Literature DB >> 25960375

Validation of the appropriate use criteria for percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with stable coronary artery disease (from the COURAGE trial).

Steven M Bradley1, Paul S Chan2, Pamela M Hartigan3, Brahmajee K Nallamothu4, William S Weintraub5, Steven P Sedlis6, Marcin Dada7, David J Maron8, William J Kostuk9, Daniel S Berman10, Koon K Teo11, G B John Mancini12, William E Boden13, John A Spertus2.   

Abstract

Establishing the validity of appropriate use criteria (AUC) for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in the setting of stable ischemic heart disease can support their adoption for quality improvement. We conducted a post hoc analysis of 2,287 Clinical Outcomes Utilizing Revascularization and Aggressive Drug Evaluation trial patients with stable ischemic heart disease randomized to PCI with optimal medical therapy (OMT) or OMT alone. Within appropriateness categories, we compared rates of death, myocardial infarction, revascularization subsequent to initial therapy, and angina-specific health status as determined by the Seattle Angina Questionnaire in patients randomized to PCI + OMT to those randomized to OMT alone. A total of 1,987 patients (87.9%) were mapped to the 2012 publication of the AUC, with 1,334 (67.1%) classified as appropriate, 551 (27.7%) uncertain, and 102 (5.1%) as inappropriate. There were no significant differences between PCI and OMT alone in the rate of mortality and myocardial infarction by appropriateness classification. Rates of revascularization were significantly lower in patients initially receiving PCI + OMT who were classified as appropriate (hazard ratio 0.65; 95% confidence interval 0.53 to 0.80; p <0.001) or uncertain (hazard ratio 0.49; 95% confidence interval 0.32 to 0.76; p = 0.001). Furthermore, among patients classified as appropriate by the AUC, Seattle Angina Questionnaire scores at 1 month were better in the PCI-treated group compared with the medical therapy group (80 ± 23 vs 75 ± 24 for angina frequency, 73 ± 24 vs 68 ± 24 for physical limitations, and 68 ± 23 vs 60 ± 24 for quality of life; all p <0.01), with differences generally persisting through 12 months. In contrast, health status scores were similar throughout the first year of follow-up in PCI + OMT patients compared with OMT alone in patients classified as uncertain or inappropriate. In conclusion, these findings support the validity of the AUC in efforts to improve health care quality through optimal use of PCI. Published by Elsevier Inc.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25960375      PMCID: PMC6572758          DOI: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2015.03.057

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Cardiol        ISSN: 0002-9149            Impact factor:   2.778


  7 in total

1.  Exploring the Healthcare Value of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Appropriateness, Outcomes, and Costs in Michigan Hospitals.

Authors:  Daniel M Alyesh; Milan Seth; David C Miller; James M Dupree; John Syrjamaki; Devraj Sukul; Simon Dixon; Eve A Kerr; Hitinder S Gurm; Brahmajee K Nallamothu
Journal:  Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes       Date:  2018-06

2.  Association between procedure appropriateness and patient-reported outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention.

Authors:  Jesse Xiaolong Yang; Margaret J Stevenson; Linda Valsdottir; Kalon Ho; John A Spertus; Robert W Yeh; Jordan B Strom
Journal:  Heart       Date:  2019-12-19       Impact factor: 5.994

3.  Association Between Elective Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Appropriateness and Publicly Reported Outcomes.

Authors:  Vinay Kini; Paul L Hess; Wenhui Liu; Gary Grunwald; P Michael Ho; Steven M Bradley
Journal:  Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes       Date:  2020-11-09

4.  An Adaptation of the RAND/UCLA Modified Delphi Panel Method in the Time of COVID-19.

Authors:  Michael S Broder; Sarah N Gibbs; Irina Yermilov
Journal:  J Healthc Leadersh       Date:  2022-05-20

Review 5.  Network Medicine: A Clinical Approach for Precision Medicine and Personalized Therapy in Coronary Heart Disease.

Authors:  Teresa Infante; Luca Del Viscovo; Maria Luisa De Rimini; Sergio Padula; Pio Caso; Claudio Napoli
Journal:  J Atheroscler Thromb       Date:  2019-11-12       Impact factor: 4.928

6.  Assessing the association of appropriateness of coronary revascularization and 1-year clinical outcomes for patients with stable coronary artery disease in China.

Authors:  Shen Lin; Heng Zhang; Chen-Fei Rao; Si-Peng Chen; Shu-Bin Qiao; Hong-Bing Yan; Ke-Fei Dou; Yong-Jian Wu; Yi-Da Tang; Xin-Chun Yang; Zhu-Jun Shen; Jian Liu; Zhe Zheng
Journal:  Chin Med J (Engl)       Date:  2020-01-05       Impact factor: 2.628

7.  Tapering thrombopoietin receptor agonists in primary immune thrombocytopenia: Expert consensus based on the RAND/UCLA modified Delphi panel method.

Authors:  Adam Cuker; Jenny M Despotovic; Rachael F Grace; Caroline Kruse; Michele P Lambert; Howard A Liebman; Roger M Lyons; Keith R McCrae; Vinod Pullarkat; Jeffrey S Wasser; David Beenhouwer; Sarah N Gibbs; Irina Yermilov; Michael S Broder
Journal:  Res Pract Thromb Haemost       Date:  2020-12-08
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.