Differences in Quality of Life in Children Across the Spectrum of Congenital Heart Disease.

OBJECTIVE: To create complexity groups based upon a patient's cardiac medical history and to test for group differences in health-related quality of life (HRQOL). METHODS: Patients 8-18 years with congenital heart disease (CHD) and parent-proxies from the Pediatric Cardiac Quality of Life Inventory (PCQLI) Testing Study were included. Outcome variables included PCQLI Total, Disease Impact, and Psychosocial Impact scores. Using a patient's medical history (cardiac, neurologic, psychological, and cognitive diagnosis), latent class analysis (LCA) was used to create CHD complexity groups. Covariates included demographics and burden of illness (number of: school weeks missed, physician visits in the past year, and daily medications). Generalized estimation equations tested for differences in burden of illness and patient and parent-proxy PCQLI scores. RESULTS: Using 1482 CHD patients (60% male; 84% white; age 12.3 ± 3.0 years), latent class analysis (LCA) estimates showed 4 distinct CHD complexity groups (Mild, Moderate 1, Moderate 2, and Severe). Increasing CHD complexity was associated with increased risk of learning disorders, seizures, mental health problems, and history of stroke. Greater CHD complexity was associated with greater burden of illness (P < .01) and lower patient- and parent-reported PCQLI scores (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: LCA identified 4 congenital heart disease (CHD) complexity groupings. Increasing CHD complexity was associated with higher burden of illness and worse patient- and parent-reported HRQOL.

Expert Consensus Statement: Anatomy, Imaging, and Nomenclature of Congenital Aortic Root Malformations.

Over the past 2 decades, several categorizations have been proposed for the abnormalities of the aortic root. These schemes have mostly been devoid of input from specialists of congenital cardiac disease. The aim of this review is to provide a classification, from the perspective of these specialists, based on an understanding of normal and abnormal morphogenesis and anatomy, with emphasis placed on the features of clinical and surgical relevance. We contend that the description of the congenitally malformed aortic root is simplified when approached in a fashion that recognizes the normal root to be made up of 3 leaflets, supported by their own sinuses, with the sinuses themselves separated by the interleaflet triangles. The malformed root, usually found in the setting of 3 sinuses, can also be found with 2 sinuses, and very rarely with 4 sinuses. This permits description of trisinuate, bisinuate, and quadrisinuate variants, respectively. This feature then provides the basis for classification of the anatomical and functional number of leaflets present. By offering standardized terms and definitions, we submit that our classification will be suitable for those working in all cardiac specialties, whether pediatric or adult. It is of equal value in the settings of acquired or congenital cardiac disease. Our recommendations will serve to amend and/or add to the existing International Paediatric and Congenital Cardiac Code, along with the Eleventh iteration of the International Classification of Diseases provided by the World Health Organization.

Divided left atrium with totally anomalous drainage of normally connected pulmonary veins.

In the December 2021 issue of Cardiology in the Young, Hubrechts and colleagues, from Brussels and Leuven in Belgium, describe their experience in which the pulmonary veins were normally connected to the morphologically left atrium. By virtue of the presence of a shelf dividing the morphologically left atrium, however, the venous return was to the morphologically right atrium, with no evidence of formation of the superior interatrial fold, meaning that there was no obstruction of flow into the systemic venous circulation. The question posed by the Belgian authors is whether the shelf dividing the morphologically left atrium is a deviated primary atrial septum, as the arrangement has previously been interpreted. As they discuss, it is currently impossible to arbitrate this conundrum. In our commentary, we discuss the background to the dilemma. We point out that, as yet, it is not possible to code accurately this congenital cardiac malformation within The International Paediatric and Congenital Cardiac Code (IPCCC), nor within the newly produced 11th Revision of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11).

Nomenclature for Pediatric and Congenital Cardiac Care: Unification of Clinical and Administrative Nomenclature - The 2021 International Paediatric and Congenital Cardiac Code (IPCCC) and the Eleventh Revision of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11).

Substantial progress has been made in the standardization of nomenclature for paediatric and congenital cardiac care. In 1936, Maude Abbott published her Atlas of Congenital Cardiac Disease, which was the first formal attempt to classify congenital heart disease. The International Paediatric and Congenital Cardiac Code (IPCCC) is now utilized worldwide and has most recently become the paediatric and congenital cardiac component of the Eleventh Revision of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11). The most recent publication of the IPCCC was in 2017. This manuscript provides an updated 2021 version of the IPCCC.The International Society for Nomenclature of Paediatric and Congenital Heart Disease (ISNPCHD), in collaboration with the World Health Organization (WHO), developed the paediatric and congenital cardiac nomenclature that is now within the eleventh version of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11). This unification of IPCCC and ICD-11 is the IPCCC ICD-11 Nomenclature and is the first time that the clinical nomenclature for paediatric and congenital cardiac care and the administrative nomenclature for paediatric and congenital cardiac care are harmonized. The resultant congenital cardiac component of ICD-11 was increased from 29 congenital cardiac codes in ICD-9 and 73 congenital cardiac codes in ICD-10 to 318 codes submitted by ISNPCHD through 2018 for incorporation into ICD-11. After these 318 terms were incorporated into ICD-11 in 2018, the WHO ICD-11 team added an additional 49 terms, some of which are acceptable legacy terms from ICD-10, while others provide greater granularity than the ISNPCHD thought was originally acceptable. Thus, the total number of paediatric and congenital cardiac terms in ICD-11 is 367. In this manuscript, we describe and review the terminology, hierarchy, and definitions of the IPCCC ICD-11 Nomenclature. This article, therefore, presents a global system of nomenclature for paediatric and congenital cardiac care that unifies clinical and administrative nomenclature.The members of ISNPCHD realize that the nomenclature published in this manuscript will continue to evolve. The version of the IPCCC that was published in 2017 has evolved and changed, and it is now replaced by this 2021 version. In the future, ISNPCHD will again publish updated versions of IPCCC, as IPCCC continues to evolve.

Assisted conception and the risk of CHD: a case-control study.

Epidemiological studies suggest a higher prevalence of congenital malformations in children conceived through assisted reproductive technologies. There are a few studies that address CHD specifically and most have examined data from registries. We examined the relationship between CHD and assisted conception using data collected in a specialist paediatric cardiac service in the United Kingdom. Between April, 2010 and July, 2011, the parents of children attending paediatric cardiology clinics at the Royal Brompton Hospital, London, were invited to complete a questionnaire that enquired about the nature of their child's conception, the route for their original referral, and a number of potential confounding exposures. "Cases" were defined as children diagnosed with one or more carefully defined CHDs and "controls" as those with normal hearts. Of 894 new attendees with complete data, half of them were cases (n=410, 45.9%). The overall prevalence of assisted conception was 5.4% (n=44). Logistic regression analysis demonstrated a non-significant increase in the crude odds for the use of assisted reproduction (odds ratio 1.21, 95% confidence interval 0.66-2.22) in this group. After adjustment for gestation, parity, year of birth, and maternal age, the odds ratio reduced (odds ratio 0.95, 95% confidence interval 0.48-1.88). Increased rates of assisted conception were observed in a number of CHD subgroups, although no significant differences were found. These findings do not suggest an overall association between CHD and assisted reproduction in this population.

Nomenclature for congenital and paediatric cardiac disease: the International Paediatric and Congenital Cardiac Code (IPCCC) and the Eleventh Iteration of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11).

An internationally approved and globally used classification scheme for the diagnosis of CHD has long been sought. The International Paediatric and Congenital Cardiac Code (IPCCC), which was produced and has been maintained by the International Society for Nomenclature of Paediatric and Congenital Heart Disease (the International Nomenclature Society), is used widely, but has spawned many "short list" versions that differ in content depending on the user. Thus, efforts to have a uniform identification of patients with CHD using a single up-to-date and coordinated nomenclature system continue to be thwarted, even if a common nomenclature has been used as a basis for composing various "short lists". In an attempt to solve this problem, the International Nomenclature Society has linked its efforts with those of the World Health Organization to obtain a globally accepted nomenclature tree for CHD within the 11th iteration of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11). The International Nomenclature Society has submitted a hierarchical nomenclature tree for CHD to the World Health Organization that is expected to serve increasingly as the "short list" for all communities interested in coding for congenital cardiology. This article reviews the history of the International Classification of Diseases and of the IPCCC, and outlines the process used in developing the ICD-11 congenital cardiac disease diagnostic list and the definitions for each term on the list. An overview of the content of the congenital heart anomaly section of the Foundation Component of ICD-11, published herein in its entirety, is also included. Future plans for the International Nomenclature Society include linking again with the World Health Organization to tackle procedural nomenclature as it relates to cardiac malformations. By doing so, the Society will continue its role in standardising nomenclature for CHD across the globe, thereby promoting research and better outcomes for fetuses, children, and adults with congenital heart anomalies.

Nomenclature and systems of classification for cardiomyopathy in children.

There has been a progressive evolution in systems of classification for cardiomyopathy, driven by advances in imaging modalities, disease recognition, and genetics, following initial clinical descriptions in the 1960s. A pathophysiological classification emerged and was endorsed by World Health Organisation Task Forces in 1980 and 1995: dilated, hypertrophic, restrictive, and arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathies; subdivided into idiopathic and disease-specific cardiomyopathies. Genetic advances have increasingly linked "idiopathic" phenotypes to specific mutations, although most linkages exhibit highly variable or little genotype-phenotype correlation, confounded by age-dependent changes and varying penetrance. The following two dominant classification systems are currently in use, with advocates in both continents. First, American Heart Association (2006): "A heterogeneous group of diseases of the myocardium associated with mechanical and/or electrical dysfunction that usually exhibit inappropriate ventricular hypertrophy or dilatation due to a variety of causes that frequently are genetic". These are subdivided to those predominantly involving the heart - primary - due to genetic mutation, including ion channelopathies, acquired disease, or mixed; and those with systemic involvement in other organ systems - secondary. Second, European Society of Cardiology (2008): "A myocardial disorder in which heart muscle is structurally and functionally abnormal… sufficient to cause the observed myocardial abnormality", with subdivision to familial and non-familial, excluding ion channelopathies, and split to specific disease subtypes and idiopathic. Further differences exist in the definitions for hypertrophic cardiomyopathy; however, whichever high-level classification is used, the clinical reality remains phenotype driven. Clinical evaluation and diagnostic imaging dominate initial patient contact, revealing diagnostic red flags that determine further specific tests. Genetic testing is undertaken early. A recent attempt to harmonise these competing systems named the MOGE(S) system, based on descriptive logical nosology, currently remains unproven as a fully practical solution.

Summary of the 2015 International Paediatric Heart Failure Summit of Johns Hopkins All Children's Heart Institute.

In the United States alone, ∼14,000 children are hospitalised annually with acute heart failure. The science and art of caring for these patients continues to evolve. The International Pediatric Heart Failure Summit of Johns Hopkins All Children's Heart Institute was held on February 4 and 5, 2015. The 2015 International Pediatric Heart Failure Summit of Johns Hopkins All Children's Heart Institute was funded through the Andrews/Daicoff Cardiovascular Program Endowment, a philanthropic collaboration between All Children's Hospital and the Morsani College of Medicine at the University of South Florida (USF). Sponsored by All Children's Hospital Andrews/Daicoff Cardiovascular Program, the International Pediatric Heart Failure Summit assembled leaders in clinical and scientific disciplines related to paediatric heart failure and created a multi-disciplinary "think-tank". The purpose of this manuscript is to summarise the lessons from the 2015 International Pediatric Heart Failure Summit of Johns Hopkins All Children's Heart Institute, to describe the "state of the art" of the treatment of paediatric cardiac failure, and to discuss future directions for research in the domain of paediatric cardiac failure.

Mortality as a measure of quality of care in infants with congenital cardiovascular malformations following surgery.

INTRODUCTION: Mortality has traditionally been perceived as a straightforward measure of outcome and has been used to evaluate surgical performance. In the rapidly developing arena of paediatric cardiac surgery, the insightful analysis of mortality figures is challenging. SOURCES OF DATA: This report discusses the issues involved when mortality is used as a marker for surgical outcome, referring to national and international audit and research data. AREAS OF AGREEMENT: Mortality is an important variable and should be transparently defined, reported and monitored. AREAS OF CONTROVERSY: Definitions of mortality, assessments of risk and interpretations of reported statistics all have limitations that must be recognized. GROWING POINTS: Traditional use of raw early mortality as a simplistic indicator of outcome and performance is evolving to include risk-adjusted mortality, longer-term survival, reinterventions and complications. AREAS TIMELY FOR DEVELOPING RESEARCH: As the vast majority of children undergoing cardiac surgery now survive beyond 30 days, the focus for measures of quality is shifting towards morbidity.

Defining the Spectrum of Hypoplastic Left Heart Syndrome (HLHS).

The 2021 International Paediatric and Congenital Cardiac Code and the Eleventh Revision of the International Classification of Diseases provide the following definition for hypoplastic left heart syndrome (HLHS): "Hypoplastic left heart syndrome (HLHS) is defined as a spectrum of congenital cardiovascular malformations with normally aligned great arteries without a common atrioventricular junction, characterized by underdevelopment of the left heart with significant hypoplasia of the left ventricle including atresia, stenosis, or hypoplasia of the aortic or mitral valve, or both valves, and hypoplasia of the ascending aorta and aortic arch." Although HLHS with intact ventricular septum (HLHS + IVS) and HLHS with ventricular septal defect (HLHS + VSD) are different cardiac phenotypes, both of these lesions are part of the spectrum of HLHS.

Expert Consensus Statement: Anatomy, Imaging, and Nomenclature of Congenital Aortic Root Malformations.

Over the past 2 decades, several categorizations have been proposed for the abnormalities of the aortic root. These schemes have mostly been devoid of input from specialists of congenital cardiac disease. The aim of this review is to provide a classification, from the perspective of these specialists, based on an understanding of normal and abnormal morphogenesis and anatomy, with emphasis placed on the features of clinical and surgical relevance. We contend that the description of the congenitally malformed aortic root is simplified when approached in a fashion that recognizes the normal root to be made up of 3 leaflets, supported by their own sinuses, with the sinuses themselves separated by the interleaflet triangles. The malformed root, usually found in the setting of 3 sinuses, can also be found with 2 sinuses, and very rarely with 4 sinuses. This permits description of trisinuate, bisinuate, and quadrisinuate variants, respectively. This feature then provides the basis for classification of the anatomical and functional number of leaflets present. By offering standardized terms and definitions, we submit that our classification will be suitable for those working in all cardiac specialties, whether pediatric or adult. It is of equal value in the settings of acquired or congenital cardiac disease. Our recommendations will serve to amend and/or add to the existing International Paediatric and Congenital Cardiac Code, along with the Eleventh iteration of the International Classification of Diseases provided by the World Health Organization.

Nomenclature for Pediatric and Congenital Cardiac Care: Unification of Clinical and Administrative Nomenclature - The 2021 International Paediatric and Congenital Cardiac Code (IPCCC) and the Eleventh Revision of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11).

Substantial progress has been made in the standardization of nomenclature for paediatric and congenital cardiac care. In 1936, Maude Abbott published her Atlas of Congenital Cardiac Disease, which was the first formal attempt to classify congenital heart disease. The International Paediatric and Congenital Cardiac Code (IPCCC) is now utilized worldwide and has most recently become the paediatric and congenital cardiac component of the Eleventh Revision of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11). The most recent publication of the IPCCC was in 2017. This manuscript provides an updated 2021 version of the IPCCC.The International Society for Nomenclature of Paediatric and Congenital Heart Disease (ISNPCHD), in collaboration with the World Health Organization (WHO), developed the paediatric and congenital cardiac nomenclature that is now within the eleventh version of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11). This unification of IPCCC and ICD-11 is the IPCCC ICD-11 Nomenclature and is the first time that the clinical nomenclature for paediatric and congenital cardiac care and the administrative nomenclature for paediatric and congenital cardiac care are harmonized. The resultant congenital cardiac component of ICD-11 was increased from 29 congenital cardiac codes in ICD-9 and 73 congenital cardiac codes in ICD-10 to 318 codes submitted by ISNPCHD through 2018 for incorporation into ICD-11. After these 318 terms were incorporated into ICD-11 in 2018, the WHO ICD-11 team added an additional 49 terms, some of which are acceptable legacy terms from ICD-10, while others provide greater granularity than the ISNPCHD thought was originally acceptable. Thus, the total number of paediatric and congenital cardiac terms in ICD-11 is 367. In this manuscript, we describe and review the terminology, hierarchy, and definitions of the IPCCC ICD-11 Nomenclature. This article, therefore, presents a global system of nomenclature for paediatric and congenital cardiac care that unifies clinical and administrative nomenclature.The members of ISNPCHD realize that the nomenclature published in this manuscript will continue to evolve. The version of the IPCCC that was published in 2017 has evolved and changed, and it is now replaced by this 2021 version. In the future, ISNPCHD will again publish updated versions of IPCCC, as IPCCC continues to evolve.

Costs of neonatal care for low-birthweight babies in English hospitals.

AIM: To estimate mean costs of neonatal care for babies with birthweights

Ethnic-specific mortality of infants undergoing congenital heart surgery in England and Wales.

PURPOSE: To investigate ethnic differences in mortality for infants with congenital heart defects (CHDs) undergoing cardiac surgery or interventional catheterisation. DESIGN: Observational study of survival to age 1 year using linked records from routine national paediatric cardiac surgery and intensive care audits. Mortality risk was investigated using multivariable Poisson models with multiple imputation. Predictors included sex, ethnicity, preterm birth, deprivation, comorbidities, prenatal diagnosis, age and weight at surgery, preprocedure deterioration and cardiac diagnosis. SETTING: All paediatric cardiac surgery centres in England and Wales. PATIENTS: 5350 infants with CHDs born from 2006 to 2009. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Survival at age 1 year. RESULTS: Mortality was 83.9 (95% CI 76.3 to 92.1) per 1000 infants, with variation by ethnic group. Compared with those of white ethnicity, infants in British Asian (Indian, Pakistani and Bangladeshi) and 'all other' (Chinese, mixed and other) categories experienced significantly higher mortality by age 1 year (relative risk [RR] 1.52[95% CI 1.19 to 1.95]; 1.62[95% CI 1.20 to 2.20], respectively), specifically during index hospital admission (RR 1.55 [95% CI 1.07 to 2.26]; 1.64 [95% CI 1.05 to 2.57], respectively). Further predictors of mortality included non-cardiac comorbidities, prenatal diagnosis, older age at surgery, preprocedure deterioration and cardiac diagnosis. British Asian infants had higher mortality risk during elective hospital readmission (RR 1.86 [95% CI 1.02 to 3.39]). CONCLUSIONS: Infants of British Asian and 'all other' non-white ethnicity experienced higher postoperative mortality risk, which was only partly explained by socioeconomic deprivation and access to care. Further investigation of case-mix and timing of risk may provide important insights into potential mechanisms underlying ethnic disparities.

Verification of data in congenital cardiac surgery.

Accurate, complete data is now the expectation of patients, families, payers, government, and even media. It has become an obligation of those practising congenital cardiac surgery. Appropriately, major professional organizations worldwide are assuming responsibility for the data quality in their respective registry databases. The purpose of this article is to review the current strategies used for verification of the data in the congenital databases of The Society of Thoracic Surgeons, The European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery, and The United Kingdom Central Cardiac Audit Database. Because the results of the initial efforts to verify data in the congenital databases of the United Kingdom and Europe have been previously published, this article provides a more detailed look at the current efforts in North America, which prior to this article have not been published. The discussion and presentation of the strategy for the verification of data in the congenital heart surgery database of The Society of Thoracic Surgeons is then followed by a review of the strategies utilized in the United Kingdom and Europe. The ultimate goal of sharing the information in this article is to provide information to the participants in the databases that track the outcomes of patients with congenitally malformed hearts. This information should help to improve the quality of the data in all of our databases, and therefore increase the utility of these databases to function as a tool to optimise the management strategies provided to our patients. The need for accurate, complete and high quality Congenital Heart Surgery outcome data has never been more pressing. The public interest in medical outcomes is at an all time high and "pay for performance" is looming on the horizon. Information found in administrative databases is not risk or complexity adjusted, notoriously inaccurate, and far too imprecise to evaluate performance adequately in congenital cardiac surgery. The Society of Thoracic Surgeons and European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery databases contain the elements needed for assessment of quality of care provided that a mechanism exists within these organizations to guarantee the completeness and accuracy of the data. The Central Cardiac Audit Database in the United Kingdom has an advantage in this endeavour with the ability to track and verify mortality independently, through their National Health Service. A combination of site visits with "Source Data Verification", in other words, verification of the data at the primary source of the data, and external verification of the data from independent databases or registries, such as governmental death registries, may ultimately be required to allow for optimal verification of data. Further research in the area of verification of data is also necessary. Data must be verified for both completeness and accuracy.

Cardiac complications associated with the treatment of patients with congenital cardiac disease: consensus definitions from the Multi-Societal Database Committee for Pediatric and Congenital Heart Disease.

A complication is an event or occurrence that is associated with a disease or a healthcare intervention, is a departure from the desired course of events, and may cause, or be associated with, suboptimal outcome. A complication does not necessarily represent a breech in the standard of care that constitutes medical negligence or medical malpractice. An operative or procedural complication is any complication, regardless of cause, occurring (1) within 30 days after surgery or intervention in or out of the hospital, or (2) after 30 days during the same hospitalization subsequent to the operation or intervention. Operative and procedural complications include both intraoperative/intraprocedural complications and postoperative/postprocedural complications in this time interval. The MultiSocietal Database Committee for Pediatric and Congenital Heart Disease has set forth a comprehensive list of complications associated with the treatment of patients with congenital cardiac disease, related to cardiac, pulmonary, renal, haematological, infectious, neurological, gastrointestinal, and endocrinal systems, as well as those related to the management of anaesthesia and perfusion, and the transplantation of thoracic organs. The objective of this manuscript is to examine the definitions of operative morbidity as they relate specifically to the cardiac system. These specific definitions and terms will be used to track morbidity associated with surgical and transcatheter interventions and other forms of therapy in a common language across many separate databases.The MultiSocietal Database Committee for Pediatric and Congenital Heart Disease has prepared and defined a near-exhaustive list of cardiac complications, including intraoperative complications and cardiopulmonary bypass-related complications. These cardiac complications are presented in the following subgroups: 1) Cardiac (general), 2) Cardiac--Metabolic, 3) Cardiac--Residual and Recurrent cardiac lesions, 4) Arrhythmia, 5) Cardiopulmonary bypass and mechanical circulatory support, and 6) Operative/Procedural. Within each subgroup, complications are presented in alphabetical order. Clinicians caring for patients with congenital cardiac disease will be able to use this list for databases, quality improvement initiatives, reporting of complications, and comparing strategies for treatment.

Databases for assessing the outcomes of the treatment of patients with congenital and paediatric cardiac disease--the perspective of cardiology.

This review includes a brief discussion, from the perspective of the pediatric cardiologist, of the rationale for creation and maintenance of multi-institutional databases of outcomes of the treatment of patients with congenital and paediatric cardiac disease, together with a history of the evolution of such databases, and a description of the current state of the art. A number of projects designed to have broad-based impact are currently in the design phase, or have already been implemented. Not surprisingly, most of the efforts thus far have focused on catheterization procedures and interventions, although some work examining other aspects of paediatric cardiology practice is also beginning. This review briefly describes several European and North American initiatives related to databases for pediatric and congenital cardiology including the Central Cardiac Audit Database of the United Kingdom, national database initiatives for pediatric cardiology in Switzerland and Germany, various database initiatives under the leadership of the Working Groups of The Association for European Paediatric Cardiology, the IMPACT Registry (IMproving Pediatric and Adult Congenital Treatment) of the National Cardiovascular Data Registry of The American College of Cardiology Foundation and The Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions (SCAI), the Mid-Atlantic Group of Interventional Cardiology (MAGIC) Catheterization Outcomes Project, the Congenital Cardiac Catheterization Project on Outcomes (C3PO), the Congenital Cardiovascular Interventional Study Consortium (CCISC), and the Joint Council on Congenital Heart Disease (JCCHD) National Quality Improvement Initiative. These projects, each leveraging multicentre data and collaboration, demonstrate the enormous progress that has occurred over the last several years to improve the quality and consistency of information about nonsurgical treatment for congenital cardiac disease. The paediatric cardiology field is well-poised to move quickly beyond outcome assessment and benchmarking, to collaborative quality improvement.

Nomenclature for congenital and paediatric cardiac disease: historical perspectives and The International Pediatric and Congenital Cardiac Code.

Clinicians working in the field of congenital and paediatric cardiology have long felt the need for a common diagnostic and therapeutic nomenclature and coding system with which to classify patients of all ages with congenital and acquired cardiac disease. A cohesive and comprehensive system of nomenclature, suitable for setting a global standard for multicentric analysis of outcomes and stratification of risk, has only recently emerged, namely, The International Paediatric and Congenital Cardiac Code. This review, will give an historical perspective on the development of systems of nomenclature in general, and specifically with respect to the diagnosis and treatment of patients with paediatric and congenital cardiac disease. Finally, current and future efforts to merge such systems into the paperless environment of the electronic health or patient record on a global scale are briefly explored. On October 6, 2000, The International Nomenclature Committee for Pediatric and Congenital Heart Disease was established. In January, 2005, the International Nomenclature Committee was constituted in Canada as The International Society for Nomenclature of Paediatric and Congenital Heart Disease. This International Society now has three working groups. The Nomenclature Working Group developed The International Paediatric and Congenital Cardiac Code and will continue to maintain, expand, update, and preserve this International Code. It will also provide ready access to the International Code for the global paediatric and congenital cardiology and cardiac surgery communities, related disciplines, the healthcare industry, and governmental agencies, both electronically and in published form. The Definitions Working Group will write definitions for the terms in the International Paediatric and Congenital Cardiac Code, building on the previously published definitions from the Nomenclature Working Group. The Archiving Working Group, also known as The Congenital Heart Archiving Research Team, will link images and videos to the International Paediatric and Congenital Cardiac Code. The images and videos will be acquired from cardiac morphologic specimens and imaging modalities such as echocardiography, angiography, computerized axial tomography and magnetic resonance imaging, as well as intraoperative images and videos. Efforts are ongoing to expand the usage of The International Paediatric and Congenital Cardiac Code to other areas of global healthcare. Collaborative efforts are underway involving the leadership of The International Nomenclature Committee for Pediatric and Congenital Heart Disease and the representatives of the steering group responsible for the creation of the 11th revision of the International Classification of Diseases, administered by the World Health Organisation. Similar collaborative efforts are underway involving the leadership of The International Nomenclature Committee for Pediatric and Congenital Heart Disease and the International Health Terminology Standards Development Organisation, who are the owners of the Systematized Nomenclature of Medicine or "SNOMED". The International Paediatric and Congenital Cardiac Code was created by specialists in the field to name and classify paediatric and congenital cardiac disease and its treatment. It is a comprehensive code that can be freely downloaded from the internet (http://www.IPCCC.net) and is already in use worldwide, particularly for international comparisons of outcomes. The goal of this effort is to create strategies for stratification of risk and to improve healthcare for the individual patient. The collaboration with the World Heath Organization, the International Health Terminology Standards Development Organisation, and the healthcare industry, will lead to further enhancement of the International Code, and to its more universal use.