PICS/AEPC/APPCS/CSANZ/SCAI/SOLACI: Expert Consensus Statement on Cardiac Catheterization for Pediatric Patients and Adults With Congenital Heart Disease.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Holzer RJ
PROVIDER: S-EPMC11307799 | biostudies-literature | 2024 Jan
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
PICS/AEPC/APPCS/CSANZ/SCAI/SOLACI: Expert Consensus Statement on Cardiac Catheterization for Pediatric Patients and Adults With Congenital Heart Disease.
Holzer Ralf J RJ Bergersen Lisa L Thomson John J Aboulhosn Jamil J Aggarwal Varun V Akagi Teiji T Alwi Mazeni M Armstrong Aimee K AK Bacha Emile E Benson Lee L Bökenkamp Regina R Carminati Mario M Dalvi Bharat B DiNardo James J Fagan Thomas T Fetterly Kenneth K Ing Frank F FF Kenny Damien D Kim Dennis D Kish Emily E O'Byrne Michael M O'Donnell Clare C Pan Xiangbin X Paolillo Joseph J Pedra Carlos C Peirone Alejandro A Singh Harsimran S HS Søndergaard Lars L Hijazi Ziyad M ZM
Journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions 20231215 1
Similar Datasets
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: Not available
| S-EPMC11307953 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Stent failure remains the major drawback to the use of coronary stents as a revascularization strategy. Recent advances in imaging have substantially improved our understanding of the mechanisms underlying these occurrences, which have in common numerous clinical risk factors and mechanical elements at the time of stent implantation. In-stent restenosis remains a common clinical problem despite numerous improvements in-stent design and polymer coatings over the past 2 decades. It generates significant health care cost and is associated with an increased risk of death and rehospitalization. Stent thrombosis causes abrupt closure of the stented artery and therefore carries a high risk of myocardial infarction and death. This Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions (SCAI) Expert Consensus Statement suggests updated practical algorithmic approaches to in-stent restenosis and stent thrombosis. A pragmatic outline of assessment and management of patients presenting with stent failure is presented. A new SCAI classification that is time-sensitive with mechanistic implications of in-stent restenosis is proposed. Emphasis is placed on frequent use of intracoronary imaging and assessment of timing to determine the precise etiology because that information is crucial to guide selection of the best treatment option. SCAI recommends image-guided coronary stenting at the time of initial implantation to minimize the occurrence of stent failure. When in-stent restenosis and stent thrombosis are encountered, imaging should be strongly considered to optimize the subsequent approach.
| S-EPMC11308135 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC11307489 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) remains a leading cause of morbidity and mortality in the United States. Timely reperfusion with primary percutaneous coronary intervention is associated with improved outcomes. The Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions puts forth this expert consensus document regarding best practices for cardiac catheterization laboratory team readiness, arterial access with an algorithm to help determine proper arterial access in STEMI, and diagnostic angiography. This consensus statement highlights the strengths and limitations of various diagnostic and therapeutic interventions to access and treat a patient with STEMI in the catheterization laboratory, reviews different options to manage large thrombus burden during STEMI, and reviews the management of STEMI across the spectrum of various anatomical and clinical circumstances.
| S-EPMC11624394 | biostudies-literature
Project description:An American Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association (AHPBA)-sponsored consensus meeting of expert panellists met on 15 January 2014 to review current evidence on the management of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC) in order to establish practice guidelines and to agree on consensus statements. The treatment of ICC requires a coordinated, multidisciplinary approach to optimize survival. Biopsy is not necessary if the surgeon suspects ICC and is planning curative resection, although biopsy should be obtained before systemic or locoregional therapies are initiated. Assessment of resectability is best accomplished using cross-sectional imaging [computed tomography (CT) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)], but the role of positron emission tomography (PET) is unclear. Resectability in ICC is defined by the ability to completely remove the disease while leaving an adequate liver remnant. Extrahepatic disease, multiple bilobar or multicentric tumours, and lymph node metastases beyond the primary echelon are contraindications to resection. Regional lymphadenectomy should be considered a standard part of surgical therapy. In patients with high-risk features, the routine use of diagnostic laparoscopy is recommended. The preoperative diagnosis of combined hepatocellular carcinoma and cholangiocarcinoma (cHCC-CC) by imaging studies is extremely difficult. Surgical resection remains the mainstay of treatment, but survival is worse than in HCC alone. There are no adequately powered, randomized Phase III trials that can provide definitive recommendations for adjuvant therapy for ICC. Patients with high-risk features (lymphovascular invasion, multicentricity or satellitosis, large tumours) should be encouraged to enrol in clinical trials and to consider adjuvant therapy. Cisplatin plus gemcitabine represents the standard-of-care, front-line systemic therapy for metastatic ICC. Genomic analyses of biliary cancers support the development of targeted therapeutic interventions.
| S-EPMC4527852 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to enumerate and categorize quality metrics relevant to the pediatric/congenital cardiac catheterization laboratory (PCCL).BackgroundDiagnostic and interventional catheterization procedures are an increasingly important part of the care of young patients with cardiac disease. Measurement of the performance of PCCL programs in a stringent and consistent fashion is a crucial step toward improving outcomes. To the best of our knowledge, a systematic evaluation of current quality metrics in PCCL has not been performed previously.MethodsPotential metrics were evaluated by: 1) a systematic review of peer-reviewed research; 2) a review of metrics from organizations interested in quality improvement, patient safety, and/or PCCL programs; and 3) a survey of U.S. PCCL cardiologists. Collected metrics were grouped on 2 dimensions: 1) Institute of Medicine domains; and 2) the Donabedian structure/process/outcome framework. Survey responses were dichotomized between favorable and unfavorable responses and then compared within and between categories.ResultsIn the systematic review, 6 metrics were identified (from 9 publications), all focused on safety either as an outcome (adverse events [AEs], mortality, and failure to rescue along with radiation exposure) or as a structure (procedure volume or operator experience). Four organizations measure quality metrics of PCCL programs, of which only 1 publicly reports data. For the survey, 229 cardiologists from 118 hospital programs responded (66% of individuals and 72% of hospital programs). The highest favorable ratings were for safety metrics (p < 0.001), of which major AEs, failure to rescue, and procedure-specific AEs had the highest ratings. Of respondents, 67% stated that current risk adjustment were not effective. Favorability ratings for hospital characteristics, PCCL characteristics, and quality improvement processes were significantly lower than for safety and less consistent within categories.ConclusionsThere is a limited number of PCCL quality metrics, primarily focused on safety. Confidence in current risk adjustment methodology is low. The knowledge gaps identified should guide future research in the development of new quality metrics.
| S-EPMC7773132 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC7867902 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundReporting guidelines for different study designs are currently available to report studies with accuracy and transparency. There is a need to develop supplementary guideline items that are specific to areas within Pediatric Dentistry. This study aims to develop Reporting stAndards for research in PedIatric Dentistry (RAPID) guidelines using a pre-defined expert consensus-based Delphi process.MethodsThe development of the RAPID guidelines was based on the Guidance for Developers of Health Research Reporting Guidelines. Following a comprehensive search of the literature, the Executive Group identified ten themes in Pediatric Dentistry and compiled a draft checklist of items under each theme. The themes were categorized as: General, Oral Medicine, Pathology and Radiology, Children with Special Health Care Needs, Sedation and Hospital Dentistry, Behavior Guidance, Dental Caries, Preventive and Restorative Dentistry, Pulp Therapy, Traumatology, and Interceptive Orthodontics. A RAPID Delphi Group (RDG) was formed comprising of 69 members from 15 countries across six continents. Items were scored using a 9-point rating Likert scale. Items achieving a score of seven and above, marked by at least 70% of RDG members were accepted into the RAPID checklist items. Weighted mean scores were calculated for each item. Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05 and one-way ANOVA was used to calculate the difference in the weighted mean scores between the themes.ResultsThe final RAPID checklist comprised of 128 items that were finalized and approved by the RDG members in the online consensus meeting. The percentage for high scores (scores 7 to 9) ranged from 69.57 to 100% for individual items. The overall weighted mean score of the final items ranged from 7.51 to 8.28 (out of 9) and the difference was statistically significant between the themes (p < 0.05).ConclusionsThe RAPID statement provides guidance to researchers, authors, reviewers and editors, to ensure that all elements relevant to particular studies are adequately reported.
| S-EPMC8299173 | biostudies-literature