title: Appropriate Use Criteria for Coronary Revascularization and Trends in Utilization, Patient Selection, and Appropriateness of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  Appropriate Use Criteria for Coronary Revascularization were developed to critically evaluate and improve patient selection for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). National trends in the appropriateness of PCI have not been examined.
  
  
  OBJECTIVE
  To examine trends in PCI utilization, patient selection, and procedural appropriateness following the introduction of Appropriate Use Criteria.
  
  
  METHODS
  Multicenter, longitudinal, cross-sectional analysis of patients undergoing PCI between July 1, 2009, and December 31, 2014, at hospitals continuously participating in the National Cardiovascular Data Registry CathPCI registry over the study period.
  
  
  METHODS
  Proportion of nonacute PCIs classified as inappropriate at the patient and hospital level using the 2012 Appropriate Use Criteria for Coronary Revascularization.
  
  
  RESULTS
  A total of 2.7 million PCI procedures from 766 hospitals were included. Annual PCI volume of acute indications was consistent over the study period (377,540 in 2010; 374,543 in 2014), but the volume of nonacute PCIs decreased from 89,704 in 2010 to 59,375 in 2014. Among patients undergoing nonacute PCI, there were significant increases in angina severity (Canadian Cardiovascular Society grade III/IV angina, 15.8% in 2010 and 38.4% in 2014), use of antianginal medications prior to PCI (at least 2 antianginal medications, 22.3% in 2010 and 35.1% in 2014), and high-risk findings on noninvasive testing (22.2% in 2010 and 33.2% in 2014) (P < .001 for all), but only modest increases in multivessel coronary artery disease (43.7% in 2010 and 47.5% in 2014, P < .001). The proportion of nonacute PCIs classified as inappropriate decreased from 26.2% (95% CI, 25.8%-26.6%) to 13.3% (95% CI, 13.1%-13.6%), and the absolute number of inappropriate PCIs decreased from 21,781 to 7921. Hospital-level variation in the proportion of PCIs classified as inappropriate persisted over the study period (median, 12.6% [interquartile range, 5.9%-22.9%] in 2014).
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Since the publication of the Appropriate Use Criteria for Coronary Revascularization in 2009, there have been significant reductions in the volume of nonacute PCI. The proportion of nonacute PCIs classified as inappropriate has declined, although hospital-level variation in inappropriate PCI persists.
authors.affiliation: Section of Cardiovascular Medicine, Department of Medicine, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut2Center for Outcomes Research and Evaluation, Yale-New Haven Hospital, New Haven, Connecticut.
authors.forename: Nihar R
authors.initials: NR
authors.lastname: Desai
authors.affiliation: Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, VA Eastern Colorado Health Care System, Denver4Department of Medicine, University of Colorado School of Medicine at the Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora.
authors.forename: Steven M
authors.initials: SM
authors.lastname: Bradley
authors.affiliation: Center for Outcomes Research and Evaluation, Yale-New Haven Hospital, New Haven, Connecticut.
authors.forename: Craig S
authors.initials: CS
authors.lastname: Parzynski
authors.affiliation: Department of Medicine, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor.
authors.forename: Brahmajee K
authors.initials: BK
authors.lastname: Nallamothu
authors.affiliation: Department of Cardiovascular Research, Saint Luke's Mid America Heart Institute, Kansas City, Missouri7Department of Medicine, University of Missouri-Kansas City.
authors.forename: Paul S
authors.initials: PS
authors.lastname: Chan
authors.affiliation: Department of Cardiovascular Research, Saint Luke's Mid America Heart Institute, Kansas City, Missouri7Department of Medicine, University of Missouri-Kansas City.
authors.forename: John A
authors.initials: JA
authors.lastname: Spertus
authors.affiliation: Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, Duke Heart Center, Duke Clinical Research Institute, Duke Medicine, Durham, North Carolina.
authors.forename: Manesh R
authors.initials: MR
authors.lastname: Patel
authors.affiliation: Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut.
authors.forename: Jeremy
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Ader
authors.affiliation: Department of Medicine, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut.
authors.forename: Aaron
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Soufer
authors.affiliation: Section of Cardiovascular Medicine, Department of Medicine, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut2Center for Outcomes Research and Evaluation, Yale-New Haven Hospital, New Haven, Connecticut.
authors.forename: Harlan M
authors.initials: HM
authors.lastname: Krumholz
authors.affiliation: Section of Cardiovascular Medicine, Department of Medicine, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut2Center for Outcomes Research and Evaluation, Yale-New Haven Hospital, New Haven, Connecticut.
authors.forename: Jeptha P
authors.initials: JP
authors.lastname: Curtis
mesh_terms: D000368:Aged; D000787:Angina Pectoris / Q000145:classification / Q000188:drug therapy / Q000601:surgery; D003430:Cross-Sectional Studies; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D009204:Myocardial Revascularization / Q000592:standards* / Q000706:statistics & numerical data / Q000639:trends*; D018579:Patient Selection; D062645:Percutaneous Coronary Intervention / Q000145:classification / Q000592:standards* / Q000706:statistics & numerical data / Q000639:trends*; D012720:Severity of Illness Index