An angiographic tool grading the complexity of coronary artery disease. EuroInterv 2005;1:219-227.
15. Moussa ID, Wong SC, Feldman T. Coronary revascularization for patients with unprotected left main coronary artery disease: Evidence, guidelines, and judgment! Making clinical decisions in 2009. Catheter Cardiovasc Intervent 2009;74:448-458.
16. Accessed at http://www.syntaxscore.com/August 19, 2009.
17. Kern MJ, Lerman A, Bech JW, et al. Physiological assessment of coronary artery disease in the cardiac catheterization laboratory: A scientific statement from the American Heart Association Committee on Diagnostic and Interventional Cardiac Catheterization, Council on Clinical Cardiology. Circulation 2006;114:1321-1341.
18. Shaw LJ, Berman DS, Maron DJ, et al. Optimal medical therapy with or without percutaneous coronary intervention to reduce ischemic burden: Results from the Clinical Outcomes Utilizing Revascularization and Aggressive Drug Evaluation (COURAGE) Trial Nuclear Substudy. Circulation 2008;117:1283-1291.
19. Klein LW, Kolm P, Dey SK, et al. Assessing coronary interventional program quality. The CathPCI Registry mortality ratio: A preliminary report from the American College of Cardiology-National Cardiovascular Data Registry. JACC Cardiovasc Interv 2009;2:136-143.