2021 ACC/AHA/SVM/ACP Advanced Training Statement on Vascular Medicine (Revision of the 2004 ACC/ACP/SCAI/SVMB/SVS Clinical Competence Statement on Vascular Medicine and Catheter-Based Peripheral Vascular Interventions).
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Creager MA
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8221116 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC11307449 | biostudies-literature
Project description:This case series shows how the 2021 ACC/AHA/SCAI guideline for coronary artery revascularization can be used to decide between revascularization or optimal medical therapy to reduce mortality or cardiovascular events in selected subsets of patients with stable ischemic heart disease and complex coronary disease with or without left ventricular dysfunction. (Level of Difficulty: Advanced.).
| S-EPMC8743811 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The American College of Cardiology (ACC) Foundation, along with key specialty and subspecialty societies, conducted an appropriate use review of stress testing and anatomic diagnostic procedures for risk assessment and evaluation of known or suspected chronic coronary disease (CCD), formerly referred to as stable ischemic heart disease (SIHD). This document reflects an updating of the prior Appropriate Use Criteria (AUC) published for radionuclide imaging, stress echocardiography (echo), calcium scoring, coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA), stress cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR), and invasive coronary angiography for SIHD. This is in keeping with the commitment to revise and refine the AUC on a frequent basis. As with the prior version of this document, rating of test modalities is provided side-by-side for a given clinical scenario. These ratings are explicitly not considered competitive rankings due to the limited availability of comparative evidence, patient variability, and the range of capabilities available in any given local setting1-4.This version of the AUC for CCD is a focused update of the prior version of the AUC for SIHD4. Key changes beyond the updated ratings based on new evidence include the following: 1. Clinical scenarios related to preoperative testing were removed and will be incorporated into another AUC document under development. 2. Some clinical scenarios and tables were removed in an effort to simplify the selection of clinical scenarios. Additionally, the flowchart of tables has been reorganized, and all clinical scenario tables can now be reached by answering a limited number of clinical questions about the patient, starting with the patient's symptom status. 3. Several clinical scenarios have been revised to incorporate changes in other documents such as pretest probability assessment, atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) risk assessment, syncope, and others. ASCVD risk factors that are not accounted for in contemporary risk calculators have been added as modifiers to certain clinical scenarios. The 64 clinical scenarios rated in this document are limited to the detection and risk assessment of CCD and were drawn from common applications or anticipated uses, as well as from current clinical practice guidelines.5 These clinical scenarios do not specifically address patients having acute chest pain episodes. They may, however, be applicable in the inpatient setting if the patient is not having an acute coronary syndrome and warrants evaluation for CCD.Using standardized methodology, clinical scenarios were developed to describe common patient encounters in clinical practice focused on common applications and anticipated uses of testing for CCD. Where appropriate, the scenarios were developed on the basis of the most current ACC/American Heart Association guidelines. A separate, independent rating panel scored the clinical scenarios in this document on a scale of 1 to 9, following a modified Delphi process consistent with the recently updated AUC development methodology. Scores of 7 to 9 indicate that a modality is considered appropriate for the clinical scenario presented, midrange scores of 4 to 6 indicate that a modality may be appropriate for the clinical scenario, and scores of 1 to 3 indicate that a modality is rarely appropriate.
| S-EPMC10585920 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundSince the release of the 2013 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) guidelines, significant controversy has surrounded the applicability of the new cholesterol guidelines and the Pooled Cohort Equations. In this present study, we investigated whether eligibility for statin therapy determined by the 2013 ACC/AHA guidelines on the management of blood cholesterol is better aligned with the progression of coronary artery calcification (CAC) detected by coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) than the previously recommended 2004 National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) Adult Treatment Panel (ATP) III guidelines.Methods and resultsWe enrolled 1246 asymptomatic participants who underwent repeated CAC score measurement during routine health examinations. The CAC score progression was defined as either incident CAC in a population free of CAC at baseline or increase ?2.5 units between the baseline and final square root of CAC scores participants who had detectable CAC at baseline examination. Application of the ACC/AHA guidelines to the study population increased the proportion of statin-eligible subjects from 20.5% (according to ATP III) to 54.7%. Statin-eligible subjects, as defined by ACC/AHA guidelines, showed a higher odds ratio for CAC score progression than those considered statin eligible according to ATP III guidelines (2.73 [95% CI, 2.07-3.61] vs 2.00 [95% CI, 1.49-2.68]).ConclusionsCompared with the ATP III guidelines, the new ACC/AHA guidelines result in better discrimination of subjects with cardiovascular risk detected by CAC score progression in an Asian population.
| S-EPMC5015275 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe usefulness of the 2013 ACC/AHA guidelines for the management of blood cholesterol in the Asian population remains controversial. In this study, we investigated whether eligibility for statin therapy determined by the 2013 ACC/AHA guidelines is better aligned with the presence of subclinical coronary atherosclerosis detected by CCTA (coronary computed tomography angiography) compared to the previously recommended 2004 NCEP ATP III guidelines.MethodsWe collected the data from 5,837 asymptomatic subjects who underwent CCTA using MDCT during routine health examinations. Based on risk factor assessment and lipid data, we determined guideline-based eligibility for statin therapy according to the 2013 ACC/AHA and 2004 NCEP ATP III guidelines. We defined the presence and severity of subclinical coronary atherosclerosis detected in CCTA according to the presence of significant coronary artery stenosis (defined as >50% stenosis), plaques, and the degree of coronary calcification.ResultsAs compared to the 2004 ATP III guidelines, a significantly higher proportion of subjects with significant coronary stenosis (61.8% vs. 33.8%), plaques (52.3% vs. 24.7%), and higher CACS (CACS >100, 63.6% vs. 26.5%) was assigned to statin therapy using the 2013 ACC/AHA guidelines (P < .001 for all variables). The area under the curves of the pooled cohort equation of the new guidelines in detecting significant stenosis, plaques, and higher CACS were significantly higher than those of the Framingham risk calculator.ConclusionsCompared to the previous ATP III guidelines, the 2013 ACC/AHA guidelines were more sensitive in identifying subjects with subclinical coronary atherosclerosis detected by CCTA in an Asian population.
| S-EPMC4570667 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Electronic health record data were analyzed to estimate the number of statin-eligible adults with the 2013 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association cholesterol guidelines not taking statin therapy and the impact of recommended statin therapy on 10-year atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD10 ) events. Adults aged 21 to 80 years in an outpatient network with ≥1 clinic visit(s) from January 2011 to June 2014 with data to calculate ASCVD10 were eligible. Moderate-intensity statin therapy was assumed to lower low-density lipoprotein cholesterol by 30% and high-intensity therapy was assumed to reduce low-density lipoprotein cholesterol by 50%. ASCVD events were assumed to decline 22% for each 39 mg/dL decline in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol. Among 411,768 adults, 260,434 (63.2%) were not taking statins and 103,478 (39.7%) were eligible for a statin, including 79,069 (76.4%) patients with hypertension. Estimated ASCVD10 events were 18,781 without and 13,328 with statin therapy, a 29.0% relative and 5.3% absolute risk reduction with a number needed to treat of 19. The 2013 cholesterol guidelines are a relatively efficient approach to reducing ASCVD in untreated, statin-eligible adults who often have concomitant hypertension.
| S-EPMC8031852 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background Studies have demonstrated that the current US guidelines based on American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) Pooled Cohort Equations Risk Calculator may underestimate risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease ( CVD ) in certain high-risk individuals, therefore missing opportunities for intensive therapy and preventing CVD events. Similarly, the guidelines may overestimate risk in low risk populations resulting in unnecessary statin therapy. We used Machine Learning ( ML ) to tackle this problem. Methods and Results We developed a ML Risk Calculator based on Support Vector Machines ( SVM s) using a 13-year follow up data set from MESA (the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis) of 6459 participants who were atherosclerotic CVD-free at baseline. We provided identical input to both risk calculators and compared their performance. We then used the FLEMENGHO study (the Flemish Study of Environment, Genes and Health Outcomes) to validate the model in an external cohort. ACC / AHA Risk Calculator, based on 7.5% 10-year risk threshold, recommended statin to 46.0%. Despite this high proportion, 23.8% of the 480 "Hard CVD " events occurred in those not recommended statin, resulting in sensitivity 0.76, specificity 0.56, and AUC 0.71. In contrast, ML Risk Calculator recommended only 11.4% to take statin, and only 14.4% of "Hard CVD " events occurred in those not recommended statin, resulting in sensitivity 0.86, specificity 0.95, and AUC 0.92. Similar results were found for prediction of "All CVD " events. Conclusions The ML Risk Calculator outperformed the ACC/AHA Risk Calculator by recommending less drug therapy, yet missing fewer events. Additional studies are underway to validate the ML model in other cohorts and to explore its ability in short-term CVD risk prediction.
| S-EPMC6404456 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Exclusion of the left atrial appendage to reduce thromboembolic risk related to atrial fibrillation was first performed surgically in 1949. Over the past 2 decades, the field of transcatheter endovascular left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) has rapidly expanded, with a myriad of devices approved or in clinical development. The number of LAAC procedures performed in the United States and worldwide has increased exponentially since the Food and Drug Administration approval of the WATCHMAN (Boston Scientific) device in 2015. The Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions (SCAI) has previously published statements in 2015 and 2016 providing societal overview of the technology and institutional and operator requirements for LAAC. Since then, results from several important clinical trials and registries have been published, technical expertise and clinical practice have matured over time, and the device and imaging technologies have evolved. Therefore, SCAI prioritized the development of an updated consensus statement to provide recommendations on contemporary, evidence-based best practices for transcatheter LAAC focusing on endovascular devices.
| S-EPMC11307869 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The prevalence of calcification in obstructive coronary artery disease is on the rise. Percutaneous coronary intervention of these calcified lesions is associated with increased short-term and long-term risks. To optimize percutaneous coronary intervention results, there is an expanding array of treatment modalities geared toward calcium modification prior to stent implantation. The Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, herein, puts forth an expert consensus document regarding methods to identify types of calcified coronary lesions, a central algorithm to help guide use of the various calcium modification strategies, tips for when using each treatment modality, and a look at future studies and trials for treating this challenging lesion subset.
| S-EPMC11307856 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:The 2017 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) blood pressure (BP) guideline provides updated recommendations for antihypertensive medication initiation and intensification. OBJECTIVES:Determine the risk for cardiovascular disease (CVD) events among adults recommended and not recommended antihypertensive medication initiation or intensification by the 2017 ACC/AHA BP guideline. METHODS:The authors analyzed data for black and white REGARDS (REasons for Geographic And Racial Differences in Stroke) study participants (age ?45 years). Systolic BP (SBP) and diastolic BP (DBP) were measured twice at baseline (2003 to 2007) and averaged. Participants not taking (n = 14,039) and taking (n = 15,179) antihypertensive medication were categorized according to their recommendations for antihypertensive medication initiation and intensification by the 2017 ACC/AHA guideline. Overall, 4,094 CVD events (stroke, coronary heart disease, and heart failure) occurred by December 31, 2014. RESULTS:Among participants not taking antihypertensive medication, 34.4% were recommended pharmacological antihypertensive treatment initiation. The CVD event rate per 1,000 person-years among participants recommended antihypertensive medication initiation with SBP/DBP ?140/90 mm Hg was 22.7 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 20.3 to 25.0). Among participants with SBP/DBP 130 to 139/80 to 89 mm Hg, the CVD event rate was 20.5 (95% CI: 18.5 to 22.6) and 3.4 (95% CI: 2.4 to 4.4) for those recommended and not recommended antihypertensive medication initiation, respectively. Among participants taking antihypertensive medication, 62.8% were recommended treatment intensification. The CVD event rate per 1,000 person-years among participants recommended treatment intensification was 33.6 (95% CI: 31.5 to 35.6) and 22.4 (95% CI: 20.8 to 23.9) for those with SBP/DBP ?140/90 mm Hg and 130 to 139/80 to 89 mm Hg, respectively. CONCLUSIONS:Implementing the 2017 ACC/AHA guideline would direct antihypertensive medication initiation and intensification to adults with high CVD risk.
| S-EPMC6346270 | biostudies-literature