Guidelines on myocardial revascularization.

By P. Kolh, W. Wijns, N. Danchin, C. di Mario, Volkmar Falk, T. Folliguet, S. Garg, K. Huber, S. James, J. Knuuti and 15 more. European Journal of Cardio-Thoracic Surgery, 2010

1,244 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Guidelines and Expert Consensus Documents summarize and evaluate all available evidence with the aim of assisting physicians in selecting the best management strategy for an individual patient suffering from a given condition, taking into account the impact on outcome and the risk benefit ratio of diagnostic or therapeutic means. Guidelines are no substitutes for textbooks and their legal implications have been discussed previously. Guidelines and recommendations should help physicians to make decisions in their daily practice. However, the ultimate judgement regarding the care of an individual patient must be made by his/her responsible physician(s). The recommendations for formulating and issuing ESC Guidelines and Expert Consensus Documents can be found on the ESC website (http://www.escardio.org/knowledge/ guidelines/rules). Members of this Task Force were selected by the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS) to represent all physicians involved with the medical and surgical care of patients with coronary artery disease (CAD). A critical evaluation of diagnostic and therapeutic procedures is performed including assessment of the risk benefit ratio. Estimates of expected health outcomes for society are included, where data exist. The level of evidence and the strength of recommendation of particular treatment options are weighed and graded according to predefined scales, as outlined in Tables 1 and 2. The members of the Task Force have provided disclosure statements of all relationships that might be perceived as real or potential sources of conflicts of interest. These disclosure forms are kept on file at European Heart House, headquarters of the ESC. Any changes in conflict of interest that arose during the writing period were notified to the ESC. The Task Force report received its entire financial support from the ESC and EACTS, without any involvement of the pharmaceutical, device, or surgical industry. ESC and EACTS Committees for Practice Guidelines are responsible for the endorsement process of these joint Guidelines. The finalized document has been approved by all the experts involved in the Task Force, and was submitted to outside specialists selected by both societies for review. The document is revised, and finally approved by ESC and EACTS and subsequently published simultaneously in the European Heart Journal and the European Journal of Cardio-Thoracic Surgery. After publication, dissemination of the Guidelines is of paramount importance. Pocket-sized versions and personal digital assistant-downloadable versions are useful at the point of care. Some surveys have shown that the intended users are sometimes unaware of the existence of guidelines, or simply do not translate them into practice. Thus, implementation programmes are needed because it has been shown that the outcome of disease may be favourably influenced by the thorough application of clinical recommendations.

Subfields: Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine, Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging, Surgery

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/247996648b6a96bb5b54a9aee1aa9ff917e32455

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine

In Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging

Frank Flachskampf

Citations in the corpus

Percutaneous Mechanical Circulatory Support Versus Intra-Aortic Balloon Pump in Cardiogenic Shock After Acute Myocardial Infarction. (2017, background): “Surgical LVAD placement 0 (0) 1 (4) Heart transplantation 0 (0) 0 (0) Other surgery 2 (8) 0 (0) Myocardial (re)infarction 1 (4) 2 (8)”
2016 ACC/AHA guideline focused update on duration of dual antiplatelet therapy in patients with coronary artery disease: A report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Clinical Practice Guidelines. (2016, background): “Most contemporary studies of DAPT have compared either shorter (3 to 6 months) (17-21) or longer (18 to 48 months) (16,22-26) duration of therapy with 12 months of DAPT, which is the recommended or minimal duration of therapy for most patients in ACC/AHA (9,13,14) and European Society of Cardiology ”
Diagnostic performance of noninvasive fractional flow reserve derived from coronary computed tomography angiography in suspected coronary artery disease: the NXT trial (Analysis of Coronary Blood Flow Using CT Angiography: Next Steps). (2014, methodology): “Current clinical algorithms for therapeutic decision making in stable CAD often require 2 separate tests for assessment of coronary anatomy and ischemia (4,5).”
ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of acute and chronic heart failure 2012 (2012, methodology): “The detailed indications for coronary revascularization are covered elsewhere.(71)”
2014 AHA/ACC guideline for the management of patients with non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndromes: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines. (2014, neutral): “Myocardial revascularization ESC 2010 (30)”
2016 ACC/AHA Guideline Focused Update on Duration of Dual Antiplatelet Therapy in Patients With Coronary Artery Disease: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Clinical Practice Guidelines. (2016, background): “Most contemporary studies of DAPT have compared either shorter (3 to 6 months) (17-21) or longer (18 to 48 months) (16,2 2-26) duration of therapy with 12 months of DAPT, which i s the recommended or minimal duration of therapy fo r most patients in ACC/AHA (9,13,14) and European Soc iety of Cardiol”