• Taku Inohara, Shun Kohsaka, Hiroaki Miyata, Ikuko Ueda, Shiro Ishikawa, Takahiro Ohki, Yutaro Nishi, Kentaro Hayashida, Yuichiro Maekawa, Akio Kawamura, Takahiro Higashi, and Keiichi Fukuda.
• Department of Cardiology, Keio University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan.
• JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2014 Sep 1; 7 (9): 1000-9.

ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to evaluate the appropriateness of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in Japan and clarify the association between trends of pre-procedural noninvasive testing and changes in appropriateness ratings.BackgroundAlthough PCI appropriateness criteria are widely used for quality-of-care improvement, they have not been validated internationally. Furthermore, the correlation of appropriateness ratings with implementation of newly developed noninvasive testing is unclear.MethodsWe assigned an appropriateness rating to 11,258 consecutive PCIs registered in the Japanese Cardiovascular Database according to appropriateness use criteria developed in 2009 (AUC/2009) and the 2012 revised version (AUC/2012). Trends of pre-procedural noninvasive testing and appropriateness ratings were plotted; logistic regression was performed to identify inappropriate PCI predictors.ResultsIn nonacute settings, 15% of PCIs were rated inappropriate under AUC/2009, and this percent increased to 30.7% under AUC/2012 criteria. This was mostly because of the focused update of AUC, in which the patients were newly classified as inappropriate if they lacked proximal left anterior descending lesions and did not undergo pre-procedural noninvasive testing. However, these cases were simply not rated under AUC/2009. The amount of inappropriate PCIs increased over 5 years, proportional to the increase in coronary computed tomography angiography use. Use of coronary computed tomography angiography was independently associated with inappropriate PCIs (odds ratio: 1.33; p = 0.027).ConclusionsIn a multicenter, Japanese PCI registry, approximately one-sixth of nonacute PCIs were rated as inappropriate under AUC/2009, increasing to approximately one-third under the revised AUC/2012. This significant gap may reflect a needed shift in appropriateness recognition of methods for noninvasive pre-procedural evaluation of coronary artery disease.Copyright © 2014 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

36 keywords...

hide…