Pick Topic
Review Topic
List Experts
Examine Expert
Save Expert
  Site Guide ··   
Coronary Artery Disease: HELP
Articles from USA
Based on 9,433 articles published since 2009
||||

These are the 9433 published articles about Coronary Artery Disease that originated from USA during 2009-2019.
 
+ Citations + Abstracts
Pages: 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 · 7 · 8 · 9 · 10 · 11 · 12 · 13 · 14 · 15 · 16 · 17 · 18 · 19 · 20
1 Guideline Antithrombotic Therapy in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation Treated With Oral Anticoagulation Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention. 2018

Angiolillo, Dominick J / Goodman, Shaun G / Bhatt, Deepak L / Eikelboom, John W / Price, Matthew J / Moliterno, David J / Cannon, Christopher P / Tanguay, Jean-Francois / Granger, Christopher B / Mauri, Laura / Holmes, David R / Gibson, C Michael / Faxon, David P. ·Division of Cardiology, University of Florida College of Medicine-Jacksonville (D.J.A.). · St. Michael's Hospital, University of Toronto, and the Canadian Heart Research Centre, Canada (S.G.G.). · Canadian Virtual Coordinating Centre for Global Collaborative Cardiovascular Research Centre, University of Alberta, Canada (S.G.G.). · Brigham and Women's Hospital Heart & Vascular Center and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA (D.L.B., C.P.C., L.M., D.P.F.). · Department of Medicine, Population Health Research Institute, Thrombosis & Atherosclerosis Research Institute, Hamilton, Canada (J.W.E.). · Division of Cardiovascular Diseases, Scripps Clinic, La Jolla, CA (M.J.P.). · Division of Cardiovascular Medicine and Gill Heart Institute, University of Kentucky, Lexington (D.J.M.). · Department of Medicine, Montreal Heart Institute, Université de Montréal, Canada (J.-F.T.). · Duke Clinical Research Institute, Duke University, Durham, NC (C.B.G.). · Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN (D.R.H.). · Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA (C.M.G.). ·Circulation · Pubmed #30571525.

ABSTRACT: The optimal antithrombotic treatment regimen for patients with atrial fibrillation undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention with stent implantation represents a challenge in clinical practice. In 2016, an updated opinion of selected experts from the United States and Canada on the treatment of patients with atrial fibrillation undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention was reported. After the 2016 North American consensus statement on the management of antithrombotic therapy in patients with atrial fibrillation undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention, results of pivotal clinical trials assessing the type of oral anticoagulant agent and the duration of antiplatelet treatment have been published. On the basis of these results, this focused update on the antithrombotic management of patients with atrial fibrillation undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention recommends that a non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulant be preferred over a vitamin K antagonist as the oral anticoagulant of choice. Moreover, a double-therapy regimen (oral anticoagulant plus single antiplatelet therapy with a P2Y

2 Guideline Coronary computed tomographic imaging in women: An expert consensus statement from the Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography. 2018

Truong, Quynh A / Rinehart, Sarah / Abbara, Suhny / Achenbach, Stephan / Berman, Daniel S / Bullock-Palmer, Renee / Carrascosa, Patricia / Chinnaiyan, Kavitha M / Dey, Damini / Ferencik, Maros / Fuechtner, Gudrun / Hecht, Harvey / Jacobs, Jill E / Lee, Sang-Eun / Leipsic, Jonathan / Lin, Fay / Meave, Aloha / Pugliese, Francesca / Sierra-Galán, Lilia M / Williams, Michelle C / Villines, Todd C / Shaw, Leslee J / Anonymous3891033. ·Weill Cornell Medicine, USA. Electronic address: qat9001@med.cornell.edu. · Piedmont Healthcare, USA. · UT Southwestern Medical Center, USA. · University of Erlangan, Germany. · Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, USA. · Deborah Heart and Lung Center, USA. · Maipu Diagnosis, Argentina. · William Beaumont Hospital, USA. · Oregon Health & Science University, USA. · Medical University of Innsbruck, Austria. · Mount Sinai Health System, USA. · NYU Langone Medical Center, USA. · Severance Hospital, South Korea. · Providence Healthcare, Canada. · Weill Cornell Medicine, USA. · Ignacio Chavez National Institute for Cardiology, Mexico. · William Harvey Research Institute, UK. · American British Cowdray Medical Center, Mexico. · British Heart Foundation, UK. · Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences F Edward Hebert School of Medicine, USA. ·J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr · Pubmed #30392926.

ABSTRACT: This expert consensus statement from the Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography (SCCT) provides an evidence synthesis on the use of computed tomography (CT) imaging for diagnosis and risk stratification of coronary artery disease in women. From large patient and population cohorts of asymptomatic women, detection of any coronary artery calcium that identifies females with a 10-year atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease risk of >7.5% may more effectively triage women who may benefit from pharmacologic therapy. In addition to accurate detection of obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD), CT angiography (CTA) identifies nonobstructive atherosclerotic plaque extent and composition which is otherwise not detected by alternative stress testing modalities. Moreover, CTA has superior risk stratification when compared to stress testing in symptomatic women with stable chest pain (or equivalent) symptoms. For the evaluation of symptomatic women both in the emergency department and the outpatient setting, there is abundant evidence from large observational registries and multi-center randomized trials, that CT imaging is an effective procedure. Although radiation doses are far less for CT when compared to nuclear imaging, radiation dose reduction strategies should be applied in all women undergoing CT imaging. Effective and appropriate use of CT imaging can provide the means for improved detection of at-risk women and thereby focus preventive management resulting in long-term risk reduction and improved clinical outcomes.

3 Guideline ACR Appropriateness Criteria 2018

Anonymous2701124 / Shah, Amar B / Kirsch, Jacobo / Bolen, Michael A / Batlle, Juan C / Brown, Richard K J / Eberhardt, Robert T / Hurwitz, Lynne M / Inacio, Joao R / Jin, Jill O / Krishnamurthy, Rajesh / Leipsic, Jonathon A / Rajiah, Prabhakar / Singh, Satinder P / White, Richard D / Zimmerman, Stefan L / Abbara, Suhny. ·Westchester Medical Center, Valhalla, New York. Electronic address: ashah27@northwell.edu. · Panel Chair, Cleveland Clinic Florida, Weston, Florida. · Panel Vice-Chair, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio. · Miami Cardiac and Vascular Institute and Baptist Health of South Florida, Miami, Florida. · University of Michigan Health System, Ann Arbor, Michigan. · Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts; American College of Cardiology. · Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina. · The Ottawa Hospital, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada. · Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, Illinois; American College of Physicians. · Nationwide Children's Hospital, Columbus, Ohio. · St. Paul's Hospital, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. · UT Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas. · University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama. · The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, Ohio. · Johns Hopkins Medical Institute, Baltimore, Maryland. · Specialty Chair, UT Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas. ·J Am Coll Radiol · Pubmed #30392597.

ABSTRACT: Chronic chest pain (CCP) of a cardiac etiology is a common clinical problem. The diagnosis and classification of the case of chest pain has rapidly evolved providing the clinician with multiple cardiac imaging strategies. Though scintigraphy and rest echocardiography remain as appropriate imaging tools in the diagnostic evaluation, new technology is available. Current evidence supports the use of alternative imaging tests such as coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA), cardiac MRI (CMRI), or Rb-82 PET/CT. Since multiple imaging modalities are available to the clinician, the most appropriate noninvasive imaging strategy will be based upon the patient's clinical presentation and clinical status. The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed annually by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and revision include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer reviewed journals and the application of well-established methodologies (RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation or GRADE) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures for specific clinical scenarios. In those instances where evidence is lacking or equivocal, expert opinion may supplement the available evidence to recommend imaging or treatment.

4 Guideline Risk Assessment for Cardiovascular Disease With Nontraditional Risk Factors: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement. 2018

Anonymous2681075 / Curry, Susan J / Krist, Alex H / Owens, Douglas K / Barry, Michael J / Caughey, Aaron B / Davidson, Karina W / Doubeni, Chyke A / Epling, John W / Kemper, Alex R / Kubik, Martha / Landefeld, C Seth / Mangione, Carol M / Silverstein, Michael / Simon, Melissa A / Tseng, Chien-Wen / Wong, John B. ·University of Iowa, Iowa City. · Fairfax Family Practice Residency, Fairfax, Virginia. · Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond. · Veterans Affairs Palo Alto Health Care System, Palo Alto, California. · Stanford University, Stanford, California. · Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts. · Oregon Health & Science University, Portland. · Columbia University, New York, New York. · University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia. · Virginia Tech Carilion School of Medicine, Roanoke. · Nationwide Children's Hospital, Columbus, Ohio. · Temple University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. · University of Alabama at Birmingham. · University of California, Los Angeles. · Boston University, Boston, Massachusetts. · Northwestern University, Evanston, Illinois. · University of Hawaii, Honolulu. · Pacific Health Research and Education Institute, Honolulu, Hawaii. · Tufts University, Medford, Massachusetts. ·JAMA · Pubmed #29998297.

ABSTRACT: Importance: Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is the most common cause of death among adults in the United States. Treatment to prevent CVD events by modifying risk factors is currently informed by the Framingham Risk Score, the Pooled Cohort Equations, or similar CVD risk assessment models. If current CVD risk assessment models could be improved by adding more risk factors, treatment might be better targeted, thereby maximizing the benefits and minimizing the harms. Objective: To update the 2009 US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommendation on using nontraditional risk factors in coronary heart disease risk assessment. Evidence Review: The USPSTF reviewed the evidence on using nontraditional risk factors in CVD risk assessment, focusing on the ankle-brachial index (ABI), high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hsCRP) level, and coronary artery calcium (CAC) score; the health benefits and harms of CVD risk assessment and treatment guided by nontraditional risk factors combined with the Framingham Risk Score or Pooled Cohort Equations compared with using either risk assessment model alone; and whether adding nontraditional risk factors to existing CVD risk assessment models improves measures of calibration, discrimination, and risk reclassification. Findings: The USPSTF found adequate evidence that adding the ABI, hsCRP level, and CAC score to existing CVD risk assessment models results in small improvements in discrimination and risk reclassification; however, the clinical meaning of these changes is largely unknown. Evidence on adding the ABI, hsCRP level, and CAC score to the Pooled Cohort Equations is limited. The USPSTF found inadequate evidence to assess whether treatment decisions guided by the ABI, hsCRP level, or CAC score, in addition to risk factors in existing CVD risk assessment models, leads to reduced incidence of CVD events or mortality. The USPSTF found adequate evidence to conceptually bound the harms of early detection and interventions as small. The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of using the ABI, hsCRP level, or CAC score in risk assessment for CVD in asymptomatic adults to prevent CVD events. Conclusions and Recommendation: The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of adding the ABI, hsCRP level, or CAC score to traditional risk assessment for CVD in asymptomatic adults to prevent CVD events. (I statement).

5 Guideline Focused update of expert consensus statement: Use of invasive assessments of coronary physiology and structure: A position statement of the society of cardiac angiography and interventions. 2018

Lotfi, Amir / Davies, Justin E / Fearon, William F / Grines, Cindy L / Kern, Morton J / Klein, Lloyd W. ·Baystate Medical Center, Tufts University School of Medicine, Springfield, Massachusetts. · Imperial Colleges, London, United Kingdom. · Stanford University Medical Center, Stanford, California. · Northwell Health, North Shore University Hospital, Manhasset, New York. · Long Beach Veterans Administration Hospital, University of California, Irvine, Irvine, California. · Advocate Illinois Masonic Medical Center, Rush Medical College, Chicago, Illinois. ·Catheter Cardiovasc Interv · Pubmed #29968425.

ABSTRACT: -- No abstract --

6 Guideline CAC-DRS: Coronary Artery Calcium Data and Reporting System. An expert consensus document of the Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography (SCCT). 2018

Hecht, Harvey S / Blaha, Michael J / Kazerooni, Ella A / Cury, Ricardo C / Budoff, Matt / Leipsic, Jonathon / Shaw, Leslee. ·Division of Cardiology, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, and Mount Sinai St. Luke's Medical Center, New York, NY, United States. Electronic address: harvey.hecht@mountsinai.org. · The Johns Hopkins Ciccarone Center for the Prevention of Heart Disease, Baltimore, MD, United States. · Division of Radiology, University of Michigan Medical Center, Ann Arbor, MI 48109, United States. · Miami Cardiac and Vascular Institute, Baptist Hospital of Miami, 8900 N Kendall Drive, Miami, FL 33176, United States. · Division of Cardiology, Los Angeles Biomedical Research Institute at Harbor-UCLA Medical Center, Torrance, CA, United States. · Department of Medicine and Radiology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada. · Department of Medicine, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA, United States. ·J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr · Pubmed #29793848.

ABSTRACT: The goal of CAC-DRS: Coronary Artery Calcium Data and Reporting System is to create a standardized method to communicate findings of CAC scanning on all noncontrast CT scans, irrespective of the indication, in order to facilitate clinical decision-making, with recommendations for subsequent patient management. The CAC-DRS classification is applied on a per-patient basis and represents the total calcium score and the number of involved arteries. General recommendations are provided for further management of patients with different degrees of calcified plaque burden based on CAC-DRS classification. In addition, CAC-DRS will provide a framework of standardization that may benefit quality assurance and tracking patient outcomes with the potential to ultimately result in improved quality of care.

7 Guideline A Multidisciplinary Approach on the Perioperative Antithrombotic Management of Patients With Coronary Stents Undergoing Surgery: Surgery After Stenting 2. 2018

Rossini, Roberta / Tarantini, Giuseppe / Musumeci, Giuseppe / Masiero, Giulia / Barbato, Emanuele / Calabrò, Paolo / Capodanno, Davide / Leonardi, Sergio / Lettino, Maddalena / Limbruno, Ugo / Menozzi, Alberto / Marchese, U O Alfredo / Saia, Francesco / Valgimigli, Marco / Ageno, Walter / Falanga, Anna / Corcione, Antonio / Locatelli, Alessandro / Montorsi, Marco / Piazza, Diego / Stella, Andrea / Bozzani, Antonio / Parolari, Alessandro / Carone, Roberto / Angiolillo, Dominick J / Anonymous911159 / Anonymous921159 / Anonymous931159 / Anonymous941159 / Anonymous951159 / Anonymous961159 / Anonymous971159 / Anonymous981159 / Anonymous991159 / Anonymous1001159 / Anonymous1011159 / Anonymous1021159 / Anonymous1031159 / Anonymous1041159 / Anonymous1051159 / Anonymous1061159 / Anonymous1071159 / Anonymous1081159 / Anonymous1091159 / Anonymous1101159 / Anonymous1111159 / Anonymous1121159 / Anonymous1131159. ·Dipartimento Emergenze e Aree Critiche, Ospedale Santa Croce e Carle, Cuneo, Italy. Electronic address: roberta.rossini2@gmail.com. · Department of Cardiac, Thoracic and Vascular Sciences, University of Padua Medical School, Padua, Italy. · Dipartimento Emergenze e Aree Critiche, Ospedale Santa Croce e Carle, Cuneo, Italy. · Division of Cardiology, Department of Advanced Biomedical Sciences, Federico II University, Naples, Italy. · Division of Cardiology, Department of Cardio-Thoracic Sciences, Università degli Studi della Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli," Naples, Italy. · Division of Cardiology, Cardio-Thoracic-Vascular Department, Azienda Ospedaliero Universitaria "Policlinico-Vittorio Emanuele, Catania, Italy; Department of General Surgery and Medical-Surgical Specialties, University of Catania, Catania, Italy. · Coronary Care Unit, Fondazione IRCCS Policlinico San Matteo, Pavia, Italy. · Cardiovascular Department, Humanitas Research Hospital, Rozzano, Italy. · U.O.C. Cardiologia, Azienda USL Toscana Sudest, Grosseto, Italy. · Unità Operativa di Cardiologia, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di Parma, Italy. · U.O.C. Cardiologia Interventistica, Anthea Hospital, GVM Care & Research, Bari, Italy. · Cardiology Unit, Cardio-Thoraco-Vascular Department, University Hospital of Bologna, Policlinico S. Orsola-Malpighi, Bologna, Italy. · Swiss Cardiovascular Centre Bern, Bern University Hospital, Bern, Switzerland. · Degenza Breve Internistica e Centro Trombosi ed Emostasi, Dipartimento di Medicina e Chirurgia, Università dell'Insubria, Varese, Italy. · Department of Immunohematology and Transfusion Medicine, Thrombosis and Hemostasis Center, ASST Papa Giovanni XXIII, Bergamo, Italy. · Department of Anaesthesia and Critical Care, AORN Dei Colli, Naples, Italy. · Dipartimento di Chirurgia Generale, Humanitas Research Hospital and University, Milano, Italy. · Policlinico Vittorio Emanuele di Catania, Catania, Italy. · Chirurgia Vascolare, Università di Bologna, Ospedale Sant'Orsola-Malpighi, Bologna, Italy. · UOC Chirurgia Vascolare, Dipartimento di Scienze Chirurgiche, Fondazione I.R.C.C.S. Policlinico San Matteo, Pavia, Italy. · Dipartimento di Scienze Biomediche per la Salute, Policlinico San Donato IRCCS, University of Milano, Milan, Italy. · Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria Città della salute e della scienza, Torino, Italy. · Division of Cardiology, University of Florida, College of Medicine-Jacksonville, Jacksonville, Florida. ·JACC Cardiovasc Interv · Pubmed #29519377.

ABSTRACT: Perioperative management of antithrombotic therapy in patients treated with coronary stents undergoing surgery remains poorly defined. Importantly, surgery represents a common reason for premature treatment discontinuation, which is associated with an increased risk in mortality and major adverse cardiac events. However, maintaining antithrombotic therapy to minimize the incidence of perioperative ischemic complications may increase the risk of bleeding complications. Although guidelines provide some recommendations with respect to the perioperative management of antithrombotic therapy, these have been largely developed according to the thrombotic risk of the patient and a definition of the hemorrhagic risk specific to each surgical procedure, key to defining the trade-off between ischemia and bleeding, is not provided. These observations underscore the need for a multidisciplinary collaboration among cardiologists, anesthesiologists, hematologists and surgeons to reach this goal. The present document is an update on practical recommendations for standardizing management of antithrombotic therapy management in patients treated with coronary stents (Surgery After Stenting 2) in various types of surgery according to the predicted individual risk of thrombotic complications against the anticipated risk of surgical bleeding complications. Cardiologists defined the thrombotic risk using a "combined ischemic risk" approach, while surgeons classified surgeries according to their inherent hemorrhagic risk. Finally, a multidisciplinary agreement on the most appropriate antithrombotic treatment regimen in the perioperative phase was reached for each surgical procedure.

8 Guideline 2016 SCCT/STR guidelines for coronary artery calcium scoring of noncontrast noncardiac chest CT scans: A report of the Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography and Society of Thoracic Radiology. 2017

Hecht, Harvey S / Cronin, Paul / Blaha, Michael J / Budoff, Matthew J / Kazerooni, Ella A / Narula, Jagat / Yankelevitz, David / Abbara, Suhny. ·aLenox Hill Heart & Vascular Institute, New York, NY, United States bUniversity of Michigan Health System, Ann Arbor, MI, United States cJohns Hopkins Medicine, Baltimore, MD, United States dHarbor-UCLA Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, United States eIcahn School of Medicine at Mt. Sinai, New York, NY, United States fThe Mount Sinai Medical Center, New York, NY, United States gUTSouthwestern Medical Center, Radiology, 5323 Harry Hines Blv, Dallas, TX 75390-9316, United States. ·J Thorac Imaging · Pubmed #28832417.

ABSTRACT: The Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography (SCCT) and the Society of Thoracic Radiology (STR) have jointly produced this document. Experts in this subject have been selected from both organizations to examine subject-specific data and write this guideline in partnership. A formal literature review, weighing the strength of evidence has been performed. When available, information from studies on cost was considered. Computed tomography (CT) acquisition, CAC scoring methodologies and clinical outcomes are the primary basis for the recommendations in this guideline. This guideline is intended to assist healthcare providers in clinical decision making. The recommendations reflect a consensus after a thorough review of the best available current scientific evidence and practice patterns of experts in the field and are intended to improve patient care while acknowledging that situations arise where additional information may be needed to better inform patient care.

9 Guideline ACR Appropriateness Criteria 2017

Anonymous3940905 / Akers, Scott R / Panchal, Vandan / Ho, Vincent B / Beache, Garth M / Brown, Richard K J / Ghoshhajra, Brian B / Greenberg, S Bruce / Hsu, Joe Y / Kicska, Gregory A / Min, James K / Stillman, Arthur E / Stojanovska, Jadranka / Abbara, Suhny / Jacobs, Jill E. ·Principal Author, VA Medical Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Electronic address: akerssco@me.com. · Research Author, Internal Medicine Resident, Henry Ford Allegiance Health, Jackson, Michigan. · Panel Vice-Chair, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, Bethesda, Maryland. · University of Louisville School of Medicine, Louisville, Kentucky. · University Hospital, Ann Arbor, Michigan. · Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts. · Arkansas Children's Hospital, Little Rock, Arkansas. · Kaiser Permanente, Los Angeles, California. · University of Washington, Seattle, Washington. · Cedars Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, California; American College of Cardiology. · Emory University Hospital, Atlanta, Georgia. · University of Michigan Health System, Ann Arbor, Michigan. · Specialty Chair, UT Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas. · Panel Chair, New York University Medical Center, New York, New York. ·J Am Coll Radiol · Pubmed #28473096.

ABSTRACT: In patients with chronic chest pain in the setting of high probability of coronary artery disease (CAD), imaging has major and diverse roles. First, imaging is valuable in determining and documenting the presence, extent, and severity of myocardial ischemia, hibernation, scarring, and/or the presence, site, and severity of obstructive coronary lesions. Second, imaging findings are important in determining the course of management of patients with suspected chronic myocardial ischemia and better defining those patients best suited for medical therapy, angioplasty/stenting, or surgery. Third, imaging is also necessary to determine the long-term prognosis and likely benefit from various therapeutic options by evaluating ventricular function, diastolic relaxation, and end-systolic volume. Imaging studies are also required to demonstrate other abnormalities, such as congenital/acquired coronary anomalies and severe left ventricular hypertrophy, that can produce angina in the absence of symptomatic coronary obstructive disease due to atherosclerosis. Clinical risk assessment is necessary to determine the pretest probability of CAD. Multiple methods are available to categorize patients as low, medium, or high risk for developing CAD. The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed annually by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and revision include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer reviewed journals and the application of well-established methodologies (RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation or GRADE) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures for specific clinical scenarios. In those instances where evidence is lacking or equivocal, expert opinion may supplement the available evidence to recommend imaging or treatment.

10 Guideline Clinical indications for coronary artery calcium scoring in asymptomatic patients: Expert consensus statement from the Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography. 2017

Hecht, Harvey / Blaha, Michael J / Berman, Daniel S / Nasir, Khurram / Budoff, Matthew / Leipsic, Jonathon / Blankstein, Ron / Narula, Jagat / Rumberger, John / Shaw, Leslee J. ·Division of Cardiology, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, Mount Sinai St. Luke's Medical Center, New York, NY, USA. Electronic address: hhecht@aol.com. · The Johns Hopkins Ciccarone Center for the Prevention of Heart Disease, Baltimore, MD, USA. · Department of Medicine, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles, CA, USA. · Miami Cardiac and Vascular Institute, Baptist Health South Florida, Miami, FL, USA. · Division of Cardiology, Los Angeles Biomedical Research Institute at Harbor-UCLA Medical Center, Torrance, CA, USA. · Department of Medicine and Radiology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada. · Non-Invasive Cardiovascular Imaging Program, Departments of Medicine (Cardiovascular Division) and Radiology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA. · Division of Cardiology, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, Mount Sinai St. Luke's Medical Center, New York, NY, USA. · The Princeton Longevity Center, Princeton, NJ, USA. · Department of Medicine, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA, USA. ·J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr · Pubmed #28283309.

ABSTRACT: This expert consensus statement summarizes the available data regarding the prognostic value of CAC in the asymptomatic population and its ability to refine individual risk prediction, addresses the limitations identified in the current traditional risk factor-based treatment strategies recommended by the 2013 ACC/AHA Prevention guidelines including use of the Pooled Cohort Equations (PCE), and the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) Recommendation Statement for Statin Use for the Primary Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease in Adults. It provides CAC based treatment recommendations both within the context of the shared decision making model espoused by the 2013 ACC/AHA Prevention guidelines and independent of these guidelines.

11 Guideline 2016 SCCT/STR guidelines for coronary artery calcium scoring of noncontrast noncardiac chest CT scans: A report of the Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography and Society of Thoracic Radiology. 2017

Hecht, Harvey S / Cronin, Paul / Blaha, Michael J / Budoff, Matthew J / Kazerooni, Ella A / Narula, Jagat / Yankelevitz, David / Abbara, Suhny. ·Lenox Hill Heart & Vascular Institute, New York, NY, United States. · University of Michigan Health System, Ann Arbor, MI, United States. · Johns Hopkins Medicine, Baltimore, MD, United States. · Harbor-UCLA Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, United States. · Icahn School of Medicine at Mt. Sinai, New York, NY, United States. · The Mount Sinai Medical Center, New York, NY, United States. · UTSouthwestern Medical Center, Radiology, 5323 Harry Hines Blv, Dallas, TX 75390-9316, United States. Electronic address: suhny.abbara@utsouthwestern.edu. ·J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr · Pubmed #27916431.

ABSTRACT: The Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography (SCCT) and the Society of Thoracic Radiology (STR) have jointly produced this document. Experts in this subject have been selected from both organizations to examine subject-specific data and write this guideline in partnership. A formal literature review, weighing the strength of evidence has been performed. When available, information from studies on cost was considered. Computed tomography (CT) acquisition, CAC scoring methodologies and clinical outcomes are the primary basis for the recommendations in this guideline. This guideline is intended to assist healthcare providers in clinical decision making. The recommendations reflect a consensus after a thorough review of the best available current scientific evidence and practice patterns of experts in the field and are intended to improve patient care while acknowledging that situations arise where additional information may be needed to better inform patient care.

12 Guideline The Rationale for Performance of Coronary Angiography and Stenting Before Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: From the Interventional Section Leadership Council of the American College of Cardiology. 2016

Ramee, Stephen / Anwaruddin, Saif / Kumar, Gautam / Piana, Robert N / Babaliaros, Vasilis / Rab, Tanveer / Klein, Lloyd W / Anonymous11460889 / Anonymous11470889. ·Ochsner Medical Center, New Orleans, Louisiana. · Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. · Emory University/Atlanta VA Medical Center, Atlanta, Georgia. · Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee. · Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia. · Rush Medical College, Chicago, Illinois. Electronic address: lloydklein@comcast.net. ·JACC Cardiovasc Interv · Pubmed #27931592.

ABSTRACT: Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is an effective, nonsurgical treatment option for patients with severe aortic stenosis. The optimal treatment strategy for treating concomitant coronary artery disease (CAD) has not been tested prospectively in a randomized clinical trial. Nevertheless, it is standard practice in the United States to perform coronary angiography and percutaneous coronary intervention for significant CAD at least 1 month before TAVR. All existing clinical trials were designed using this strategy. Therefore, it is wrong to extrapolate current American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Appropriate Use Criteria against invasive procedures in asymptomatic patients to the TAVR population when evaluating the quality of care by cardiologists or hospitals. In this statement from the Interventional Section Leadership Council of the ACC, it is recommended that percutaneous coronary intervention should be considered in all patients with significant proximal coronary stenosis in major coronary arteries before TAVR, even though the indication is not covered in current guidelines.

13 Guideline Antithrombotic Therapy in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A North American Perspective-2016 Update. 2016

Angiolillo, Dominick J / Goodman, Shaun G / Bhatt, Deepak L / Eikelboom, John W / Price, Matthew J / Moliterno, David J / Cannon, Christopher P / Tanguay, Jean-Francois / Granger, Christopher B / Mauri, Laura / Holmes, David R / Gibson, C Michael / Faxon, David P. ·From the Division of Cardiology, University of Florida College of Medicine-Jacksonville (D.J.A.) · St Michael's Hospital, University of Toronto, and the Canadian Heart Research Centre · Canadian VIGOUR Centre, University of Alberta, Edmonton (S.G.G.) · Brigham and Women's Hospital Heart & Vascular Center and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA (D.L.B., D.P.F.) · Department of Medicine, Population Health Research Institute, Thrombosis & Atherosclerosis Research Institute, Hamilton, ON, Canada (J.W.E.) · Division of Cardiovascular Diseases, Scripps Clinic, La Jolla CA (M.J.P.) · Division of Cardiovascular Medicine and Gill Heart Institute, University of Kentucky, Lexington (D.J.M.) · Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Clinical Research Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA (C.P.C., L.M.) · Department of Medicine, Montreal Heart Institute, Université de Montréal, QC, Canada (J.-F.T.) · Duke Clinical Research Institute, Duke University, Durham, NC (C.B.G.) · Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN (D.R.H.) · and Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA (C.M.G.). ·Circ Cardiovasc Interv · Pubmed #27803042.

ABSTRACT: The optimal antithrombotic treatment regimen for patients with atrial fibrillation undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention with stent implantation is an emerging clinical problem. Currently, there is limited evidenced-based data on the optimal antithrombotic treatment regimen, including antiplatelet and anticoagulant therapies, for these high-risk patients with practice guidelines, thus, providing limited recommendations. Over the past years, expert consensus documents have provided guidance to clinicians on how to manage patients with atrial fibrillation undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. Given the recent advancements in the field, the current document provides an updated opinion of selected North American experts from the United States and Canada on the treatment of patients with atrial fibrillation undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. In particular, this document provides the current views on (1) embolic/stroke risk, (2) ischemic/thrombotic cardiac risk, and (3) bleeding risk, which are pivotal for discerning the choice of antithrombotic therapy. In addition, we describe the recent advances in pharmacology, stent designs, and clinical trials relevant to the field. Ultimately, we provide expert consensus-derived recommendations, using a pragmatic approach, on the management of patients with atrial fibrillation undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention.

14 Guideline SCCT guidelines for the performance and acquisition of coronary computed tomographic angiography: A report of the society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography Guidelines Committee: Endorsed by the North American Society for Cardiovascular Imaging (NASCI). 2016

Abbara, Suhny / Blanke, Philipp / Maroules, Christopher D / Cheezum, Michael / Choi, Andrew D / Han, B Kelly / Marwan, Mohamed / Naoum, Chris / Norgaard, Bjarne L / Rubinshtein, Ronen / Schoenhagen, Paul / Villines, Todd / Leipsic, Jonathon. ·University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, United States. Electronic address: Suhny.Abbara@UTSouthwestern.edu. · Department of Radiology and Division of Cardiology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. · University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, United States. · Cardiology Service Ft. Belvoir Community Hospital, Ft. Belvoir, VA, United States. · Division of Cardiology and Department of Radiology, The George Washington University School of Medicine, Washington DC, United States. · Minneapolis Heart Institute and Children's Heart Clinic, Minneapolis, MN, United States. · Cardiology Department, University Hospital, Erlangen, Germany. · Concord Hospital, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia. · Department of Cardiology B, Aarhus University Hospital-Skejby, Aarhus N, Denmark. · Lady Davis Carmel Medical Center & Rappaport School of Medicine- Technion- IIT, Haifa, Israel. · Cardiovascular Imaging, Cleveland Clinic Lerner College of Medicine, Cleveland, OH, United States. · Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, MD, United States. ·J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr · Pubmed #27780758.

ABSTRACT: In response to recent technological advancements in acquisition techniques as well as a growing body of evidence regarding the optimal performance of coronary computed tomography angiography (coronary CTA), the Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography Guidelines Committee has produced this update to its previously established 2009 "Guidelines for the Performance of Coronary CTA" (1). The purpose of this document is to provide standards meant to ensure reliable practice methods and quality outcomes based on the best available data in order to improve the diagnostic care of patients. Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography Guidelines for the Interpretation is published separately (2). The Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography Guidelines Committee ensures compliance with all existing standards for the declaration of conflict of interest by all authors and reviewers for the purpose ofclarity and transparency.

15 Guideline CAD-RADS(TM) Coronary Artery Disease - Reporting and Data System. An expert consensus document of the Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography (SCCT), the American College of Radiology (ACR) and the North American Society for Cardiovascular Imaging (NASCI). Endorsed by the American College of Cardiology. 2016

Cury, Ricardo C / Abbara, Suhny / Achenbach, Stephan / Agatston, Arthur / Berman, Daniel S / Budoff, Matthew J / Dill, Karin E / Jacobs, Jill E / Maroules, Christopher D / Rubin, Geoffrey D / Rybicki, Frank J / Schoepf, U Joseph / Shaw, Leslee J / Stillman, Arthur E / White, Charles S / Woodard, Pamela K / Leipsic, Jonathon A. ·Miami Cardiac and Vascular Institute, Baptist Hospital of Miami, 8900 N Kendall Drive, Miami, FL, 33176, United States. Electronic address: rcury@baptisthealth.net. · Department of Radiology, 5323 Harry Hines Blvd, Dallas, TX, 75390, United States. Electronic address: Suhny.Abbara@UTSouthwestern.edu. · Friedrich-Alexander-Universität, Erlangen-Nürnberg, Department of Cardiology, Ulmenweg 18, 90154, Erlangen, Germany. Electronic address: Stephan.Achenbach@uk-erlangen.de. · Baptist Health Medical Grp, 1691 Michigan Avenue, Miami, FL, 33139, United States. Electronic address: ArthurSAg@baptisthealth.net. · Cedars-Sinai Med Center, 8700 Beverly Boulevard, Taper Building, Rm 1258, Los Angeles, CA, 90048, United States. Electronic address: bermand@cshs.org. · 1124 W. Carson Street, Torrance, CA, 90502, United States. Electronic address: mbudoff@labiomed.org. · 5841 South Maryland Ave, MC2026, Chicago, IL, 60637, United States. Electronic address: kdill@radiology.bsd.uchicago.edu. · 550 First Avenue, New York, NY, 10016, United States. Electronic address: jill.jacobs@nyumc.org. · Department of Radiology, 5323 Harry Hines Blvd, Dallas, TX, 75390, United States. Electronic address: christopher.maroules@gmail.com. · 2400 Pratt Street, Room 8020, DCRI Box 17969, Durham, NC, 27715, United States. Electronic address: grubin@duke.edu. · The Ottawa Hospital General Campus, 501 Smyth Rd, Ottawa, ON, CA K1H 8L6, Canada. Electronic address: frybicki@toh.on.ca. · 25 Courtenay Dr., Charleston, SC, 29425, United States. Electronic address: schoepf@musc.edu. · 1256 Briarcliff Rd. NE, Rm 529, Atlanta, GA, 30324, United States. Electronic address: lshaw3@emory.edu. · 1364 Clifton Road, NE, Atlanta, GA, 30322, United States. Electronic address: aestill@emory.edu. · University of Maryland, 22 S. Greene St., Baltimore, MD, 21201, United States. Electronic address: cwhite@umm.edu. · Mallinckrodt Instit of Radiology, 510 S Kingshighway Blvd, St. Louis, MO, 63110, United States. Electronic address: woodardp@mir.wustl.edu. · Department of Radiology|St. Paul's Hospital, 2nd Floor, Providence Building, 1081 Burrard Street, Vancouver, BC, V6Z 1Y6, United States. Electronic address: jleipsic@providencehealth.bc.ca. ·J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr · Pubmed #27318587.

ABSTRACT: The intent of CAD-RADS - Coronary Artery Disease Reporting and Data System is to create a standardized method to communicate findings of coronary CT angiography (coronary CTA) in order to facilitate decision-making regarding further patient management. The suggested CAD-RADS classification is applied on a per-patient basis and represents the highest-grade coronary artery lesion documented by coronary CTA. It ranges from CAD-RADS 0 (Zero) for the complete absence of stenosis and plaque to CAD-RADS 5 for the presence of at least one totally occluded coronary artery and should always be interpreted in conjunction with the impression found in the report. Specific recommendations are provided for further management of patients with stable or acute chest pain based on the CAD-RADS classification. The main goal of CAD-RADS is to standardize reporting of coronary CTA results and to facilitate communication of test results to referring physicians along with suggestions for subsequent patient management. In addition, CAD-RADS will provide a framework of standardization that may benefit education, research, peer-review and quality assurance with the potential to ultimately result in improved quality of care.

16 Guideline SCAI expert consensus statement: 2016 best practices in the cardiac catheterization laboratory: (Endorsed by the cardiological society of india, and sociedad Latino Americana de Cardiologia intervencionista; Affirmation of value by the Canadian Association of interventional cardiology-Association canadienne de cardiologie d'intervention). 2016

Naidu, Srihari S / Aronow, Herbert D / Box, Lyndon C / Duffy, Peter L / Kolansky, Daniel M / Kupfer, Joel M / Latif, Faisal / Mulukutla, Suresh R / Rao, Sunil V / Swaminathan, Rajesh V / Blankenship, James C. ·Division of Cardiology, Winthrop University Hospital, Mineola, New York. ssnaidu@winthrop.org. · Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Cardiovascular Institute, Providence, RI. · West Valley Medical Center, Caldwell, ID. · FirstHealth of the Carolinas, Pinehurst, NC. · Cardiovascular Medicine Division, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA. · University of Illinois School of Medicine-Peoria, Peoria, IL. · University of Oklahoma and VA Medical Center, Oklahoma City, OK. · University of Pittsburgh and VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System, Pittsburgh, PA. · Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC. · Weill Cornell Medical College, New York-Presbyterian Hospital, Greenberg Division of Cardiology, New York, NY. · Geisinger Medical Center, Danville, PA. ·Catheter Cardiovasc Interv · Pubmed #27137680.

ABSTRACT: -- No abstract --

17 Guideline Cardiac risk factors: new cholesterol and blood pressure management guidelines. 2014

Anthony, David / George, Paul / Eaton, Charles B. ·Memorial Hospital of Rhode Island, 111 Brewster St., Pawtucket, RI 02903, USA. david_anthony@brown.edu · Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University, 222 Richmond Street, Providence, RI 02903, USA. Paul-George@Brown.edu · Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University, 222 Richmond Street, Providence, RI 02903, USA. Charles_Eaton@Brown.edu ·FP Essent · Pubmed #24936717.

ABSTRACT: The 2013 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association cholesterol guidelines depart from low-density lipoprotein (LDL) treatment targets and recommend treating four specific patient groups with statins. Statins are the only cholesterol-lowering drugs with randomized trial evidence of benefit for preventing atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). The groups are patients with clinical ASCVD; patients ages 40 to 75 years with diabetes and LDL of 70 to 189 mg/dL but no clinical ASCVD; patients 21 years or older with LDL levels of 190 mg/dL or higher; and patients ages 40 to 75 years with LDL of 70 to 189 mg/dL without clinical ASCVD or diabetes but with 10-year ASCVD risk of 7.5% or higher. Ten-year ASCVD risk may be calculated using the Pooled Cohort Equations. The Eighth Joint National Committee (JNC 8) guidelines for blood pressure management recommend a blood pressure goal of less than 140/90 mm Hg for all adults except those 60 years or older. For the latter group, the JNC 8 recommends a systolic blood pressure goal of less than 150 mm Hg. In another notable change from prior guidelines, the JNC 8 recommends relaxing the systolic blood pressure goal for patients with diabetes and chronic kidney disease to less than 140 mm Hg from less than 130 mm Hg.

18 Guideline Screening for coronary heart disease with electrocardiography: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. 2012

Moyer, Virginia A / Anonymous40733. ·U.S. Preventive Services Task Force, Rockville, MD, USA. ·Ann Intern Med · Pubmed #22847227.

ABSTRACT: DESCRIPTION: Update of the 2004 U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommendation statement on screening for coronary heart disease (CHD). METHODS: The USPSTF reviewed new evidence on the benefits of screening with electrocardiography (ECG) in asymptomatic adults to reduce the risk for CHD events versus not screening, the effect of identifying high-risk persons on treatment to reduce risk, the accuracy of stratifying individuals into risk categories, and the harms of screening. RECOMMENDATIONS: The USPSTF recommends against screening with resting or exercise ECG for the prediction of CHD events in asymptomatic adults at low risk for CHD events (D recommendation). The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening with resting or exercise ECG for the prediction of CHD events in asymptomatic adults at intermediate or high risk for CHD events (I statement).

19 Guideline Staging of multivessel percutaneous coronary interventions: an expert consensus statement from the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions. 2012

Blankenship, James C / Moussa, Issam D / Chambers, Charles C / Brilakis, Emmanouil S / Haldis, Thomas A / Morrison, Douglas A / Dehmer, Gregory J / Anonymous1360710. ·Geisinger Medical Center, Danville, Pennsylvania 17822, USA. jblankenship@geisinger.edu ·Catheter Cardiovasc Interv · Pubmed #22072562.

ABSTRACT: Percutaneous coronary interventions (PCIs) to treat multivessel coronary artery disease (MVCAD) may involve single-vessel or multivessel interventions, performed in one or more stages. This consensus statement reviews factors that may influence choice of strategy and includes six recommendations to guide decisions regarding staging of PCI. Every patient who undergoes PCI should receive optimal therapy for coronary disease, ideally before starting the procedure. Multivessel PCI at the time of diagnostic catheterization should be considered only if informed consent included the risks and benefits of multivessel PCI and the risks and benefits of alternative treatments. When considering multivessel PCI, the interventionist should develop a strategy regarding which stenoses to treat or evaluate, and their order, method, and timing. This strategy should maximize patient benefits, minimize patient risk, and consider the factors described in this article. For planned multivessel PCI, additional vessel(s) should be treated only if the first vessel is treated successfully and if anticipated contrast and radiation doses and patient and operator conditions are favorable. After the first stage of the planned multistage PCI, the need for subsequent PCI should be reviewed before it is performed. Third party payers and quality auditors should recognize that multistage PCI for MVCAD is neither an indication of poor quality nor an attempt to increase reimbursement when performed according to recommendations in this article.

20 Guideline Does the revised appropriate use criteria for echocardiography represent an improvement over the initial criteria? A comparison between the 2011 and the 2007 appropriateness use criteria for echocardiography. 2012

Parikh, Puja B / Asheld, John / Kort, Smadar / Anonymous1900708 / Anonymous1910708. ·Department of Medicine, Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, Stony Brook University Medical Center, Stony Brook, New York 11794-8160, USA. ·J Am Soc Echocardiogr · Pubmed #22014427.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: The appropriateness use criteria (AUC) for the performance of transthoracic echocardiography were recently revised. The aims of this study were to evaluate the 2011 AUC for echocardiography for their ability to categorize indications not addressed by the older AUC and to identify trends in ordering unclassified and inappropriate studies when applying the new AUC. METHODS: We reviewed 384 consecutive adult transthoracic echocardiographic studies performed at a tertiary care teaching hospital. The appropriateness of each study was determined applying both the 2007 and the 2011 AUC. RESULTS: Among the 384 studies evaluated, 212 (55.2%) were performed in men, 261 (67.9%) were inpatient studies, and 186 (48.4%) were ordered by cardiologists. Compared with the older 2007 AUC, applying the new 2011 AUC demonstrated a lower rate of unclassified studies (5.5% vs 12.5%), higher rates of appropriate (92.2% vs 86.7%) and inappropriate (1.8% vs 0.8%) studies, and no significant change in the rate of uncertain studies (0.5% vs 0.0%). Of the 5.5% of studies that continued to be unclassified despite the application of the more extensive 2011 AUC, common indications included preoperative evaluation for non-transplantation surgery in patients with coronary artery disease, postoperative assessment of thoracic aortic surgery in the absence of any clinical change, and reassessment of ventricular function after revascularization in the absence of acute coronary syndromes. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with the 2007 AUC for transthoracic echocardiography, application of the recently revised 2011 criteria leads to a significant decrease in the number of studies that are not classified, demonstrating that the AUC revision was successful in achieving the goal of addressing more clinical indications.

21 Guideline Clinical expert consensus document on standards for acquisition, measurement and reporting of intravascular ultrasound regression/progression studies. 2011

Mintz, Gary S / Garcia-Garcia, Hector M / Nicholls, Stephen J / Weissman, Neil J / Bruining, Nico / Crowe, Tim / Tardif, Jean-Claude / Serruys, Patrick W. ·Cardiovascular Research Foundation, New York, NY, USA. ·EuroIntervention · Pubmed #21518687.

ABSTRACT: Atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality despite the widespread use of established medical therapies. This has prompted the search to identify new therapeutic approaches to achieve more effective prevention of cardiovascular events. Considerable interest has focused on the role of surrogate markers of therapeutic efficacy in the early evaluation of novel anti-atherosclerotic therapies. Monitoring changes in the extent of coronary atherosclerosis with intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) has been increasingly employed in clinical trials to assess progression and regression of atherosclerosis. This is based on the pivotal role that atherosclerotic plaque plays in the natural history of cardiovascular disease and the acceptance of validated arterial imaging approaches including coronary angiography and carotid intimal-medial thickness by regulatory authorities. The ability to generate high-resolution imaging of the entire thickness of the coronary artery wall permits evaluation of the entire burden of atherosclerotic plaque. In order to understand the differences, similarities, limitations and pitfalls of the IVUS technique among different academic core laboratories, a number of meetings of representatives from these groups were convened in 2007 and 2008. This document is the result of those IVUS methodology meetings that assembled experts from core laboratories to discuss standards for image acquisition, definitions, criteria, analyses, and primary and secondary endpoints.

22 Guideline Guideline for minimizing radiation exposure during acquisition of coronary artery calcium scans with the use of multidetector computed tomography: a report by the Society for Atherosclerosis Imaging and Prevention Tomographic Imaging and Prevention Councils in collaboration with the Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography. 2011

Voros, Szilard / Rivera, Juan J / Berman, Daniel S / Blankstein, Ron / Budoff, Matthew J / Cury, Ricardo C / Desai, Milind Y / Dey, Damini / Halliburton, Sandra S / Hecht, Harvey S / Nasir, Khurram / Santos, Raul D / Shapiro, Michael D / Taylor, Allen J / Valeti, Uma S / Young, Phillip M / Weissman, Gaby / Anonymous650689 / Anonymous660689. ·Piedmont Heart Institute, Piedmont Hospital, 1968 Peachtree Rd NW, Atlanta, GA 30309, USA. szilard.voros@piemont.org ·J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr · Pubmed #21398199.

ABSTRACT: Coronary artery calcium (CAC) scanning is an important tool for risk stratification in intermediate-risk, asymptomatic subjects without previous coronary disease. However, the clinical benefit of improved risk prediction needs to be balanced against the risk of the use of ionizing radiation. Although there is increasing emphasis on the need to obtain CAC scans at low-radiation exposure to the patient, very few practical documents exist to aid laboratories and health care professionals on how to obtain such low-radiation scans. The Tomographic Imaging Council of the Society for Atherosclerosis Imaging and Prevention, in collaboration with the Prevention Council and the Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography, created a task force and writing group to generate a practical document to address parameters that can be influenced by careful attention to image acquisition. Patient selection for CAC scanning should be based on national guidelines. It is recommended that laboratories performing CAC examinations monitor radiation exposure (dose-length-product [DLP]) and effective radiation dose (E) in all patients. DLP should be <200 mGy × cm; E should average 1.0-1.5 mSv and should be <3.0 mSv. On most scanner platforms, CAC imaging should be performed in an axial mode with prospective electrocardiographic triggering, using tube voltage of 120 kVp. Tube current should be carefully selected on the basis of patient size, potentially using chest lateral width measured on the topogram. Scan length should be limited for the coverage of the heart only. When patients and imaging parameters are selected appropriately, CAC scanning can be performed with low levels of radiation exposure.

23 Guideline The role of radionuclide myocardial perfusion imaging for asymptomatic individuals. 2011

Hendel, Robert C / Abbott, Brian G / Bateman, Timothy M / Blankstein, Ron / Calnon, Dennis A / Leppo, Jeffrey A / Maddahi, Jamshid / Schumaecker, Matthew M / Shaw, Leslee J / Ward, R Parker / Wolinsky, David G / Anonymous2920682. ·University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL, USA. ·J Nucl Cardiol · Pubmed #21181519.

ABSTRACT: -- No abstract --

24 Guideline Management of platelet-directed pharmacotherapy in patients with atherosclerotic coronary artery disease undergoing elective endoscopic gastrointestinal procedures. 2009

Becker, Richard C / Scheiman, James / Dauerman, Harold L / Spencer, Frederick / Rao, Sunil / Sabatine, Marc / Johnson, David A / Chan, Frances / Abraham, Neena S / Quigley, Eamonn M M / Anonymous1490644 / Anonymous1500644. ·Duke University Medical Center, Duke Clinical Research Institute, Durham, NC 27705, USA. becke021@mc.duke.edu ·J Am Coll Cardiol · Pubmed #19942393.

ABSTRACT: The periprocedural management of patients with atherosclerotic coronary heart disease, including those who have heart disease and those who are undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention and stent placement who might require temporary interruption of platelet-directed pharmacotherapy for the purpose of an elective endoscopic gastrointestinal procedure, is a common clinical scenario in daily practice. Herein, we summarize the available information that can be employed for making management decisions and provide general guidance for risk assessment.

25 Guideline Using nontraditional risk factors in coronary heart disease risk assessment: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. 2009

Anonymous11891255. ·U.S. Preventive Services Task Force, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Rockville, Maryland, USA. ·Ann Intern Med · Pubmed #19805770.

ABSTRACT: DESCRIPTION: New recommendation from the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) on the use of nontraditional, or novel, risk factors in assessing the coronary heart disease (CHD) risk of asymptomatic persons. METHODS: Systematic reviews were conducted of literature since 1996 on 9 proposed nontraditional markers of CHD risk: high-sensitivity C-reactive protein, ankle-brachial index, leukocyte count, fasting blood glucose, periodontal disease, carotid intima-media thickness, coronary artery calcification score on electron-beam computed tomography, homocysteine, and lipoprotein(a). The reviews followed a hierarchical approach aimed at determining which factors could practically and definitively reassign persons assessed as intermediate-risk according to their Framingham score to either a high-risk or low-risk strata, and thereby improve outcomes by means of aggressive risk-factor modification in those newly assigned to the high-risk stratum. RECOMMENDATION: The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of using the nontraditional risk factors studied to screen asymptomatic men and women with no history of CHD to prevent CHD events. (I statement).

Next