Related Experiment Video
Updated: Mar 19, 2026

Interventional Diagnostic Procedure: A Practical Guide for the Assessment of Coronary Vascular Function
Published on: March 15, 2022
How does the 'Heart Team' decision get enacted for patients with coronary artery disease?
Pankaj Kumar Mishra1, Heyman Luckraz1, Dincer Aktuerk1
1Cardiothoracic Unit , Heart & Lung Centre , Wolverhampton , UK.
Insights
The heart team approach for coronary artery disease management is highly effective, with 95.5% of decisions enacted. Aberrations are uncommon, ensuring patients receive optimal, evidence-based care.
Area of Science:
- Cardiology
- Medical Decision-Making
Background:
- The heart team approach is recommended for managing coronary artery disease (CAD).
- This study reviews the implementation of this approach over 8 years.
- Evaluating the enactment of heart team decisions is crucial for optimizing patient care.
Purpose of the Study:
- To review the enactment of heart team decisions in CAD patients.
- To identify reasons for deviations from heart team recommendations.
- To discuss potential improvements in the heart team process.
Main Methods:
- A retrospective review of 1000 heart team decisions for CAD patients.
- Decisions were recorded contemporaneously.
- Patient records were reviewed after 6 months to assess enactment and reasons for aberration.
Main Results:
- Heart team decisions were enacted in 95.5% of cases.
- Reasons for non-enactment included patient refusal, unrecognized comorbidities, clinical deterioration, and death.
- Aberrations were uncommon, highlighting the general adherence to team recommendations.
Conclusions:
- Well-established heart team meetings lead to high rates of decision enactment.
- Deviations from recommendations are infrequent and often due to factors unknown at the time of discussion.
- The heart team approach ensures evidence-based, transparent, and optimal patient care.
Objectives:
A heart team approach has been recommended for managing patients with coronary artery disease. Although this seems to be a new concept, we have been developing such a practice for over 8 years. In this report, the enactment of the heart team decision is reviewed and possible improvement is discussed.
Design:
Review of 1000 heart team decisions over a 1-year period for patients with coronary artery disease. These decisions were recorded contemporaneously at the time of the team discussion. Thereafter, patient's notes were reviewed 6 months following the heart team meeting to assess whether the decision was enacted and, if not, what were the reasons for aberration.
Results:
The heart team decision was enacted in 95.5% of patients. The reasons for aberration in the remaining 45 patients included patient's choice (refusal), unrecognised comorbidities at the time of the heart team discussion, change in patient's clinical condition requiring urgent intervention and death while awaiting procedure, among others.
Conclusions:
The decision of a well set-up heartteam meeting is carried out for most patients. Aberration is uncommon and usually due to unknown factors at the time of the discussion. The heart team approach ensures that patients receive best available care (most likely evidence-based), and demonstrates transparency.
More Related Videos
09:52Setting Up a Stroke Team Algorithm and Conducting Simulation-based Training in the Emergency Department - A Practical Guide
Published on: January 15, 2017
05:58Testing Acetylcholine Followed by Adenosine for Invasive Diagnosis of Coronary Vasomotor Disorders
Published on: February 3, 2021
Related Concept Videos
Coronary Artery Disease V: Interprofessional Care
Acute Coronary Syndrome IV: Interprofessional Care
Acute Coronary Syndrome V: Nursing Management
Coronary Artery Disease IV: Preventive Measures
Angina V: Nursing Management
Atherosclerosis III: Management