ACCF/ASNC/ACR/AHA/ASE/SCCT/SCMR/SNM 2009 Appropriate Use Criteria for Cardiac Radionuclide Imaging
Author(s) -
Robert C. Hendel,
Daniel S. Berman,
Marcelo F. Di Carli,
Paul A. Heidenreich,
Robert E. Henkin,
Patricia A. Pellikka,
Gerald M. Pohost,
Kim A. Williams
Publication year - 2009
Publication title -
circulation
Language(s) - Uncategorized
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 7.795
H-Index - 607
eISSN - 1524-4539
pISSN - 0009-7322
DOI - 10.1161/circulationaha.109.192519
Subject(s) - medicine , appropriate use criteria , coronary artery disease , subspecialty , reimbursement , specialty , radionuclide ventriculography , cardiac imaging , angina , appropriateness criteria , myocardial perfusion imaging , test (biology) , medical physics , perioperative , intensive care medicine , ejection fraction , family medicine , radiology , health care , myocardial infarction , heart failure , paleontology , biology , economics , economic growth
The American College of Cardiology Foundation (ACCF), along with key specialty and subspecialty societies, conducted an appropriate use review of common clinical scenarios where cardiac radionuclide imaging (RNI) is frequently considered. This document is a revision of the original Single-Photon Emission Computed Tomography Myocardial Perfusion Imaging (SPECT MPI) Appropriateness Criteria, published 4 years earlier, written to reflect changes in test utilization and new clinical data, and to clarify RNI use where omissions or lack of clarity existed in the original criteria. This is in keeping with the commitment to revise and refine appropriate use criteria (AUC) on a frequent basis. The indications for this review were drawn from common applications or anticipated uses, as well as from current clinical practice guidelines. Sixty-seven clinical scenarios were developed by a writing group and scored by a separate technical panel on a scale of 1 to 9 to designate appropriate use, inappropriate use, or uncertain use. In general, use of cardiac RNI for diagnosis and risk assessment in intermediate- and high-risk patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) was viewed favorably, while testing in low-risk patients, routine repeat testing, and general screening in certain clinical scenarios were viewed less favorably. Additionally, use for perioperative testing was found to be inappropriate except for high selected groups of patients. It is anticipated that these results will have a significant impact on physician decision making, test performance, and reimbursement policy, and will help guide future research.
Accelerating Research
Robert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom
Address
John Eccles HouseRobert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom