Results of a Swiss consensus conference on coronary revascularization. Members of the Swiss Society of Cardiology, Swiss Society of Internal Medicine, Swiss Society of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery.

Details

Serval ID
serval:BIB_21222B56531A
Type
Article: article from journal or magazin.
Publication sub-type
Review (review): journal as complete as possible of one specific subject, written based on exhaustive analyses from published work.
Collection
Publications
Institution
Title
Results of a Swiss consensus conference on coronary revascularization. Members of the Swiss Society of Cardiology, Swiss Society of Internal Medicine, Swiss Society of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery.
Journal
Schweizerische Medizinische Wochenschrift
Author(s)
Cardiovascular Surgery
Working group(s)
Members of the Swiss Society of Cardiology, Swiss Society of Internal Medicine, Swiss Society of Thoracic
ISSN
0036-7672
Publication state
Published
Issued date
1997
Peer-reviewed
Oui
Volume
127
Number
27-28
Pages
1191-1210
Language
english
Notes
Publication types: Consensus Development Conference ; Journal Article ; Review - Publication Status: ppublish
Abstract
Percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (PTCA) and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) are major coronary revascularization procedures to relieve angina, prevent myocardial infarction and improve long-term survival. The quality of their indication is widely discussed at present. The Swiss Societies of Cardiology, of Internal Medicine and of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery decided to set up a consensus conference to evaluate the indications for coronary revascularization. For this a modified RAND approach (Delphi method) was used. An expert panel rated 992 indications for coronary revascularization twice for appropriateness (more benefits than risks for the patient), and once for necessity (procedure has to be offered or discussed with the patient). In the panel an agreement percentage of 65% was noted. In 35% we observed neither agreement nor disagreement, and there was almost no disagreement among the panelists. The results of the necessity ratings were 48% agreement, 49% indetermination and 3% disagreement. The average median rating for appropriateness on a 1-9 point scale (1 = extremely inappropriate, 9 = extremely appropriate or necessary) was 7.7 over all given single indications and 7.2 for necessity. The results of appropriateness and necessity ratings presented in this paper reflect the findings of a 15-member Swiss panel.
Keywords
Angioplasty, Transluminal, Percutaneous Coronary, Coronary Artery Bypass, Coronary Disease/therapy, Humans, Switzerland
Pubmed
Create date
14/02/2008 14:18
Last modification date
20/08/2019 12:57
Usage data