We only have this paper's title and publication details.
Read it at the sourceCaptured external expert commentary on this paper, strongest first. Original sources are linked where available.
“The original guidelines, I think everyone would agree, were just a lot more best practice and expert consensus, whereas now we have at least some data to support our recommendations.”
“Although the prevalence of ACHD is increasing, the population of patients with a given congenital abnormality or specific repair may be relatively small, which can make accruing evidence to guide treatment challenging.”
“This is a way of thinking about patients that involves not just their anatomy, but also considering a variety of domains in which there may be physiologic dysfunction that can modify the underlying anatomy. I think that is a more clinically relevant way to think about patients and patient evaluation management, and I commend the authors for that focus.”
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Warnes et al. (2008) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 4 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: