This guideline continues the ACC and AHA effort to design a comprehensive yet succinct compilation of practical guidance for the primary prevention of ASCVD and to promote optimal dissemination of information by using concise language and formatting. The recommendations listed in this guideline are evidence based and supported by an extensive evidence review. A search for literature derived from 1.2. Organization of the Writing Committee The writing committee consisted of clinicians, cardiologists, health services researchers, epidemiologists, internists, nurses, and a lay representative. The writing committee included representatives from the ACC and AHA. Appendix 2 of the present document lists writing committee members' relevant RWI. For the purposes of full transparency, the writing committee members' comprehensive disclosure information is available online.
Aim:
The guideline for coronary artery revascularization replaces the 2011 coronary artery bypass graft surgery and the 2011 and 2015 percutaneous coronary intervention guidelines, providing a patient-centric approach to guide clinicians in the treatment of patients with significant coronary artery disease undergoing coronary revascularization as well as the supporting documentation to encourage their use.
Methods:
A comprehensive literature search was conducted from May 2019 to September 2019, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Collaboration, CINHL Complete, and other relevant databases. Additional relevant studies, published through May 2021, were also considered.
Structure:
Coronary artery disease remains a leading cause of morbidity and mortality globally. Coronary revascularization is an important therapeutic option when managing patients with coronary artery disease. The 2021 coronary artery revascularization guideline provides recommendations based on contemporary evidence for the treatment of these patients. The recommendations present an evidence-based approach to managing patients with coronary artery disease who are being considered for coronary revascularization, with the intent to improve quality of care and align with patients’ interests.
Aim:
The executive summary of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association/Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions coronary artery revascularization guideline provides the top 10 items readers should know about the guideline. In the full guideline, the recommendations replace the 2011 coronary artery bypass graft surgery guideline and the 2011 and 2015 percutaneous coronary intervention guidelines. This summary offers a patient-centric approach to guide clinicians in the treatment of patients with significant coronary artery disease undergoing coronary revascularization, as well as the supporting documentation to encourage their use.
Methods:
A comprehensive literature search was conducted from May 2019 to September 2019, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Collaboration, CINHL Complete, and other relevant databases. Additional relevant studies, published through May 2021, were also considered.
Structure:
Recommendations from the earlier percutaneous coronary intervention and coronary artery bypass graft surgery guidelines have been updated with new evidence to guide clinicians in caring for patients undergoing coronary revascularization. This summary includes recommendations, tables, and figures from the full guideline that relate to the top 10 take-home messages. The reader is referred to the full guideline for graphical flow charts, supportive text, and tables with additional details about the rationale for and implementation of each recommendation, and the evidence tables detailing the data considered in the development of this guideline.
Cardiopulmonary resuscitation is a lifesaving technique for victims of sudden cardiac arrest. Despite advances in resuscitation science, basic life support remains a critical factor in determining outcomes. The American Heart Association recommendations for adult basic life support incorporate the most recently published evidence and serve as the basis for education and training for laypeople and healthcare providers who perform cardiopulmonary resuscitation.
Background
Four direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) have been brought to market for the treatment of nonvalvular atrial fibrillation and venous thromboembolism. Many forces, including numerous positive trial results, emerging safety concerns, marketing and promotion may shape DOAC adoption by providers. However, relatively little is known regarding their ambulatory utilization compared with warfarin, as well as the degree to which they have decreased undertreatment of atrial fibrillation.
Method
We used the IMS Health National Disease and Therapeutic Index, a nationally representative audit of outpatient office visits, to estimate the use of warfarin and DOACs between 2009 and 2014.
Results
Overall, visits with anticoagulation use increased from 2.05 (95% CI 1.82-2.27) to 2.83 (95% CI 2.49-3.17) million (M) quarterly visits (p<0.001). Of these, DOAC use has grown to 4.21M (95% CI 3.63M-4.79M; 38.2% of total) treatment visits in 2014 since their introduction in 2010. Use of all oral anticoagulants in treatment visits for atrial fibrillation has increased from 0.88M (95% CI 0.74M-1.02M) to 1.72M (95% CI 1.47M -1.97M; p<0.001), with similar DOAC and warfarin use in 2014. Atrial Fibrillation visits with anticoagulant use increased from 51.9% (95% CI 50.4%-53.8%) to 66.9% (95% CI 65.0%-69.3%) between 2009 and 2014 (p<0.001). In 2014, rivaroxaban was the most commonly prescribed DOAC for atrial fibrillation (47.9% of office visits), followed by apixaban (26.5%) and dabigatran (25.5%).
Conclusions
DOACs have been rapidly adopted, matching the use of warfarin, and are associated with increased use of oral anticoagulation for patients with atrial fibrillation.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.