Interventional cardiology: How should the appropriateness of PCI be judged?

Nature Reviews Cardiology

Volumn 8, Issue 10, 2011, Pages 544-546

  Stone, Gregg W ^a   Moses, Jeffrey W ^a  

^a NewYork Presbyterian Hospital   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DECISION MAKING; HEART MUSCLE REVASCULARIZATION; HUMAN; MORTALITY; NON ST SEGMENT ELEVATION MYOCARDIAL INFARCTION; PATIENT PREFERENCE; PERCUTANEOUS CORONARY INTERVENTION; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY CONTROL; SHORT SURVEY; ST SEGMENT ELEVATION MYOCARDIAL INFARCTION; UNSTABLE ANGINA PECTORIS;

ANGIOPLASTY, BALLOON, CORONARY; DECISION SUPPORT TECHNIQUES; HUMANS; OUTCOME AND PROCESS ASSESSMENT (HEALTH CARE); PATIENT SELECTION; PRACTICE GUIDELINES AS TOPIC; REGISTRIES; TREATMENT OUTCOME; UNITED STATES;

EID: 80053277272     PISSN: 17595002     EISSN: 17595010     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/nrcardio.2011.135     Document Type: Short Survey

References (10)

1. Stone, G. W. et al. Everolimus-eluting versus paclitaxel-eluting stents in coronary artery disease. N. Engl. J. Med. 362, 1663-1674 (2010).
2. Patel, M. R. et al. CCF/SCAI/STS/AATS/AHA/ ASNC 2009 Appropriateness criteria for coronary revascularization: a report by the American College of Cardiology Foundation Appropriateness Criteria Task Force, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, Society of Thoracic Surgeons, American Association for Thoracic Surgery, American Heart Association, and the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology endorsed by the American Society of Echocardiography, the Heart Failure Society of America, and the Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 53, 530-553 (2009).
3. Chan, P. S. et al. Appropriateness of percutaneous coronary intervention. JAMA 306, 53-61 (2011).
4. Tricoci, P., Allen, J. M., Kramer, J. M., Califf, R. M. & Smith, S. C. Scientific evidence underlying the ACC/AHA clinical practice guidelines. JAMA 301, 831-841 (2009).
5. Chan, P. S. et al. Concordance of physicianratings with the appropriate use criteria for coronary revascularization. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 57, 1546-1553 (2011).
6. Kushner, F. G. et al. 2009 Focused Updates: ACC/AHA guidelines for the management of patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (updating the 2004 guideline and 2007 focused update) and ACC/AHA/SCAI guidelines on percutaneous coronary intervention (updating the 2005 guideline and 2007 focused update): a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/ American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines. Circulation 120, 2271-2306 (2009).
7. Wijns, W. et al. Guidelines on myocardial revascularization: The Task Force on Myocardial Revascularization of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS). Eur. Heart J. 31, 2501-2555 (2010).
8. Shaw, L. J. 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 117, 1283-1291 (2008). (Pubitemid 351365675)
9. Serruys, P. W. et al. Percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary-artery bypass grafting for severe coronary artery disease. N. Engl. J. Med. 360, 961-972 (2009).
10. Fazel, R. et al. Choice of reperfusion strategy at hospitals with primary percutaneous coronary intervention: a National Registry of Myocardial Infarction analysis. Circulation 120, 2455-2461 (2009).