Hypothetical ratings of coronary angiography appropriateness: are they associated with actual angiographic findings, mortality, and revascularisation rate? The ACRE study
Key result
Expert panel appropriateness ratings for coronary angiography significantly predicted angiographic findings (p<0.001), mortality (p=0.018), and revascularisation rates (p<0.0001) over 2.5 years.
Why the study?
Are expert panel ratings of coronary angiography appropriateness associated with actual angiographic findings, mortality, and revascularisation rates in patients undergoing coronary angiography?
Population
3631 consecutive patients undergoing coronary angiography (no exclusion criteria)
Comparison
Expert panel appropriateness ratings for… vs Comparison between appropriateness rating…
Design
Cohort
Follow-up
2.5 years
Authors
Discussion
Loading...
Member takes
Implication
May inform angiography referral decisions; supports validation of expert appropriateness criteria in observational cohorts.
Study Design
Type
Cohort (n=3,631)
Multicenter
No
Structured PICO
Are expert panel ratings of coronary angiography appropriateness associated with actual angiographic findings, mortality, and revascularisation rates in patients undergoing coronary angiography?
P
Population
3631 consecutive patients undergoing coronary angiography (no exclusion criteria)
I
Intervention
Expert panel appropriateness ratings (appropriate, uncertain, inappropriate) for coronary angiography indications
C
Comparator
Comparison between appropriateness rating categories (appropriate vs uncertain vs inappropriate)
O
Outcome
Angiographic findings, mortality, and revascularisation over 2.5 years of follow uphard clinical
Main Result
p-value: p=0.018
Expert panel ratings of appropriateness for coronary angiography successfully predict actual angiographic findings, mortality, and subsequent revascularisation rates.
Cite This Study
Harry Hemingway (2001) conducted a cohort in Coronary artery disease (n=3,631). Expert panel appropriateness ratings for coronary angiography vs. Comparison among appropriate, uncertain, and inappropriate ratings was evaluated on Angiographic findings, mortality, and revascularisation (p=0.018). Expert panel appropriateness ratings for coronary angiography significantly predicted angiographic findings (p<0.001), mortality (p=0.018), and revascularisation rates (p<0.0001) over 2.5 years.