Appropriateness of Percutaneous Coronary Interventions: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
appropriate use criteria
appropriateness
coronary artery disease
coronary revascularization
patient selection
percutaneous coronary interventions
Journal
Journal of cardiovascular development and disease
ISSN: 2308-3425
Titre abrégé: J Cardiovasc Dev Dis
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101651414
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
21 Feb 2023
21 Feb 2023
Historique:
received:
16
01
2023
revised:
04
02
2023
accepted:
13
02
2023
medline:
29
3
2023
entrez:
28
3
2023
pubmed:
29
3
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Since the foundation of appropriate use criteria (AUC) for coronary revascularization, the proportion of inappropriate (later revised as "rarely inappropriate") percutaneous coronary interventions (PCIs) varied in different populations. However, the pooled inappropriate PCI rate remains unknown. We searched the PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, and Sinomed databases for studies related to AUC and PCIs. Studies that reported inappropriate/rarely appropriate PCI rates were included. A random effects model was employed in the meta-analysis because of the high statistical heterogeneity. Thirty-seven studies were included in our study, of which eight studies reported the appropriateness of acute PCIs or PCIs in acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients, 25 studies reported the appropriateness of non-acute/elective PCIs or PCIs in non-ACS/stable ischemic heart disease (SIHD) patients, and 15 studies reported both acute and non-acute PCIs or did not distinguish the urgency of PCI. The pooled inappropriate PCI rate was 4.3% (95% CI: 2.6-6.4%) in acute scenarios, 8.9% (95% CI: 6.7-11.0%) in non-acute scenarios, and 6.1% (95% CI: 4.9-7.3%) overall. The inappropriate/rarely appropriate PCI rate was significantly higher in non-acute than acute scenarios. No difference in the inappropriate PCI rate was detected based on the study location, the country's level of development, or the presence of chronic total occlusion (CTO). The worldwide inappropriate PCI rate is generally identical but comparatively high, especially under non-acute scenarios.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Since the foundation of appropriate use criteria (AUC) for coronary revascularization, the proportion of inappropriate (later revised as "rarely inappropriate") percutaneous coronary interventions (PCIs) varied in different populations. However, the pooled inappropriate PCI rate remains unknown.
METHODS
METHODS
We searched the PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, and Sinomed databases for studies related to AUC and PCIs. Studies that reported inappropriate/rarely appropriate PCI rates were included. A random effects model was employed in the meta-analysis because of the high statistical heterogeneity.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Thirty-seven studies were included in our study, of which eight studies reported the appropriateness of acute PCIs or PCIs in acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients, 25 studies reported the appropriateness of non-acute/elective PCIs or PCIs in non-ACS/stable ischemic heart disease (SIHD) patients, and 15 studies reported both acute and non-acute PCIs or did not distinguish the urgency of PCI. The pooled inappropriate PCI rate was 4.3% (95% CI: 2.6-6.4%) in acute scenarios, 8.9% (95% CI: 6.7-11.0%) in non-acute scenarios, and 6.1% (95% CI: 4.9-7.3%) overall. The inappropriate/rarely appropriate PCI rate was significantly higher in non-acute than acute scenarios. No difference in the inappropriate PCI rate was detected based on the study location, the country's level of development, or the presence of chronic total occlusion (CTO).
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
The worldwide inappropriate PCI rate is generally identical but comparatively high, especially under non-acute scenarios.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36975857
pii: jcdd10030093
doi: 10.3390/jcdd10030093
pmc: PMC10057990
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Review
Langues
eng
Références
JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2020 Jul 13;13(13):1586-1595
pubmed: 32646701
Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2012 Jul 1;5(4):445-53
pubmed: 22570356
JAMA. 2010 Apr 14;303(14):1392-400
pubmed: 20388895
Indian Heart J. 2017 Sep - Oct;69(5):600-606
pubmed: 29054183
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2021 Jul 27;78(4):384-407
pubmed: 34294273
Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2021 Apr;14(4):e006887
pubmed: 33719490
JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2018 Feb 26;11(4):342-350
pubmed: 29471947
Am J Cardiol. 2016 Apr 15;117(8):1289-93
pubmed: 26899491
Korean Circ J. 2017 May;47(3):320-327
pubmed: 28567082
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2012 Nov 6;60(19):1876-84
pubmed: 23062534
JAMA Intern Med. 2019 Feb 1;179(2):261-263
pubmed: 30556826
Circ J. 2022 Apr 25;86(5):799-807
pubmed: 34615814
BMC Cardiovasc Disord. 2014 Oct 04;14:137
pubmed: 25280534
J Invasive Cardiol. 2009 Nov;21(11):554-7
pubmed: 19901407
Heart. 2020 Mar;106(6):441-446
pubmed: 31857352
BMJ Open. 2017 Sep 05;7(9):e016909
pubmed: 28877948
Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2016 Sep;88(3):E74-9
pubmed: 26699241
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2017 May 2;69(17):2212-2241
pubmed: 28291663
JAMA. 2011 Jul 6;306(1):53-61
pubmed: 21730241
JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2014 Sep;7(9):1000-9
pubmed: 25234672
Chin Med J (Engl). 2020 Jan 5;133(1):1-8
pubmed: 31923098
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2013 Jul 23;62(4):308-16
pubmed: 23707319
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2013 Dec 17;62(24):2274-81
pubmed: 24055743
N Engl J Med. 2015 Nov 12;373(20):1937-46
pubmed: 26559572
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2017 Mar 14;69(10):1234-1242
pubmed: 28279289
Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2020 Feb;13(2):e008448
pubmed: 32069112
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2010 Jul 27;56(5):407-13
pubmed: 20650362
Arch Intern Med. 2012 Jan 23;172(2):171-8
pubmed: 22271125
Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2012 May;5(3):290-7
pubmed: 22576845
Cardiovasc Revasc Med. 2013 Nov-Dec;14(6):316-20
pubmed: 23988721
J Am Coll Cardiol. 1995 Feb;25(2):333-41
pubmed: 7829785
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2018 Feb 27;71(8):935-948
pubmed: 29471942
JAMA Intern Med. 2020 Nov 1;180(11):1540-1542
pubmed: 32955575
J Am Heart Assoc. 2019 Jan 22;8(2):e010373
pubmed: 30642222
Lancet. 2015 Jan 10;385(9963):117-71
pubmed: 25530442
Circulation. 2009 Mar 10;119(9):1330-52
pubmed: 19131581
Am J Cardiol. 2015 Dec 15;116(12):1815-21
pubmed: 26611121
J Invasive Cardiol. 2017 Sep;29(9):290-296
pubmed: 28623668
BMJ Open. 2016 Mar 30;6(3):e010345
pubmed: 27029773
Am J Cardiol. 2015 Sep 15;116(6):858-64
pubmed: 26183792
Am J Cardiol. 2015 Jul 15;116(2):167-73
pubmed: 25960375
Circulation. 2022 Feb 22;145(8):e153-e639
pubmed: 35078371
Circulation. 2015 Jul 7;132(1):20-6
pubmed: 26022910
Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2018 Jun;11(6):e004328
pubmed: 29853465
JAMA. 2015 Nov 17;314(19):2045-53
pubmed: 26551163
Am Heart J. 2014 Dec;168(6):854-61.e11
pubmed: 25458648
Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2021 Dec 1;98(7):1349-1357
pubmed: 34080774
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2012 Feb 28;59(9):857-81
pubmed: 22296741
J Clin Med. 2022 Apr 23;11(9):
pubmed: 35566504