Related Experiment Video
Updated: Feb 6, 2026

Signal Acquisition, Score Interpretation, and Economics of a Non-Invasive Point-of-Care Test for Coronary Artery Disease
Published on: August 9, 2024
Heart Team decision making and long-term outcomes for 1000 consecutive cases of coronary artery disease
Carina T Domingues1, Milan Milojevic1, Daniel J F M Thuijs1
1Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, Netherlands.
Insights
The Heart Team approach is feasible for coronary artery disease (CAD) patients, with most treatments decided quickly. Optimizing information sharing can further improve timely care for complex CAD cases.
Area of Science:
- Cardiology
- Interventional Cardiology
- Cardiovascular Surgery
Background:
- The Heart Team approach is recommended for coronary artery disease (CAD) management.
- Limited data exists on its benefits, treatment delays, and long-term outcomes.
Purpose of the Study:
- To evaluate the safety and feasibility of multidisciplinary Heart Team decision-making in CAD patients.
- To assess treatment outcomes and potential delays associated with the Heart Team approach.
Main Methods:
- Retrospective analysis of 1000 consecutive CAD cases discussed by a Heart Team.
- Assessment of time intervals, patient complexity (1-vessel disease to left main disease), and 5-year survival rates.
- Kaplan-Meier curves used for survival estimation.
Main Results:
- 960 unique cases analyzed; 35% experienced treatment delays due to missing diagnostic information.
- Treatment strategies varied by CAD complexity: PCI dominated for simple disease, while CABG and PCI were equally used for 3-vessel disease.
- 5-year mortality ranged from 3% (isolated left main) to 27% (left main with 2-3 vessel disease).
Conclusions:
- The Heart Team approach is feasible and facilitates timely decision-making for CAD patients.
- Improving information availability at Heart Team meetings can optimize treatment timing.
- Treatment recommendations align with current clinical guidelines.
Objectives:
The Heart Team has been recommended as standard care for patients with coronary artery disease (CAD). However, little is known about the real benefits, potential treatment delays and late outcomes of this approach. Our goal was to determine the safety and feasibility of multidisciplinary Heart Team decision making for patients with CAD.
Methods:
We retrospectively assessed 1000 consecutive cases discussed by the Heart Team between November 2010 and January 2012. We assessed (i) time intervals between different care steps involving the Heart Team; (ii) the distribution of patients according to the complexity of their CAD; and (iii) the 5-year survival as estimated from Kaplan-Meier curves.
Results:
Of 1000 case discussions, 40 were repeat cases, resulting in 960 unique cases. The mean age was 65 years, 73% were men, and 29% had diabetes. Native vessel disease was present in 86.4%, of which 69% had simple 1-vessel disease (1VD) or 2-vessel disease (2VD), and 31% had complex left main (LM) or 3-vessel disease (3VD). The time interval between referral by a community hospital and final treatment was less than 6 weeks for 90% of cases. Treatment decisions were delayed in 35% of cases due to a need for additional diagnostic information. For simple 1- or 2VD with or without proximal left anterior descending artery involvement, treatment was medical therapy in 6% and 12%, respectively; percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in 88% and 85%, respectively; and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) in 6% and 3%, respectively. For 3VD disease, treatment was equally split between CABG and PCI (46% for both). PCI was preferred for isolated LM or LM with 1VD (81% vs CABG 16%), whereas CABG was preferred in LM with 2- or 3VD (71% vs PCI 19%). The 5-year mortality rate was 16% for 1- or 2VD, 17% for 3VD, 3% for isolated LM or with 1VD and 27% for LM with 2- or 3VD.
Conclusions:
In this single-centre analysis, the Heart Team approach was feasible, with decision making and treatment by the Heart Team following within a short time after referral. However, the timing of treatment could be further optimized if adequate information and imaging were available at the time of the Heart Team meeting. The final treatment recommendation by the Heart Team was largely in accordance with clinical guidelines.
Related Concept Videos
Coronary Artery Disease I: Introduction
Coronary Artery Disease II: Pathophysiology
Coronary Artery Disease V: Interprofessional Care
Coronary Artery Disease III: Clinical Manifestations
Coronary Artery Disease IV: Preventive Measures
Anatomy of the Heart

