66 research outputs found
Guidelines for percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty. A report of the American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology Task Force on Assessment of Diagnostic and Therapeutic Cardiovascular Procedures (Committee on Percutaneous Transluminal Coronary Angioplasty)
"The American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Assessment of Diagnostic and Therapeutic Cardiovascular Procedures was formed to gather information and make recommendations about appropriate use of technology in the diagnosis and treatment of patients with cardiovascular disease. Coronary angioplasty is one such important technique. We are currently witnessing an extraordinary expansion of the use of coronary angioplasty as an alternative means of achieving myocardial revascularization. An estimated 300 000 angioplasty procedures were performed in the United States in 1990, a more than tenfold increase over the past decade.1 Such growth is attributable not only to demonstrated clinical benefit but also to continuing technical advances that have led to improved techniques and higher success rates over time. There was some concomitant broadening of the indications for both coronary angiography and angioplasty, which led the task force to promulgate guidelines for coronary angiography in 19872 and guidelines for percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (PTCA) in 1988.3 In view of the continuing advances and expanding role of interventional cardiology in clinical practice today, it was recommended that this committee review current indications and procedures governing the performance of angioplasty in the United States and determine whether any alterations in the previously published guidelines are warranted. Such a review was anticipated and recommended in the original committee report.3 This document presents the summary opinion of the reconvened committee with its newly constituted membership.
ACC/AHA/ASNC Guidelines for the Clinical Use of Cardiac Radionuclide Imaging—Executive Summary A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (ACC/AHA/ASNC Committee to Revise the 1995 Guidelines for the Clinical Use of Cardiac Radionuclide Imaging)44The ACC/AHA Task Force on Practice Guidelines makes every effort to avoid any actual or potential conflicts of interest that might arise as a result of an outside relationship or personal interest of a member of the writing panel. Specifically, all members of the writing panel are asked to provide disclosure statements of all such relationships that might be perceived as real or potential conflicts of interest. These statements are reviewed by the parent task force, reported orally to all members of the writing panel at the first meeting, and updated as changes occur.55This document was approved by the American College of Cardiology Foundation Board of Trustees in July, 2003, the American Heart Association Science Advisory and Coordinating Committee in July, 2003, and the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology Board of Directors in July, 2003.66When citing this document, the American College of Cardiology Foundation, the American Heart Association, and the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology request that the following citation format be used: Klocke FJ, Baird MG, Bateman TM, Berman DS, Carabello BA, Cerqueira MD, DeMaria AN, Kennedy JW, Lorell BH, Messer JV, O’Gara PT, Russell RO Jr, St. John Sutton MG, Udelson JE, Verani MS, Williams KA. ACC/AHA/ASNC guidelines for the clinical use of cardiac radionuclide imaging—executive summary: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (ACC/AHA/ASNC Committee to Revise the 1995 Guidelines for the Clinical Use of Radionuclide Imaging). J Am Coll Cardiol 2003;42:1318–33.77(J Am Coll Cardiol 2003;42:1318–33)88©2003 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation and the American Heart Association, Inc.
A regional evaluation of the annual cycle energy system
The Solar Assisted Annual Cycle Energy System (ACES) is evaluated by means of a dynamic computer simulation. The operational concept of the ACES is discussed and the methodology used in evaluating the system is presented. Annual energy consumption and associated costs are investigated for the full, minimum and cos-topimised ACES in a variety of US climates. The energy and economic effectiveness of ACES is evaluated by comparing ACES with four conventional heating and cooling systems. Results show that ACES can be three to four times more energy efficient than the conventional systems investigated in this study. Under prototype equipment cost constraints, residential ACES is not, in general, cost competitive with the conventional systems. However, with realistic projections on the cost of mature components, residential ACES is far superior to conventional systems.
Exploring the Business Case Development Process in Inter-Organizational Enterprise System Implementations
- …