Pulse Brain · Growing Health Evidence Index
Tier 4 — Narrative / commentaryPeer-reviewed

ACC/AATS/AHA/ASE/ASNC/SCAI/SCCT/STS 2017 Appropriate Use Criteria for Coronary Revascularization in Patients With Stable Ischemic Heart Disease

Manesh R. Patel, John Calhoon, Gregory Dehmer, J. Aaron Grantham, Thomas M. Maddox, David J. Maron, Peter K. Smith

Journal of Nuclear Cardiology · 2017

Read source ↗ All evidence

Summary

This 2017 multi-society consensus document from the American College of Cardiology and associated societies establishes appropriate use criteria for coronary revascularisation in patients with stable ischaemic heart disease. The guidance synthesises evidence to classify clinical scenarios as appropriate, inappropriate, or uncertain for revascularisation, intended to inform clinical decision-making and reduce unnecessary procedures. The document reflects professional consensus on evidence-based indications for intervention in this patient population.

UK applicability

Whilst developed by United States societies, the clinical evidence base and pathophysiological principles are generally applicable to UK practice. However, UK practitioners should consult National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidance on stable angina management, which may reflect different cost-effectiveness thresholds and healthcare system priorities.

Key measures

Appropriateness classifications for coronary revascularisation across patient presentations and anatomical scenarios

Outcomes reported

The paper presents appropriate use criteria (AUC) for coronary revascularisation procedures in patients with stable ischaemic heart disease, as developed by a multi-society consensus panel. It provides clinical guidance on when revascularisation is deemed appropriate, inappropriate, or uncertain based on patient and anatomical factors.

Theme
Nutrition & health
Subject
Other / interdisciplinary
Study type
Guideline
Study design
Guideline
Source type
Peer-reviewed study
Status
Published
Geography
United States
System type
Human clinical
DOI
10.1007/s12350-017-0917-9
Catalogue ID
BFmor3gavc-rryubl

Topic tags

Pulse AI · ask about this record

Dig deeper with Pulse AI.

Pulse AI has read the whole catalogue. Ask about this record, its theme, or how the findings apply to UK farming and policy — every answer cites the underlying studies.