1. Cassel CK, Guest JA. Choosing wisely: helping physicians and patients make smart decisions about their care. JAMA 2012;307:1801–2.
2. Go AS, Mozaffarian D, Roger VL, et al. Heart disease and stroke statistics—2013 update: a report from the American Heart Association. Circulation 2013;127:e6–e245.
3. HCUPnet: A tool for identifying, tracking, and analyzing national hospital statistics. Accessed 22 Oct 2013 at http://hcupnet.ahrq.gov/HCUPnet.jsp?Parms= H4sIAAAAAAAAABXBMQ6AIBAEwC9JAg.gsLAhRvjAnnuXgGihFb9XZwYe3EhLdpN2h2aIcsnQLCp9jQVbLDN3ksq DnSeqVXzNfIAP9mtmLy0rZhdIAAAA83D0C2BCAE02DD1508408B2C5C094F1ADF6E788C&JS=Y.
4. Keeley EC, Boura JA, Grines CL. Primary angioplasty versus intravenous thrombolytic therapy for acute myocardial infarction: a quantitative review of 23 randomised trials. Lancet 2003;361:13–20.
5. Boden WE, O’Rourke RA, Teo KK, et al. Optimal medical therapy with or without PCI for stable coronary disease. N Engl J Med 2007;356:1503–16.
6. Boden WE, O’Rourke RA, Teo KK, et al. Impact of optimal medical therapy with or without percutaneous coronary intervention on long-term cardiovascular end points in patients with stable coronary artery disease (from the COURAGE Trial). Am J Cardiol 2009;104:1–4.
7. Stergiopoulos K, Brown DL. Initial coronary stent implantation with medical therapy vs medical therapy alone for stable coronary artery disease: Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Arch Intern Med 2012;172:312–9.
8. McCullough PA, Adam A, Becker CR, et al. Epidemiology and prognostic implications of contrast-induced nephropathy. Contrast-Induc Nephrop Clin Insights Pract Guid Rep CIN Consens Work Panel 2006;98:5–13.
9. Roe MT, Messenger JC, Weintraub WS, et al. Treatments, trends, and outcomes of acute myocardial infarction and percutaneous coronary intervention. J Am Coll Cardiol 2010;56:254–63.
10. Patel MR, Dehmer GJ, Hirshfeld JW, et al. ACCF/SCAI/STS/AATS/AHA/ASNC 2009 Appropriateness Criteria for Coronary Revascularization: A Report by the American College of Cardiology Foundation Appropriateness Criteria Task Force, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, Society of Thoracic Surgeons, American Association for Thoracic Surgery, American Heart Association, and the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology Endorsed by the American Society of Echocardiography, the Heart Failure Society of America, and the Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography. J Am Coll Cardiol 2009;53:530–53.
11. Patel MR, Dehmer GJ, Hirshfeld JW, et al. ACCF/SCAI/STS/AATS/AHA/ASNC/HFSA/SCCT 2012 Appropriate Use Criteria for Coronary Revascularization Focused Update: A Report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation Appropriate Use Criteria Task Force, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, Society of Thoracic Surgeons, American Association for Thoracic Surgery, American Heart Association, American Society of Nuclear Cardiology, and the Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography. J Am Coll Cardiol 2012;59:857–81.
12. Dartmouth Atlas of Health Care. Accessed 8 Jan 2014 at www.dartmouthatlas.org.
13. Dartmouth Atlas of Health Care: Studies of surgical variation. Cardiac surgery report. 2005. Accessed 8 Jan 2014 at www.dartmouthatlas.org/publications/reports.aspx.
14. Fisher ES, Wennberg DE, Stukel TA, et al. The implications of regional variations in medicare spending. part 1: the content, quality, and accessibility of care. Ann Intern Med 2003;138:273–87.
15. Fisher ES, Wennberg DE, Stukel TA, et al. The implications of regional variations in medicare spending. part 2: health outcomes and satisfaction with care. Ann Intern Med 2003;138:288–98.
16. Abelson R. Heart procedure is off the charts in an Ohio city. New York Times 2006. Accessed 23 Apr 2013 at www.nytimes.com/2006/08/18/business/18stent.html.
17. Akhter N, Milford-Beland S, Roe MT, et al. Gender differences among patients with acute coronary syndromes undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention in the American College of Cardiology-National Cardiovascular Data Registry (ACC-NCDR). Am Heart J 2009;157:141–8.
18. Blomkalns AL, Chen AY, Hochman JS, et al. Gender disparities in the diagnosis and treatment of non–ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromesLarge-scale observations from the CRUSADE (Can Rapid Risk Stratification of Unstable Angina Patients Suppress Adverse Outcomes With Early Implementation of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Guidelines) National Quality Improvement Initiative. J Am Coll Cardiol 2005;45:832–7.
19. Daly C, Clemens F, Lopez Sendon JL, et al. Gender differences in the management and clinical outcome of stable angina. Circulation 2006;113:490–8.
20. Groeneveld PW, Heidenreich PA, Garber AM. Racial disparity in cardiac procedures and mortality among long-term survivors of cardiac arrest. Circulation 2003;108:286–91.
21. Hannan EL, Zhong Y, Walford G, et al. Underutilization of percutaneous coronary intervention for ST-elevation myocardial infarction in Medicaid patients relative to private insurance patients. J Intervent Cardiol 2013;26:470–81.
22. Sonel AF, Good CB, Mulgund J, et al. Racial variations in treatment and outcomes of black and white patients with high-risk non–ST-elevation acute coronary syndromes: insights From CRUSADE (Can Rapid Risk Stratification of Unstable Angina Patients Suppress Adverse Outcomes With Early Implementation of the ACC/AHA Guidelines?). Circulation 2005;111:1225–32.
23. Patel MR, Spertus JA, Brindis RG, et al. ACCF proposed method for evaluating the appropriateness of cardiovascular imaging. J Am Coll Cardiol 2005;46:1606–13.
24. Levine GN, Bates ER, Blankenship JC, et al. 2011 ACCF/AHA/SCAI Guideline for percutaneous coronary intervention: executive summary: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines and the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions. Circulation 2011;124:2574–609.
25. Campeau L. Letter: Grading of angina pectoris. Circulation 1976;54:522–3.
26. Chan PS, Patel MR, Klein LW, et al. Appropriateness of percutaneous coronary intervention. JAMA 2011;306:53–61.
27. Hannan EL, Cozzens K, Samadashvili Z, et al. Appropriateness of coronary revascularization for patients without acute coronary syndromes. J Am Coll Cardiol 2012;59:1870–6.
28. Bradley SM, Maynard C, Bryson CL. Appropriateness of percutaneous coronary interventions in Washington State. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes 2012;5:445–53.
29. Nallamothu BK, Tommaso CL, Anderson HV, et al. ACC/AHA/SCAI/AMA–Convened PCPI/NCQA 2013 Performance measures for adults undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. A report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Performance Measures, the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, the American Medical Association–Convened Physician Consortium for Performance Improvement, and the National Committee for Quality Assurance. J Am Coll Cardiol 2014;63:722–45.
30. Ko DT, Guo H, Wijeysundera HC, et al. Assessing the association of appropriateness of coronary revascularization and clinical outcomes for patients with stable coronary artery disease. J Am Coll Cardiol 2012;60:1876–84.
31. Matlock DD, Groeneveld PW, Sidney S, et al. Geographic variation in cardiovascular procedure use among medicare fee-for-service vs medicare advantage beneficiaries. JAMA 2013;310:155–62.
32. Beltrame JF, Weekes AJ, Morgan C, et al. The prevalence of weekly angina among patients with chronic stable angina in primary care practices: The coronary artery disease in general practice (cadence) study. Arch Intern Med 2009;169:1491–9.
33. Bradley SM, Spertus JA, Nallamothu BK, et al. The association between patient selection for diagnostic coronary angiography and hospital-level PCI appropriateness: Insights from the NCDR. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes 2013;6:A1. Accessed 20 Nov 2013 at http://circoutcomes.ahajournals.org/cgi/content/short/6/3_MeetingAbstracts/A1?rss=1.
34. Lee J, Chuu K, Spertus J, et al. Patients overestimate the potential benefits of elective percutaneous coronary intervention. Mo Med 2012;109:79.