The heart team approach to coronary revascularization--have we crossed the lines of evidence-based medicine?

Abstract

Evidence-based medicine demands considerable time and decision-making skills to navigate through the proliferating data. A hierarchical "pyramid of evidence" has been formulated to help categorize data quality. The hierarchical data are processed into recommendations in Practice Guideline statements. Recently, both American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association/Society for Cardiac Angiography and Interventions and European Society of Cardiology guidelines for percutaneous coronary intervention embraced a new "heart team approach" as the preferred method to optimize revascularization decision making in cases of complex coronary anatomy. This extrapolation of a research method to the broad clinical practice has potential limitations. We suggest that both the need for a new method to optimize patient triage for the various revascularization strategies and the method to optimize decision making should be discussed. Published data suggest only minor deviations from guideline-based indications. Furthermore, traditional clinical judgment may result in a better patient outcome than arbitrary treatment assignment by rigid set of criteria. In conclusion, the need for a new decision-making process in the choice of revascularization strategy should be further explored and supported by scientific evidence.