← Back to Guidelines

2017 ACC/AATS/AHA/ASE/ASNC/SCAI/SCCT/STS Appropriate Use Criteria for Coronary Revascularization in Patients With Stable Ischemic Heart Disease

Clinical Quick Reference — AUC Rating System for PCI vs CABG

Published: Journal of the American College of Cardiology (May 2, 2017)
Societies: ACC, AATS, AHA, ASE, ASNC, SCAI, SCCT, STS
DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2017.02.001
View Full Guideline PDF

Overview: AUC Rating System

This guideline provides Appropriate Use Criteria (AUC) for coronary revascularization in patients with stable ischemic heart disease (SIHD). The AUC rating system helps clinicians systematically assess whether PCI (percutaneous coronary intervention) or CABG (coronary artery bypass grafting) is appropriate for each patient based on anatomy, risk stratification, symptom status, and antianginal therapy.

AUC Score Interpretation

7–9: Appropriate
Benefits clearly outweigh risks
4–6: May Be Appropriate
Variable evidence; clinical judgment needed
3–4: Intermediate
Borderline; consider alternative approaches
1–3: Rarely Appropriate
Risks outweigh benefits; document rationale if performed
Key Assumption: All tables assume patients are receiving optimal guideline-based medical therapy for secondary prevention (beta-blockers, ACE inhibitors/ARBs, statins, antiplatelet agents) unless explicitly stated otherwise.

Survival Benefit Reference

Certain anatomic patterns—particularly left main disease, 3-vessel disease, and proximal LAD involvement—are associated with improved survival when revascularized versus managed medically. These are highlighted throughout the tables.

Anatomic Setting CABG vs PCI Typical Approach
Left main or 3-vessel CAD CABG preferred for survival benefit Strongly consider CABG (especially complex anatomy or high surgical risk)
2-vessel CAD with proximal LAD CABG may offer survival benefit Shared decision-making; PCI reasonable if low complexity
1-vessel or 2-vessel without prox LAD Survival benefit unclear Symptom relief and ischemia reduction primary goals

Definitions & Framework

Vessel Disease Classification

1-Vessel Disease: Significant stenosis (≥50% luminal narrowing) in 1 major epicardial artery.

2-Vessel Disease: Significant stenosis in 2 major epicardial arteries. Special distinction: Presence or absence of proximal LAD involvement changes management significantly.

3-Vessel Disease: Significant stenosis in all 3 major epicardial arteries (LAD, LCx, RCA). Complexity increases with SYNTAX score ≥23 (intermediate/high complexity).

Left Main CAD: Significant stenosis in left main coronary artery. Generally associated with high-risk anatomy. May involve ostial, mid-shaft, or bifurcation disease. Often evaluated by angiography, FFR, and intravascular ultrasound (IVUS).

Noninvasive Risk Stratification

Risk is stratified by noninvasive testing findings (stress test, imaging) and clinical features:

Risk Category Annual Mortality/MI Risk Example Findings
High Risk ≥3% annual death or MI Severe resting LV dysfunction (LVEF <35%), multiple abnormal segments on stress, inducible wall motion abnormality with >10% myocardial involvement, stress-induced ischemia with ≥10% CAC
Intermediate Risk 1–3% annual death or MI Mild/moderate resting LV dysfunction (LVEF 35–49%), 1 mm ST-segment depression on resting ECG, stress ischemia in 1–9% of myocardium
Low Risk <1% annual death or MI Normal stress test, no resting wall motion abnormality, CAC score <100 Agatston units

FFR & Physiologic Assessment

FFR ≤0.80 is abnormal and consistent with hemodynamically significant (ischemia-causing) stenosis. FFR is increasingly used in the cath lab to guide PCI decisions, especially in intermediate stenosis or when anatomy is ambiguous.

FFR >0.80 suggests the stenosis is not causing significant ischemia and revascularization may not improve symptoms or survival.

SYNTAX Score Integration

For complex 3-vessel and left main disease, the SYNTAX score quantifies angiographic complexity:

SYNTAX Score Complexity Clinical Implication
<23 Low Complexity PCI and CABG outcomes similar; both acceptable
23–32 Intermediate Complexity Consider both approaches; shared decision-making
>32 High Complexity CABG generally preferred; PCI has worse outcomes

Clinical Presentations: Symptom & Therapy Status

Ischemic Symptom Classification

Angina symptoms determine which columns apply in the AUC tables below:

Asymptomatic: Patient has no anginal symptoms or equivalent.

Ischemic Symptoms: Patient reports angina, dyspnea, or equivalent ischemic symptoms. These may be described as typical (substernal chest discomfort with exertion) or atypical (jaw pain, arm pain, dyspnea, fatigue).

Antianginal Therapy Status

Tables distinguish patients by current antianginal regimen:

Therapy Status Description
Not on AA Therapy or with AA Therapy Patient not taking antianginal drugs (beta-blockers, CCBs, nitrates, etc.) or already on AA therapy
On 1 AA Drug (BB Preferred) Patient on a single antianginal agent; beta-blockers are preferred as first-line
On ≥2 AA Drugs Patient on 2 or more antianginal agents and still symptomatic (refractory angina)

Noninvasive Test Findings

Each indication also specifies whether stress test/imaging findings are:

One-Vessel Disease

One-vessel disease (single epicardial artery with ≥50% stenosis) generally does not confer a survival benefit from revascularization compared to medical therapy. Management focuses on symptom relief and ischemia reduction.

Clinical Scenario PCI CABG Notes
Asymptomatic, Low-Risk Findings 3 3 Revascularization not indicated; medical therapy alone
Asymptomatic, Intermediate/High-Risk Findings 2a 3 PCI may be reasonable; CABG not indicated for single-vessel disease
Symptomatic (1 AA Drug), Low-Risk Findings 2b 3 Consider PCI if refractory to medical optimization
Symptomatic (1 AA Drug), Intermediate/High-Risk Findings 2a 3 PCI appropriate for symptom relief and ischemia reduction
Symptomatic (≥2 AA Drugs), Any Risk 2a 3 Refractory angina; PCI may provide symptom relief
Pearl: In one-vessel disease, revascularization is primarily justified by symptom reduction. Medical therapy with beta-blockers, CCBs, and nitrates should be optimized first. PCI is more commonly used than CABG for single-vessel anatomy.

Two-Vessel Disease

Two-vessel disease is stratified by proximal LAD involvement and diabetes status. Proximal LAD stenosis is considered higher-risk anatomy and may be associated with larger ischemic burden.

Two-Vessel Disease WITHOUT Proximal LAD

Clinical Scenario PCI CABG Notes
Asymptomatic, Low-Risk Findings 3 3 Revascularization not indicated; medical therapy
Asymptomatic, Intermediate/High-Risk Findings 2b 3 PCI may be considered; CABG not indicated
Symptomatic (1 AA Drug), Low-Risk Findings 2a 3 PCI appropriate for symptom relief
Symptomatic (1 AA Drug), Intermediate/High-Risk Findings 2a 2a Both PCI and CABG reasonable; shared decision-making
Symptomatic (≥2 AA Drugs), Any Risk 2a 2a Refractory angina; both approaches reasonable

Two-Vessel Disease WITH Proximal LAD

Proximal LAD involvement increases mortality risk and shifts recommendations toward more aggressive revascularization, particularly with ischemic symptoms or high-risk findings.

Clinical Scenario PCI CABG Notes
Asymptomatic, Low-Risk Findings 3 3 Revascularization not indicated; medical therapy
Asymptomatic, Intermediate/High-Risk Findings 2a 2b PCI or CABG may be considered; PCI slightly favored
Symptomatic (1 AA Drug), Low-Risk Findings 2a 2a Both approaches reasonable; PCI or CABG by local expertise
Symptomatic (1 AA Drug), Intermediate/High-Risk Findings 2a 2a Both approaches reasonable; consider CABG if complex anatomy
Symptomatic (≥2 AA Drugs), Any Risk 2a 2a Both approaches appropriate; CABG may be preferred if complex
Pearl: Proximal LAD disease warrants closer attention to revascularization, especially with ischemic symptoms. The proximal LAD supplies the largest territory of myocardium; its occlusion carries high mortality risk.

Three-Vessel Disease

Three-vessel disease is the highest-risk subset and is associated with improved survival when revascularized (either PCI or CABG) compared to medical therapy alone. Disease complexity (SYNTAX score) and diabetes status are key decision points. Use the SYNTAX Score calculator to quantify complexity.

Three-Vessel Disease: Low Complexity (SYNTAX <23)

Clinical Scenario PCI CABG Notes
Asymptomatic, Low-Risk Findings, No Diabetes 2b 2b Either approach reasonable; medical therapy also acceptable
Asymptomatic, Intermediate/High-Risk Findings, No Diabetes 2a 2a Revascularization appropriate; PCI or CABG acceptable
Any Symptom Status, Diabetes Present 2a 2a Revascularization appropriate in diabetic patients with 3-vessel disease
Symptomatic (≥1 AA Drug), Any Risk, No Diabetes 2a 2a Revascularization appropriate; both approaches reasonable

Three-Vessel Disease: Intermediate/High Complexity (SYNTAX ≥23)

Higher SYNTAX scores shift the balance toward CABG, particularly in diabetic patients and those with ischemic symptoms.

Clinical Scenario PCI CABG Notes
Asymptomatic, Low-Risk Findings, No Diabetes 2b 2b Either approach may be considered; medical therapy also acceptable
Asymptomatic, Intermediate/High-Risk Findings, No Diabetes 2b 2a CABG preferred; PCI may be considered in selected patients
Asymptomatic, Any Risk, Diabetes 2b 2a CABG favored in diabetic patients with complex 3-vessel disease
Symptomatic (1 AA Drug), No Diabetes 2a 2a Both approaches reasonable; shared decision-making
Symptomatic (1 AA Drug), Diabetes 2b 2a CABG preferred in diabetic patients; PCI less favorable long-term
Symptomatic (≥2 AA Drugs), No Diabetes 2a 2a Revascularization appropriate; both approaches reasonable
Symptomatic (≥2 AA Drugs), Diabetes 2b 2a CABG favored for long-term outcomes in complex anatomy + diabetes
Pearl: 3-vessel disease, especially with high SYNTAX score and diabetes, is associated with improved survival with CABG compared to PCI. Angiographic complexity and diabetes are key drivers toward surgical revascularization.
Pitfall: Do not assume all 3-vessel disease requires CABG. Low-complexity 3-vessel disease with low-risk features may be managed medically or with PCI. Calculate the SYNTAX score and assess symptom severity before deciding.

Left Main Coronary Artery Disease

Left main (LM) disease is high-risk anatomy and generally associated with improved survival after revascularization. Both PCI and CABG are options, though CABG has traditionally been favored. SYNTAX score and disease location (ostial, bifurcation, simple stenosis) guide the choice.

Isolated Left Main Stenosis (Ostial/Mid-Shaft)

Clinical Scenario PCI CABG Notes
Asymptomatic, Low-Risk Findings 2a 2a Both approaches reasonable; shared decision-making
Asymptomatic, Intermediate/High-Risk Findings 2a 2a Revascularization indicated; both approaches acceptable
Symptomatic (1 AA Drug) 2a 2a Both approaches appropriate; consider local expertise and anatomy
Symptomatic (≥2 AA Drugs) 2a 2a Revascularization indicated; both approaches reasonable

Left Main Bifurcation Disease / Concurrent Multivessel Disease

Complex left main bifurcation or left main with concurrent 3-vessel disease shifts toward CABG, especially with high SYNTAX scores or diabetes.

Clinical Scenario PCI CABG Notes
LMCA + 3-Vessel, Low SYNTAX, No Diabetes 2a 2a Both approaches reasonable
LMCA + 3-Vessel, High SYNTAX or Diabetes 2b 2a CABG preferred; complex anatomy favors surgery
LMCA Bifurcation with Diabetes 2b 2a CABG generally preferred; improved long-term outcomes
Pearl: Left main stenosis should prompt careful angiographic assessment, including FFR when feasible, and often IVUS to quantify severity. Bifurcation disease or high SYNTAX scores favor CABG. PCI of left main is increasingly performed in low-risk anatomy, but CABG remains the gold standard for complex patterns.
Pitfall: Do not underestimate left main disease. Even asymptomatic left main stenosis with high-risk features should be addressed. Occlusion of the left main can be immediately life-threatening.

Prior CABG: Graft Patency & Recurrent Disease

Patients with prior CABG may develop stenosis in native coronary arteries or bypass grafts. Management depends on graft patency and the pattern of recurrent disease.

IMA to LAD Patent (Functional)

Clinical Scenario PCI CABG Notes
Stenosis Supplying 1 Territory (Low-Risk) 2a 2b PCI preferred; avoids repeat surgery; IMA usually still patent
Stenosis Supplying 1 Territory (Intermediate/High-Risk) 2a 2b PCI reasonable; repeat CABG only if PCI fails or high-risk anatomy
Stenosis Supplying 2 Territories 2a 2a Both approaches reasonable; consider PCI vs redo CABG by anatomy

IMA to LAD Occluded / Not Patent

Clinical Scenario PCI CABG Notes
Stenosis Supplying 1 Territory (LAD) 2a 2b PCI preferred; LAD now supplied by native vessel or patent SVG
Stenosis Supplying 2 Territories (including LAD) 2a 2a Both approaches reasonable; repeat CABG if good conduit options
Stenosis Supplying ≥3 Territories or Complex Disease 2b 2a Redo CABG may be preferred if anatomy suitable; higher morbidity
Pearl: In prior CABG patients, assess graft patency (angiography or imaging). A patent IMA graft to the LAD has excellent long-term patency (90%+ at 10 years); stenosis in a territory supplied by a patent IMA may not need urgent revascularization. Conversely, an occluded IMA graft to the LAD means the native LAD is the primary blood supply; stenosis there may warrant more aggressive intervention.

Special Scenarios: Concurrent Procedures

Patients may undergo coronary revascularization concurrent with other cardiac or non-cardiac procedures (renal transplantation, valve surgery, etc.). Management depends on the urgency of the concurrent procedure and the urgency of revascularization.

Renal Transplantation Candidates

Patients undergoing renal transplantation with SIHD have unique considerations: transplant improves long-term survival, but cardiac events remain a major cause of death. Revascularization may be indicated to reduce perioperative and long-term cardiac risk.

Anatomy & Risk PCI CABG Notes
One-Vessel, Low Ischemia, No Diabetes 2b 3 PCI may reduce perioperative risk; medical therapy also reasonable
One- to Two-Vessel, Intermediate Risk, ± Diabetes 2a 2a PCI reasonable as bridge to transplant; CABG for high-risk anatomy
Left Main or 3-Vessel, High-Risk 2a 2a Revascularization before transplant; CABG or PCI by anatomy

Percutaneous Valve Procedure (TAVR, MitraClip, Etc.)

Patients undergoing transcatheter valve procedures with concurrent CAD require coordinated revascularization strategy.

Anatomy & Risk PCI (Staged or Concurrent) CABG Notes
One- to Two-Vessel, Low-Int Complexity 2a 2b PCI before or concurrent with valve procedure
Left Main or 3-Vessel, High Complexity 2b 2a Consider CABG + valve surgery vs staged PCI then valve
Pearl: Coordinate multidisciplinary team for patients with concurrent cardiac and non-cardiac procedures. In renal transplant candidates, staged PCI before transplant is often preferred to reduce perioperative risk and graft loss. For valve procedures, staging PCI before transcatheter valve intervention is common.

Related Calculators & Tools

Use these calculators to integrate complex data and stratify risk when applying AUC to your patient:

Workflow Tip: For a complex multivessel case, calculate the SYNTAX score to guide the PCI vs CABG discussion. If performing PCI, calculate residual SYNTAX afterward to assess revascularization completeness. Use EuroSCORE II to quantify CABG perioperative risk and support shared decision-making.