ISSN 1671-5411 CN 11-5329/R
Volume 19 Issue 11
Nov.  2022
Turn off MathJax
Article Contents
Please cite this article as: Li ZM, Shirakawa N, Chen A, Ji FH, Liu H. Methodology in coronary artery bypass surgery quality assessment. J Geriatr Cardiol 2022; 19(11): 867−875. DOI: 10.11909/j.issn.1671-5411.2022.11.006
Citation: Please cite this article as: Li ZM, Shirakawa N, Chen A, Ji FH, Liu H. Methodology in coronary artery bypass surgery quality assessment. J Geriatr Cardiol 2022; 19(11): 867−875. DOI: 10.11909/j.issn.1671-5411.2022.11.006

Methodology in coronary artery bypass surgery quality assessment

doi: 10.11909/j.issn.1671-5411.2022.11.006
Funds:  This work was supported by the Departments of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine of University of California Davis Health and NIH grant UL1 TR001860 of the University of California Davis Health.
More Information
  • Coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) is associated with a high risk of mortality and morbidity; thus, assessment of surgery quality is necessary. In this perspective, we will focus on the structure, process, and outcomes measured as quality assessment. A set of 21 evidence-based structure, process, and outcome measures were selected as National Quality Forum. Of these, the Society of Thoracic Surgeons ultimately chose 11 individual quality measures grouped them into four domains used to assess the quality of CABGs. These four domains consisted of perioperative medical care, operative care, risk-adjusted operative mortality and postoperative risk-adjusted major morbidity. These measures have been useful as quality improvement tools in assessing the quality of CABG surgery.
  • loading
  • [1]
    Gaba P, Gersh BJ, Ali ZA, et al. Complete versus incomplete coronary revascularization: definitions, assessment and outcomes. Nat Rev Cardiol 2021; 18: 155−168. doi: 10.1038/s41569-020-00457-5
    de Yé benes VG, Briones AM, Martos-Folgado I, et al. Aging-associated miR-217 aggravates atherosclerosis and promotes cardiovascular dysfunction. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol 2020; 40: 2408−2424. doi: 10.1161/ATVBAHA.120.314333
    Shahian DM, Badhwar V, Kurlansky PA, et al. The STS Participant-Level, Multiprocedural Composite Measure for Adult Cardiac Surgery. Ann Thorac Surg 2021; S0003-4975(21): 01380−1.
    Gaudino MFL, Spadaccio C, Taggart DP. State-of-the-art coronary artery bypass grafting: patient selection, graft selection, and optimizing outcomes. Interv Cardiol Clin 2019; 8: 173−198.
    Li Z, Carlisle DM, Marcin JP, et al. Impact of public reporting on access to coronary artery bypass surgery: the california outcomes reporting program. Ann Thorac Surg 2010; 89: 1131−1138. doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2009.12.073
    Brooks C, Mori M, Shang M, et al. Center-level CABG and valve operative outcomes and volume-outcome relationships in New York State. J Card Surg 2021; 36: 653−658. doi: 10.1111/jocs.15240
    Romano PS, Marcin JP, Dai JJ, et al. Impact of public reporting of coronary artery bypass graft surgery performance data on market share, mortality, and patient selection. Medical Care 2011; 49: 1118−1125. doi: 10.1097/MLR.0b013e3182358c78
    Dunt D, Prang K, Sabanovic H, Kelaher M. The Impact of public performance reporting on market share, mortality, and patient mix outcomes associated with coronary artery bypass grafts and percutaneous coronary interventions (2000–2016) a systematic review and meta-analysis. Medical Care 2018; 56: 956−966. doi: 10.1097/MLR.0000000000000990
    Institute of Medicine. Performance measurement: accelerating improvement. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; 2006.
    Donabedian A. Evaluating the quality of medical care. Milbank Memorial Fund Quarterly 1966; 44: 166−206. doi: 10.2307/3348969
    Alkhouli M, Alqahtani F, Cook CC. Association between surgical volume and clinical outcomes following coronary artery bypass grafting in contemporary practice. J Card Surg 2019; 34: 1049−1054. doi: 10.1111/jocs.14205
    Chou YY, Hwang JJ, Tung YC. Optimal surgeon and hospital volume thresholds to reduce mortality and length of stay for CABG. PLoS One 2021; 16: e0249750. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0249750
    Bianco V, Aranda-Michel E, Sultan I, et al. Inconsistent correlation between procedural volume and publicly reported outcomes in adult cardiac operations. J Card Surg 2019; 34: 1194−1203. doi: 10.1111/jocs.14218
    Mori M, Weininger GA, Shang M, et al. Association between coronary artery bypass graft center volume and year-to-year outcome variability: New York and California statewide analysis. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2021; 161: 1035−1041. doi: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2020.07.119
    Kimmaliardjuk DM, Toeg H, Glineur D, et al. Operative mortality with coronary artery bypass graft: where do we stand in 2015? Curr Opin Cardiol 2015; 30: 611-618.
    Worrall N, Brevig J, Jin R, et al. Reduction in coronary artery bypass grafting surgery mortality and morbidity during a 3-year multicenter quality improvement project. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2020; 159: 1779−1791. doi: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2019.04.083
    Ferguson TB Jr, Peterson ED, Coombs LP, et al. Use of continuous quality improvement to increase use of process measures in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass graft surgery: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA 2003; 290: 49−56. doi: 10.1001/jama.290.1.49
    Ferguson TB Jr, Coombs LP, Peterson ED. Preoperative beta-blocker use and mortality and morbidity following CABG surgery in North America. JAMA 2002; 287: 2221−2227. doi: 10.1001/jama.287.17.2221
    Lazar HL. Role of statin therapy in the coronary bypass patient. Ann Thorac Surg 2004; 78: 730−740. doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2003.12.041
    Loop FD, Lytle BW, Cosgrove DM, et al. Influence of the internal-mammary-artery graft on 10-year survival and other cardiac events. N Engl J Med 1986; 314: 1−6. doi: 10.1056/NEJM198601023140101
    Lytle BW, Blackstone EH, Sabik JF, et al. The effect of bilateral internal thoracic artery grafting on survival during 20 postoperative years. Ann Thorac Surg 2004; 78: 2005−2012. doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2004.05.070
    Werner RM, Asch DA. The unintended consequences of publicly reporting quality information. JAMA 2005; 293: 1239−1244. doi: 10.1001/jama.293.10.1239
    Schneider EC, Epstein AM. Influence of cardiac-surgery performance reports on referral practices and access to care—a survey of cardiovascular specialists. N Engl J Med 1996; 335: 251−256.
    National Quality Forum. National voluntary consensus standards for cardiac surgery. (accessed Sep 6, 2006).
    Institute of Medicine. Crossing the quality chasm: a new health system for the 21st century. Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 2001.
    Shahian DM, Edwards FH, Ferraris VA, et al. Quality measurement in adult cardiac surgery: part 1—Conceptual framework and measure selection. Ann Thorac Surg 2007; 83: 3−12. doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2006.10.053
    Smith SC Jr, Allen J, Blair SN, et al. AHA/ACC guidelines for secondary prevention for patients with coronary and other atherosclerotic vascular disease: 2006 Update: endorsed by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute. Circulation 2006; 113: 2363−2372. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.106.174516
    New York State Department of Health. Adult Cardiac Surgery in New York State 2015-2017, NY: New York State Department of Health, August 2020.
    New Jersey Department of Health and Senior Services. Cardiac Surgery in New Jersey 2017-18, Health Care Quality Assessment, Office of Commissioner, August 2021.
    State of California, Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development. The California Report on Coronary Artery Bypass Graft (CABG) Surgery 2018-2019: Hospital and Surgeon Data. California Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development. December 12, 2021.
    Pennsylvania Health Care Cost Containment Council. Pennsylvania’s Guide to Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery, 2011-2012. November 2013.
    Massachusetts Data Analysis Center (MASS-DAC). Adult Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, fiscal Year 2014 Report, Department of Health Care Policy and Harvard Medical School, November 2016.
    Nolan T, Berwick DM. All-or-none measurement raises the bar on performance. JAMA 2006; 295: 1168−1170. doi: 10.1001/jama.295.10.1168
  • 加载中


    通讯作者: 陈斌,
    • 1. 

      沈阳化工大学材料科学与工程学院 沈阳 110142

    1. 本站搜索
    2. 百度学术搜索
    3. 万方数据库搜索
    4. CNKI搜索


    Article Metrics

    Article views (179) PDF downloads(36) Cited by()
    Proportional views


    DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint