Key result
Appropriate coronary angiography indications linked to ~2.5-fold higher critical CAD yield vs inappropriate indications.
Why the study?
Rational use of invasive procedures like coronary angiography requires evaluation of appropriateness according to established criteria to optimize patient care.
Does the application of Appropriate Use Criteria (AUC) correlate with the presence of obstructive CAD and the need for revascularization in patients referred for coronary angiography?
Observational (n=1,188)
No
Does the application of Appropriate Use Criteria (AUC) correlate with the presence of obstructive CAD and the need for revascularization in patients referred for coronary angiography?
Absolute Event Rate: 75.9% vs 29.7%
p-value: p=< 0.001
Application of Appropriate Use Criteria for coronary angiography is feasible and correlates strongly with the diagnostic yield of obstructive CAD and subsequent revascularization.
Appropriate indications may enhance CAD detection; supports appropriateness criteria but leaves prospective outcome impact open.
BACKGROUND: Increasing attention is being given to the rational use of invasive procedures. In this study, we aimed to evaluate, among patients referred for coronary angiography, the appropriateness of cardiac catheterization according to the Appropriate Use Criteria (AUC) for diagnostic catheterization and to examine the relationship between the appropriateness and the presence of obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD) and revascularization. METHODS: From November 2017 to December 2018, 1188 consecutive patients referred to undergo a diagnostic catheterization were included. They were categorized as having appropriate, uncertain or inappropriate indication, using a database (Melograno System). We restricted our analysis to 9 appropriate indications including acute coronary syndromes, suspected CAD, valvular heart disease, arrhythmias and cardiomyopathy. We restricted the analysis to the subgroup of patients with suspected or known CAD and, among them, we evaluate the rate of CAD and the need for revascularization. RESULTS: The indications were appropriate in 1017 patients (85.6%), of uncertain appropriateness in 134 (11.3%), and inappropriate in 37 (3.1%). Restricting the analysis to the CAD subgroup, the indications were appropriate in 848 patients (83.3%), of uncertain appropriateness in 133 (13.1%) and inappropriate in 37 (3.6%). The proportion of patients with critical CAD were 75.9%, 44.3% and 29.7% in the appropriate, uncertain and inappropriate categories respectively (p < 0.001). The revascularization rate was 63.1%, 32.2% and 21.6% in the appropriate, uncertain and inappropriate categories respectively (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Application of AUC is feasible in a community setting. Melograno system is useful to improve patient care.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Silenzi et al. (2020) conducted an observational in Suspected coronary artery disease (n=1,188). Appropriate indication for coronary angiography vs. Uncertain or inappropriate indication was evaluated on Critical coronary artery disease (CAD) (p=< 0.001). Appropriate indications for coronary angiography yielded a higher rate of critical CAD compared to uncertain or inappropriate indications (75.9% vs 44.3% and 29.7%; p<0.001).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: