Noninvasive Technologies for Diagnosing Coronary Artery Disease in Women
Clinical Questions Addressed by the Comparative Effectiveness Review (2 of 2)
In preparing the report on which this continuing medical education activity is based, the authors aimed to answer four key questions. Key Questions 3 and 4 are listed below:
Key Question 3: Is there evidence that the use of noninvasive technologies (NITs), when compared to other NITs or coronary angiography, improves:
a. Risk stratification/prognostic information?
b. Decisionmaking regarding treatment options (revascularization, optimal medical therapy)?
c. Clinical outcomes (death, myocardial infarction, unstable angina, hospitalization, revascularization, angina relief, quality of life)?
Key Question 4: Are there significant safety concerns/risks (i.e., radiation exposure, access site complications, contrast agent-induced nephropathy, nephrogenic systemic fibrosis, anaphylaxis, arrhythmias) associated with the use of different NITs to diagnose coronary artery disease (CAD) in women with symptoms suspicious of CAD?
- Dolor RJ, Patel MR, Melloni C, et al. Noninvasive Technologies for the Diagnosis of Coronary Artery Disease in Women. Comparative Effectiveness Review No. 58 (Prepared by the Duke Evidence-based Practice Center under Contract No. 290-2007-10061-I). Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; June 2012. AHRQ Publication No. 12-EHC034-EF. Available at www.effectivehealthcare.ahrq.gov/diagnosecad.cfm.
Your slide tray is being processed.