Heart team discussion in managing patients with coronary artery disease: outcome and reproducibility
Jenny Long1, Heyman Luckraz, Joyce Thekkudan
1Cardiothoracic Unit, Heart & Lung Centre, New Cross Hospital, Wolverhampton, UK.
Insights
The Heart Team (HT) approach effectively guides coronary artery disease treatment decisions, with 86% of recommendations implemented. However, 24% of decisions varied upon review a year later, highlighting treatment complexities.
Area of Science:
- Cardiology
- Cardiovascular Surgery
Background:
- Recent guidelines emphasize a multidisciplinary Heart Team (HT) approach for managing coronary artery disease.
- The HT integrates expertise to optimize patient care and treatment strategies.
Purpose of the Study:
- To prospectively evaluate the decision-making process of the Heart Team in coronary artery disease management.
- To assess the implementation of HT decisions and the consistency of recommendations over time.
Main Methods:
- Prospective analysis of 150 patients managed by an HT, examining attendance, data presented, and decision implementation.
- Re-evaluation of 50 patient cases after one year to assess decision consistency.
- Inclusion of surgeons, interventional cardiologists, and non-interventional cardiologists in all HT meetings.
Main Results:
- HT decisions included medical treatment (22%), percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI; 22%), coronary-artery bypass grafting (CABG; 34%), and further investigations (22%).
- 86% of HT decisions were fully implemented; reasons for deviation included patient refusal and new comorbidities.
- 24% of decisions differed upon re-evaluation after one year, indicating evolving treatment considerations.
Conclusions:
- The Heart Team approach provides a structured framework for coronary artery disease treatment decisions.
- While generally effective, HT decision consistency can vary, necessitating ongoing evaluation and adaptation of strategies.
Abstract:
Recent ESC/EACTS revascularization guidelines advocate a 'Heart Team' (HT) approach in the decision-making process when managing patients with coronary disease. We prospectively assessed HT decision-making in 150 patients analysing personnel attendance, data presented, the 'actioning' of the HT decision and, if not completed, then the reasons why. Additionally, 50 patients were specifically re-discussed after 1 year in order to assess consistency in decision-making. We have two HT meetings each week. At least one surgeon, interventional cardiologist and non-interventional cardiologist were present at all meetings. Data presented included patient demographics, symptoms, co-morbidities, coronary angiography, left ventricular function and other relevant investigations, e.g. echocardiograms. HT decisions included continued medical treatment (22%), percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI; 22%), coronary-artery bypass grafting (CABG; 34%) or further investigations such as pressure wire studies, dobutamine stress echo or cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (22%). These decisions were fully undertaken in 86% of patients. Reasons for aberration in the remaining 21 patients included patient refusal (CABG 29%, PCI 10%) and further co-morbidities (28%). On re-discussion of the same patient data (n = 50) a year later, 24% of decisions differed from the original HT recommendations reflecting the fact that, for certain coronary artery disease pattern, either CABG or PCI could be appropriate.
Related Concept Videos
Coronary Artery Disease V: Interprofessional Care
Acute Coronary Syndrome IV: Interprofessional Care
Acute Coronary Syndrome III: Diagnostic Studies
Coronary Artery Disease IV: Preventive Measures
Atherosclerosis III: Management
Angina V: Nursing Management
