Cargando…

Performance of the “CCS Algorithm” in real world patients

BACKGROUND: With the publication of the 2014 Focused Update of the Canadian Cardiovascular Society Guidelines for the Management of Atrial Fibrillation, the Canadian Cardiovascular Society Atrial Fibrillation Guidelines Committee has introduced a new triage and management algorithm; the so-called “C...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: LaHaye, Stephen A., Olesen, Jonas B., Lacombe, Shawn P.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5497178/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28785640
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcha.2015.02.001
_version_ 1783248110832582656
author LaHaye, Stephen A.
Olesen, Jonas B.
Lacombe, Shawn P.
author_facet LaHaye, Stephen A.
Olesen, Jonas B.
Lacombe, Shawn P.
author_sort LaHaye, Stephen A.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: With the publication of the 2014 Focused Update of the Canadian Cardiovascular Society Guidelines for the Management of Atrial Fibrillation, the Canadian Cardiovascular Society Atrial Fibrillation Guidelines Committee has introduced a new triage and management algorithm; the so-called “CCS Algorithm”. The CCS Algorithm is based upon expert opinion of the best available evidence; however, the CCS Algorithm has not yet been validated. Accordingly, the purpose of this study is to evaluate the performance of the CCS Algorithm in a cohort of real world patients. METHODS: We compared the CCS Algorithm with the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) Algorithm in 172 hospital inpatients who are at risk of stroke due to non-valvular atrial fibrillation in whom anticoagulant therapy was being considered. RESULTS: The CCS Algorithm and the ESC Algorithm were concordant in 170/172 patients (99% of the time). There were two patients (1%) with vascular disease, but no other thromboembolic risk factors, which were classified as requiring oral anticoagulant therapy using the ESC Algorithm, but for whom ASA was recommended by the CCS Algorithm. CONCLUSIONS: The CCS Algorithm appears to be unnecessarily complicated in so far as it does not appear to provide any additional discriminatory value above and beyond the use of the ESC Algorithm, and its use could result in under treatment of patients, specifically female patients with vascular disease, whose real risk of stroke has been understated by the Guidelines.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5497178
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher Elsevier
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-54971782017-08-07 Performance of the “CCS Algorithm” in real world patients LaHaye, Stephen A. Olesen, Jonas B. Lacombe, Shawn P. Int J Cardiol Heart Vasc Article BACKGROUND: With the publication of the 2014 Focused Update of the Canadian Cardiovascular Society Guidelines for the Management of Atrial Fibrillation, the Canadian Cardiovascular Society Atrial Fibrillation Guidelines Committee has introduced a new triage and management algorithm; the so-called “CCS Algorithm”. The CCS Algorithm is based upon expert opinion of the best available evidence; however, the CCS Algorithm has not yet been validated. Accordingly, the purpose of this study is to evaluate the performance of the CCS Algorithm in a cohort of real world patients. METHODS: We compared the CCS Algorithm with the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) Algorithm in 172 hospital inpatients who are at risk of stroke due to non-valvular atrial fibrillation in whom anticoagulant therapy was being considered. RESULTS: The CCS Algorithm and the ESC Algorithm were concordant in 170/172 patients (99% of the time). There were two patients (1%) with vascular disease, but no other thromboembolic risk factors, which were classified as requiring oral anticoagulant therapy using the ESC Algorithm, but for whom ASA was recommended by the CCS Algorithm. CONCLUSIONS: The CCS Algorithm appears to be unnecessarily complicated in so far as it does not appear to provide any additional discriminatory value above and beyond the use of the ESC Algorithm, and its use could result in under treatment of patients, specifically female patients with vascular disease, whose real risk of stroke has been understated by the Guidelines. Elsevier 2015-02-07 /pmc/articles/PMC5497178/ /pubmed/28785640 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcha.2015.02.001 Text en © 2015 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ireland Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
LaHaye, Stephen A.
Olesen, Jonas B.
Lacombe, Shawn P.
Performance of the “CCS Algorithm” in real world patients
title Performance of the “CCS Algorithm” in real world patients
title_full Performance of the “CCS Algorithm” in real world patients
title_fullStr Performance of the “CCS Algorithm” in real world patients
title_full_unstemmed Performance of the “CCS Algorithm” in real world patients
title_short Performance of the “CCS Algorithm” in real world patients
title_sort performance of the “ccs algorithm” in real world patients
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5497178/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28785640
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcha.2015.02.001
work_keys_str_mv AT lahayestephena performanceoftheccsalgorithminrealworldpatients
AT olesenjonasb performanceoftheccsalgorithminrealworldpatients
AT lacombeshawnp performanceoftheccsalgorithminrealworldpatients