Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 676

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 29 of the 29 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Coronary Revascularization Trends in the United States, 2001-2008

Open access
Epstein, Andrew J., Polsky, Daniel, Yang, Feifei, Yang, Lin, Groeneveld, Peter W.·2011·JAMA

Abstract

Context: Coronary revascularization is among the most common hospital-based major interventional procedures performed in the United States. It is uncertain how new revascularization technologies, new clinical evidence from trials, and updated clinical guidelines have influenced the volume and distribution of coronary revascularizations over the past decade. Objective: To examine national time trends in the rates and types of coronary revascularizations. Design, Setting, and Patients: A serial cross-sectional study with time trends of patients undergoing coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery or percutaneous coronary interventions (PCIs) between 2001 and 2008 at US hospitals in the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project's Nationwide Inpatient Sample, which reports inpatient coronary revascularizations. These data were supplemented by Medicare outpatient hospital claims. Main Outcome Measures: Annual procedure rates of coronary revascularizations, CABG surgery, and PCI. Results: A 15% decrease (P < .001) in the annual rate of coronary revascularizations was observed from 2001-2002 to 2007-2008. The annual CABG surgery rate decreased steadily from 1742 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1663-1825) CABG surgeries per million adults per year in 2001-2002 to 1081 (95% CI, 1032-1133) CABG surgeries per million adults per year in 2007-2008 (P < .001), but PCI rates did not significantly change (3827 [95% CI, 3578-4092] PCI per million adults per year in 2001-2002 vs 3667 [95% CI, 3429-3922] PCI per million adults per year in 2007-2008, P = .74). Between 2001 and 2008, the number of hospitals in the Nationwide Inpatient Sample providing CABG surgery increased by 12% (212 in 2001 vs 241 in 2008, P = .03), and the number of PCI hospitals increased by 26% (246 in 2001 vs 331 in 2008, P < .001). The median CABG surgery caseload per hospital decreased by 28% (median [interquartile range], 253 [161-458] in 2001 vs 183 [98-292] in 2008; P < .001) and the number of CABG surgery hospitals providing fewer than 100 CABG surgeries per year increased from 23 (11%) in 2001 to 62 (26%) in 2008 (P < .001). Conclusions: In US hospitals between 2001 and 2008, a substantial decrease in CABG surgery utilization rates was observed, but PCI utilization rates remained unchanged.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/jama.2011.551

Cites

29 of 29 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 29 references

Cited by

See all 676

Metadata

Authors
Epstein, A. J., Polsky, D., Yang, F., Yang, L., & Groeneveld, P. W.
Venue
JAMA
Published
2011-05-04
Volume
305
Issue
17
Pages
1769
ISSN
  • 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
  • 0098-7484
OpenAlex
W2026800143
Cited by
676
References
29
FWCI
101.85
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Coronary Revascularization Trends in the United States, 2001-2008. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1001/jama.2011.551
The paper
Epstein, A. J., Polsky, D., Yang, F., Yang, L., & Groeneveld, P. W. (2011). Coronary Revascularization Trends in the United States, 2001-2008. JAMA. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2011.551

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.