Comparison of coronary revascularization appropriateness for non-acute coronary syndrome cases under the 2017 update vs the 2012 appropriate use criteria.


Journal

Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions
ISSN: 1522-726X
Titre abrégé: Catheter Cardiovasc Interv
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 100884139

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
01 03 2019
Historique:
received: 08 09 2017
revised: 06 02 2018
accepted: 29 08 2018
pubmed: 4 10 2018
medline: 15 4 2020
entrez: 4 10 2018
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

To compare coronary revascularization appropriateness for non-acute coronary syndrome cases under the 2017 update vs the 2012 appropriate use criteria (AUC). In 2017, the 2012 AUC for coronary revascularization were updated. We examined how applying these new 2017 updates to our previous inappropriate cases would change their appropriateness. We identified 50 cases of patients who underwent coronary revascularization for stable ischemic heart disease who were deemed inappropriate under the 2012 AUC. Two separate physicians reviewed the cases and applied a new AUC based on the 2017 AUC. Next, if there was a change, the reason was identified. Average age was 64, majority being male (29; 58%). Forty-two (84%) were asymptomatic upon presentation. Most cases (27, 54%) dealt with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) of the right coronary artery. After applying the 2017 AUC, 34 of the 50 inappropriate failures (68%) would be changed from "inappropriate" to "may be appropriate care." Of the 34 cases, 25 (73.5%) were changed due to the new AUC no longer expecting the patient to be on ≥2 anti-angina medications prior to PCI. Of the 34 cases, eight (23.5%) were changed due to the new AUC expanding the use of non-invasive modalities. Applying the 2017 AUC led to a statistically higher number of cases being deemed "may be appropriate." The most common cause for the change included the change in requirement for anti-angina regimen and the expanded role of non-invasive modalities.

Sections du résumé

OBJECTIVES
To compare coronary revascularization appropriateness for non-acute coronary syndrome cases under the 2017 update vs the 2012 appropriate use criteria (AUC).
BACKGROUND
In 2017, the 2012 AUC for coronary revascularization were updated. We examined how applying these new 2017 updates to our previous inappropriate cases would change their appropriateness.
METHODS
We identified 50 cases of patients who underwent coronary revascularization for stable ischemic heart disease who were deemed inappropriate under the 2012 AUC. Two separate physicians reviewed the cases and applied a new AUC based on the 2017 AUC. Next, if there was a change, the reason was identified.
RESULTS
Average age was 64, majority being male (29; 58%). Forty-two (84%) were asymptomatic upon presentation. Most cases (27, 54%) dealt with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) of the right coronary artery. After applying the 2017 AUC, 34 of the 50 inappropriate failures (68%) would be changed from "inappropriate" to "may be appropriate care." Of the 34 cases, 25 (73.5%) were changed due to the new AUC no longer expecting the patient to be on ≥2 anti-angina medications prior to PCI. Of the 34 cases, eight (23.5%) were changed due to the new AUC expanding the use of non-invasive modalities.
CONCLUSIONS
Applying the 2017 AUC led to a statistically higher number of cases being deemed "may be appropriate." The most common cause for the change included the change in requirement for anti-angina regimen and the expanded role of non-invasive modalities.

Identifiants

pubmed: 30280475
doi: 10.1002/ccd.27895
doi:

Types de publication

Comparative Study Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

620-625

Informations de copyright

© 2018 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Auteurs

Brian C Case (BC)

MedStar Heart and Vascular Institute, MedStar Washington Hospital Center, Washington, District of Columbia.

Katherine M Geiser (KM)

MedStar Heart and Vascular Institute, MedStar Washington Hospital Center, Washington, District of Columbia.

Rebecca Torguson (R)

MedStar Research Institute, MedStar Washington Hospital Center, Washington, District of Columbia.

Augusto D Pichard (AD)

MedStar Heart and Vascular Institute, MedStar Washington Hospital Center, Washington, District of Columbia.

Lowell F Satler (LF)

MedStar Heart and Vascular Institute, MedStar Washington Hospital Center, Washington, District of Columbia.

Ron Waksman (R)

MedStar Heart and Vascular Institute, MedStar Washington Hospital Center, Washington, District of Columbia.

Itsik Ben-Dor (I)

MedStar Heart and Vascular Institute, MedStar Washington Hospital Center, Washington, District of Columbia.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH