• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

心脏团队在冠心病患者管理中的讨论:结果与可重复性

Heart team discussion in managing patients with coronary artery disease: outcome and reproducibility.

作者信息

Long Jenny, Luckraz Heyman, Thekkudan Joyce, Maher Abdul, Norell Michael

机构信息

Cardiothoracic Unit, Heart & Lung Centre, New Cross Hospital, Wolverhampton, UK.

出版信息

Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg. 2012 May;14(5):594-8. doi: 10.1093/icvts/ivr157. Epub 2012 Jan 31.

DOI:10.1093/icvts/ivr157
PMID:22294559
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3329280/
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.

摘要

欧洲心脏病学会(ESC)/欧洲心胸外科学会(EACTS)近期发布的血运重建指南提倡在冠心病患者管理的决策过程中采用“心脏团队”(HT)模式。我们对150例患者的HT决策进行了前瞻性评估,分析了人员出勤情况、所呈现的数据、HT决策的“执行情况”,若未完成,则分析其原因。此外,为评估决策的一致性,我们在1年后对50例患者进行了专门的再次讨论。我们每周举行两次HT会议。每次会议至少有一名外科医生、介入心脏病专家和非介入心脏病专家出席。所呈现的数据包括患者人口统计学资料、症状、合并症、冠状动脉造影、左心室功能及其他相关检查,如超声心动图。HT的决策包括继续药物治疗(22%)、经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI;22%)、冠状动脉旁路移植术(CABG;34%)或进一步检查,如压力导丝检查、多巴酚丁胺负荷超声心动图或心脏磁共振成像(22%)。这些决策在86%的患者中得到了充分执行。其余21例患者决策偏差的原因包括患者拒绝(CABG占29%,PCI占10%)和出现更多合并症(28%)。在1年后对相同患者数据(n = 50)进行再次讨论时,24%的决策与HT最初的建议不同,这反映出对于某些冠状动脉疾病模式,CABG或PCI可能都是合适的。

相似文献

1
Heart team discussion in managing patients with coronary artery disease: outcome and reproducibility.心脏团队在冠心病患者管理中的讨论:结果与可重复性
Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg. 2012 May;14(5):594-8. doi: 10.1093/icvts/ivr157. Epub 2012 Jan 31.
2
Description of a Heart Team approach to coronary revascularization and its beneficial long-term effect on clinical events after PCI.心脏团队冠状动脉血运重建方法及其对PCI术后临床事件的长期有益影响的描述。
Clin Res Cardiol. 2016 May;105(5):388-400. doi: 10.1007/s00392-015-0932-2. Epub 2015 Oct 27.
3
Long-Term Outcomes Following Heart Team Revascularization Recommendations in Complex Coronary Artery Disease.复杂冠状动脉疾病中心脏团队血运重建建议的长期结果。
J Am Heart Assoc. 2019 Apr 16;8(8):e011279. doi: 10.1161/JAHA.118.011279.
4
Multidisciplinary Heart Team Approach for Complex Coronary Artery Disease: Single Center Clinical Presentation.多学科心脏团队治疗复杂冠状动脉疾病:单中心临床报告。
J Am Heart Assoc. 2020 Apr 21;9(8):e014738. doi: 10.1161/JAHA.119.014738. Epub 2020 Apr 20.
5
Implementation and consistency of Heart Team decision-making in complex coronary revascularisation.心脏团队决策在复杂冠状动脉血运重建中的实施与一致性
Int J Cardiol. 2016 Mar 1;206:37-41. doi: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2016.01.041. Epub 2016 Jan 6.
6
Risk stratification in 3-vessel coronary artery disease: Applying the SYNTAX Score II in the Heart Team Discussion of the SYNTAX II trial.三支血管冠状动脉疾病的风险分层:在SYNTAX II试验的心脏团队讨论中应用SYNTAX评分II
Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2015 Nov 15;86(6):E229-38. doi: 10.1002/ccd.25907. Epub 2015 May 6.
7
Impact of European Society of Cardiology and European Association for Cardiothoracic Surgery Guidelines on Myocardial Revascularization on the activity of percutaneous coronary intervention and coronary artery bypass graft surgery for stable coronary artery disease.欧洲心脏病学会和欧洲心胸外科学会指南对稳定型冠状动脉疾病血运重建策略的影响:经皮冠状动脉介入治疗和冠状动脉旁路移植术的活动变化。
J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2014 Feb;147(2):606-10. doi: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2013.01.026. Epub 2013 Feb 10.
8
The impact of Heart Team discussion on decision making for coronary revascularization in patients with complex coronary artery disease.心脏团队讨论对复杂冠状动脉疾病患者冠状动脉血运重建决策的影响。
J Card Surg. 2020 Oct;35(10):2719-2724. doi: 10.1111/jocs.14892. Epub 2020 Aug 2.
9
Comparison of Heart Team vs Interventional Cardiologist Recommendations for the Treatment of Patients With Multivessel Coronary Artery Disease.多支冠状动脉疾病患者治疗中心脏团队与介入心脏病专家推荐的比较。
JAMA Netw Open. 2020 Aug 3;3(8):e2012749. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.12749.
10
Ten-year outcomes of patients randomized to surgery, angioplasty, or medical treatment for stable multivessel coronary disease: effect of age in the Medicine, Angioplasty, or Surgery Study II trial.稳定多血管冠状动脉疾病患者随机接受手术、血管成形术或药物治疗的 10 年结果:Medicine, Angioplasty, or Surgery Study II 试验中年龄的影响。
J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2013 Nov;146(5):1105-12. doi: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2012.08.015. Epub 2012 Aug 31.

引用本文的文献

1
The modified heart team protocol facilitated the revascularization decision-making quality in complex coronary artery disease.改良后的心脏团队方案提高了复杂冠状动脉疾病血运重建决策的质量。
Interdiscip Cardiovasc Thorac Surg. 2025 Feb 5;40(2). doi: 10.1093/icvts/ivaf023.
2
Building and Optimizing the Interdisciplinary Heart Team.构建和优化跨学科心脏团队。
J Soc Cardiovasc Angiogr Interv. 2023 Jul 14;2(6Part A):101067. doi: 10.1016/j.jscai.2023.101067. eCollection 2023 Nov-Dec.
3
Treatment Adherence Rates and Long-Term Mortality in a Quaternary Multidisciplinary Heart Team: An Observational Cohort.四元多学科心脏团队治疗依从率与长期死亡率:一项观察性队列研究。
J Am Heart Assoc. 2024 Aug 20;13(16):e035097. doi: 10.1161/JAHA.124.035097. Epub 2024 Aug 9.
4
Remote Surgical Discussion of Multivessel Coronary Artery Disease Patients without Surgery on Site-Retrospective Insights.现场无手术情况下多支冠状动脉疾病患者的远程外科讨论——回顾性见解
J Clin Med. 2023 Dec 24;13(1):103. doi: 10.3390/jcm13010103.
5
Quality and process improvement of the multidisciplinary Heart Team meeting using Lean Six Sigma.运用精益六西格玛提高多学科心脏团队会议的质量和流程改进。
BMJ Open Qual. 2023 Jan;12(1). doi: 10.1136/bmjoq-2022-002050.
6
Effect of a standardised heart team protocol versus a guideline-based protocol on revascularisation decision stability in stable complex coronary artery disease: rationale and design of a randomised trial of cardiology specialists using historic cases.标准化心脏团队方案与基于指南的方案对稳定型复杂冠状动脉疾病血运重建决策稳定性的影响:使用历史病例对心内科专家进行随机试验的原理和设计。
BMJ Open. 2022 Dec 1;12(12):e064761. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2022-064761.
7
Health Care Analysis on Myocardial Revascularization in Patients with Chronic Coronary Artery Disease: The Multicenter REVASK Study: Design and Protocol.慢性冠状动脉疾病患者的冠状动脉血运重建治疗的医疗分析:多中心 REVASK 研究:设计和方案。
Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2021 Oct;69(7):599-606. doi: 10.1055/s-0040-1721391. Epub 2020 Dec 18.
8
Heart Team-the Indian perspective.心脏团队——印度视角
Indian J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2018 Dec;34(Suppl 3):355-361. doi: 10.1007/s12055-018-0764-6. Epub 2018 Nov 16.
9
Comparison of Heart Team vs Interventional Cardiologist Recommendations for the Treatment of Patients With Multivessel Coronary Artery Disease.多支冠状动脉疾病患者治疗中心脏团队与介入心脏病专家推荐的比较。
JAMA Netw Open. 2020 Aug 3;3(8):e2012749. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.12749.
10
Multidisciplinary Heart Team Approach for Complex Coronary Artery Disease: Single Center Clinical Presentation.多学科心脏团队治疗复杂冠状动脉疾病:单中心临床报告。
J Am Heart Assoc. 2020 Apr 21;9(8):e014738. doi: 10.1161/JAHA.119.014738. Epub 2020 Apr 20.

本文引用的文献

1
Comparison of coronary bypass surgery with drug-eluting stenting for the treatment of left main and/or three-vessel disease: 3-year follow-up of the SYNTAX trial.比较冠状动脉旁路移植术与药物洗脱支架置入术治疗左主干和/或三血管病变:SYNTAX 试验 3 年随访结果。
Eur Heart J. 2011 Sep;32(17):2125-34. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehr213. Epub 2011 Jun 22.
2
Quality of care management decisions by multidisciplinary cancer teams: a systematic review.多学科癌症团队的护理管理决策质量:系统评价。
Ann Surg Oncol. 2011 Aug;18(8):2116-25. doi: 10.1245/s10434-011-1675-6. Epub 2011 Mar 26.
3
The 2010 ESC/EACTS guidelines on myocardial revascularisation.2010年欧洲心脏病学会/欧洲心胸外科学会心肌血运重建指南。
Heart. 2011 Mar;97(6):445-6. doi: 10.1136/hrt.2010.216135. Epub 2010 Dec 14.
4
A heart with 67 stents.一颗装有67个支架的心脏。
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2010 Nov 2;56(19):1605. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2010.02.077.
5
Multidisciplinary team working in cancer: what is the evidence?癌症治疗中的多学科团队协作:证据有哪些?
BMJ. 2010 Mar 23;340:c951. doi: 10.1136/bmj.c951.
6
Adherence of catheterization laboratory cardiologists to American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association guidelines for percutaneous coronary interventions and coronary artery bypass graft surgery: what happens in actual practice?经皮冠状动脉介入治疗和冠状动脉旁路移植术的导管室心脏病专家对美国心脏病学会/美国心脏协会指南的依从性:实际实践中会发生什么?
Circulation. 2010 Jan 19;121(2):267-75. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.109.887539. Epub 2010 Jan 4.
7
The SYNTAX Score: an angiographic tool grading the complexity of coronary artery disease.SYNTAX评分:一种对冠状动脉疾病复杂性进行分级的血管造影工具。
EuroIntervention. 2005 Aug;1(2):219-27.
8
Patterns of coronary heart disease mortality over the 20th century in England and Wales: Possible plateaus in the rate of decline.20世纪英格兰和威尔士冠心病死亡率模式:下降速率可能出现平稳期。
BMC Public Health. 2008 May 1;8:148. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-8-148.
9
What are the components of effective stroke unit care?有效的卒中单元护理的组成部分有哪些?
Age Ageing. 2002 Sep;31(5):365-71. doi: 10.1093/ageing/31.5.365.
10
European system for cardiac operative risk evaluation (EuroSCORE).欧洲心脏手术风险评估系统(EuroSCORE)。
Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 1999 Jul;16(1):9-13. doi: 10.1016/s1010-7940(99)00134-7.