Nomograms for estimating coronary artery disease prognosis with gated stress myocardial perfusion SPECT

Impact of Positron Emission Tomographic Myocardial Perfusion Imaging on Patient Selection for Revascularization

BACKGROUND

Positron emission tomography (PET) myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI) quantifies left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) at peak stress. PET LVEF reserve (LVEF-R = stress LVEF - rest LVEF) offers diagnostic and prognostic value.

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was to determine if PET LVEF-R identifies patients with survival benefit postrevascularization.

METHODS

We followed 14,649 unique consecutive patients undergoing 82Rb rest/stress PET MPI from January 2010 to January 2016 (excluding known cardiomyopathy). Adjusted Cox models were built to predict all-cause death, and the 3-way interaction of known coronary artery disease (CAD) (prior myocardial infarction/revascularization), LVEF-R, and 90-day revascularization was tested.

RESULTS

Known CAD was present in 4,982 (34.0%). Ischemia was detected in 5,396 (36.8%; ≥10% in 1,909 [13%]). Mean LVEF-R was 4.2% ± 5.7%, and was ≤0, 1 to 5, and >5 in 3,349 (22.9%), 5,266 (35.9%), and 6,034 (41.2%). Over median follow-up of 3.4 years (IQR: 1.9-5.2 years), 1,324 (8.1%) had 90-day revascularization, and there were 2,192 (15.0%) deaths. In multivariable modeling, there was a significant 3-way interaction among known CAD, LVEF-R, and 90-day revascularization (P = 0.025), such that LVEF-R ≤0 identified patients with survival benefit with 90-day revascularization in those without prior CAD (interaction P = 0.005), independently beyond percent ischemia and myocardial flow reserve. Among patients with known CAD, LVEF-R was not prognostic of death (HR: 0.99; 95% CI: 0.98-1.02; P = 0.98).

CONCLUSIONS

A lack of augmentation or drop in LVEF with vasodilator stress on PET MPI independently identifies patients who have better survival with revascularization within 90 days post-MPI compared with medical therapy, in absence of prior myocardial infarction or revascularization. Multiparametric assessment of ischemia with PET can optimize post-test management.

2023 AHA/ACC/ACCP/ASPC/NLA/PCNA Guideline for the Management of Patients With Chronic Coronary Disease: A Report of the American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines

AIM

The "2023 AHA/ACC/ACCP/ASPC/NLA/PCNA Guideline for the Management of Patients With Chronic Coronary Disease" provides an update to and consolidates new evidence since the "2012 ACCF/AHA/ACP/AATS/PCNA/SCAI/STS Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Patients With Stable Ischemic Heart Disease" and the corresponding "2014 ACC/AHA/AATS/PCNA/SCAI/STS Focused Update of the Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Patients With Stable Ischemic Heart Disease."

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted from September 2021 to May 2022. Clinical studies, systematic reviews and meta-analyses, and other evidence conducted on human participants were identified that were published in English from MEDLINE (through PubMed), EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, and other selected databases relevant to this guideline.

STRUCTURE

This guideline provides an evidenced-based and patient-centered approach to management of patients with chronic coronary disease, considering social determinants of health and incorporating the principles of shared decision-making and team-based care. Relevant topics include general approaches to treatment decisions, guideline-directed management and therapy to reduce symptoms and future cardiovascular events, decision-making pertaining to revascularization in patients with chronic coronary disease, recommendations for management in special populations, patient follow-up and monitoring, evidence gaps, and areas in need of future research. Where applicable, and based on availability of cost-effectiveness data, cost-value recommendations are also provided for clinicians. Many recommendations from previously published guidelines have been updated with new evidence, and new recommendations have been created when supported by published data.

2023 AHA/ACC/ACCP/ASPC/NLA/PCNA Guideline for the Management of Patients With Chronic Coronary Disease: A Report of the American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines

AIM

The "2023 AHA/ACC/ACCP/ASPC/NLA/PCNA Guideline for the Management of Patients With Chronic Coronary Disease" provides an update to and consolidates new evidence since the "2012 ACCF/AHA/ACP/AATS/PCNA/SCAI/STS Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Patients With Stable Ischemic Heart Disease" and the corresponding "2014 ACC/AHA/AATS/PCNA/SCAI/STS Focused Update of the Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Patients With Stable Ischemic Heart Disease."

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted from September 2021 to May 2022. Clinical studies, systematic reviews and meta-analyses, and other evidence conducted on human participants were identified that were published in English from MEDLINE (through PubMed), EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, and other selected databases relevant to this guideline.

STRUCTURE

This guideline provides an evidenced-based and patient-centered approach to management of patients with chronic coronary disease, considering social determinants of health and incorporating the principles of shared decision-making and team-based care. Relevant topics include general approaches to treatment decisions, guideline-directed management and therapy to reduce symptoms and future cardiovascular events, decision-making pertaining to revascularization in patients with chronic coronary disease, recommendations for management in special populations, patient follow-up and monitoring, evidence gaps, and areas in need of future research. Where applicable, and based on availability of cost-effectiveness data, cost-value recommendations are also provided for clinicians. Many recommendations from previously published guidelines have been updated with new evidence, and new recommendations have been created when supported by published data.

Multimodality imaging approach to left ventricular dysfunction in diabetes: an expert consensus document from the European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging

Heart failure (HF) is among the most important and frequent complications of diabetes mellitus (DM). The detection of subclinical dysfunction is a marker of HF risk and presents a potential target for reducing incident HF in DM. Left ventricular (LV) dysfunction secondary to DM is heterogeneous, with phenotypes including predominantly systolic, predominantly diastolic, and mixed dysfunction. Indeed, the pathogenesis of HF in this setting is heterogeneous. Effective management of this problem will require detailed phenotyping of the contributions of fibrosis, microcirculatory disturbance, abnormal metabolism, and sympathetic innervation, among other mechanisms. For this reason, an imaging strategy for the detection of HF risk needs to not only detect subclinical LV dysfunction (LVD) but also characterize its pathogenesis. At present, it is possible to identify individuals with DM at increased risk HF, and there is evidence that cardioprotection may be of benefit. However, there is insufficient justification for HF screening, because we need stronger evidence of the links between the detection of LVD, treatment, and improved outcome. This review discusses the options for screening for LVD, the potential means of identifying the underlying mechanisms, and the pathways to treatment.

2021 AHA/ACC/ASE/CHEST/SAEM/SCCT/SCMR Guideline for the Evaluation and Diagnosis of Chest Pain: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines

AIM

This clinical practice guideline for the evaluation and diagnosis of chest pain provides recommendations and algorithms for clinicians to assess and diagnose chest pain in adult patients.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted from November 11, 2017, to May 1, 2020, encompassing randomized and nonrandomized trials, observational studies, registries, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Collaboration, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality reports, and other relevant databases. Additional relevant studies, published through April 2021, were also considered.

STRUCTURE

Chest pain is a frequent cause for emergency department visits in the United States. The "2021 AHA/ACC/ASE/CHEST/SAEM/SCCT/SCMR Guideline for the Evaluation and Diagnosis of Chest Pain" provides recommendations based on contemporary evidence on the assessment and evaluation of chest pain. This guideline presents an evidence-based approach to risk stratification and the diagnostic workup for the evaluation of chest pain. Cost-value considerations in diagnostic testing have been incorporated, and shared decision-making with patients is recommended.

2021 AHA/ACC/ASE/CHEST/SAEM/SCCT/SCMR Guideline for the Evaluation and Diagnosis of Chest Pain: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines

AIM

This clinical practice guideline for the evaluation and diagnosis of chest pain provides recommendations and algorithms for clinicians to assess and diagnose chest pain in adult patients.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted from November 11, 2017, to May 1, 2020, encompassing randomized and nonrandomized trials, observational studies, registries, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Collaboration, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality reports, and other relevant databases. Additional relevant studies, published through April 2021, were also considered.

STRUCTURE

Chest pain is a frequent cause for emergency department visits in the United States. The "2021 AHA/ACC/ASE/CHEST/SAEM/SCCT/SCMR Guideline for the Evaluation and Diagnosis of Chest Pain" provides recommendations based on contemporary evidence on the assessment and evaluation of chest pain. This guideline presents an evidence-based approach to risk stratification and the diagnostic workup for the evaluation of chest pain. Cost-value considerations in diagnostic testing have been incorporated, and shared decision-making with patients is recommended.

2021 AHA/ACC/ASE/CHEST/SAEM/SCCT/SCMR Guideline for the Evaluation and Diagnosis of Chest Pain: Executive Summary: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines

AIM

This executive summary of the clinical practice guideline for the evaluation and diagnosis of chest pain provides recommendations and algorithms for clinicians to assess and diagnose chest pain in adult patients.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted from November 11, 2017, to May 1, 2020, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Collaboration, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality reports, and other relevant databases. Additional relevant studies, published through April 2021, were also considered.

STRUCTURE

Chest pain is a frequent cause for emergency department visits in the United States. The "2021 AHA/ACC/ASE/CHEST/SAEM/SCCT/SCMR Guideline for the Evaluation and Diagnosis of Chest Pain" provides recommendations based on contemporary evidence on the assessment and evaluation of chest pain. These guidelines present an evidence-based approach to risk stratification and the diagnostic workup for the evaluation of chest pain. Cost-value considerations in diagnostic testing have been incorporated and shared decision-making with patients is recommended.

2021 AHA/ACC/ASE/CHEST/SAEM/SCCT/SCMR Guideline for the Evaluation and Diagnosis of Chest Pain: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines

AIM

This clinical practice guideline for the evaluation and diagnosis of chest pain provides recommendations and algorithms for clinicians to assess and diagnose chest pain in adult patients.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted from November 11, 2017, to May 1, 2020, encompassing randomized and nonrandomized trials, observational studies, registries, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Collaboration, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality reports, and other relevant databases. Additional relevant studies, published through April 2021, were also considered. Structure: Chest pain is a frequent cause for emergency department visits in the United States. The "2021 AHA/ACC/ASE/CHEST/SAEM/SCCT/SCMR Guideline for the Evaluation and Diagnosis of Chest Pain" provides recommendations based on contemporary evidence on the assessment and evaluation of chest pain. This guideline presents an evidence-based approach to risk stratification and the diagnostic workup for the evaluation of chest pain. Cost-value considerations in diagnostic testing have been incorporated, and shared decision-making with patients is recommended.

2021 AHA/ACC/ASE/CHEST/SAEM/SCCT/SCMR Guideline for the Evaluation and Diagnosis of Chest Pain: Executive Summary: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines

AIM

This executive summary of the clinical practice guideline for the evaluation and diagnosis of chest pain provides recommendations and algorithms for clinicians to assess and diagnose chest pain in adult patients.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted from November 11, 2017, to May 1, 2020, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Collaboration, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality reports, and other relevant databases. Additional relevant studies, published through April 2021, were also considered. Structure: Chest pain is a frequent cause for emergency department visits in the United States. The "2021 AHA/ACC/ASE/CHEST/SAEM/SCCT/SCMR Guideline for the Evaluation and Diagnosis of Chest Pain" provides recommendations based on contemporary evidence on the assessment and evaluation of chest pain. These guidelines present an evidence-based approach to risk stratification and the diagnostic workup for the evaluation of chest pain. Cost-value considerations in diagnostic testing have been incorporated and shared decision-making with patients is recommended.

Planning the Follow-Up of Patients with Stable Chronic Coronary Artery Disease

Cardiovascular disease remains the leading cause of death among Europeans, Americans, and around the world. In addition, the prevalence of coronary artery disease (CAD) is increasing, with the highest number of hospital visits, hospital readmissions for patients with decompensated heart failure, and a high economic cost. It is, therefore, a priority to try to plan the follow-up of patients with stable chronic CAD (scCAD) in relation to the published data, experience, and new technology that we have today. Planning the follow-up of patients with scCAD goes beyond the information provided by clinical management guidelines. It requires understanding the importance of a cross-sectional and longitudinal analysis in the clinical history of scCAD, because it has an impact on the cost of healthcare in relation to mortality, economic factors, and the burden of medical consultations. Using the data provided in this work facilitates and standardizes the clinical follow-up of patients with scCAD, and following the marked line makes the work for the clinical physician much easier, by including most clinical possibilities and actions to consider. The follow-up intervals vary according to the clinical situation of each patient and can be highly variable. In addition, the ability to properly study patients with imaging techniques, to stratify at different levels of risk, helps plan the intervals during follow-up. Given the complexity of coronary artery disease and the diversity of clinical cases, more studies are required in the future focused on improving the planning of follow-up for patients with scCAD. The perspective and future direction are related to the valuable utility of integrated imaging techniques in clinical follow-up.

Randomized Clinical Trial of Surgical vs. Percutaneous vs. Hybrid Revascularization in Multivessel Coronary Artery Disease: Residual Myocardial Ischemia and Clinical Outcomes at One Year-Hybrid coronary REvascularization Versus Stenting or Surgery (HREVS)

AIM

Optimal revascularization strategy in multivessel (MV) coronary artery disease (CAD) eligible for percutaneous management (PCI) and surgery remains unresolved. We evaluated, in a randomized clinical trial, residual myocardial ischemia (RI) and clinical outcomes of MV-CAD revascularization using coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), hybrid coronary revascularization (HCR), or MV-PCI.

METHODS

Consecutive MV-CAD patients (n = 155) were randomized (1 : 1 : 1) to conventional CABG (LIMA-LAD plus venous grafts) or HCR (MIDCAB LIMA-LAD followed by PCI for remaining vessels) or MV-PCI (everolimus-eluting CoCr stents) under Heart Team agreement on equal technical and clinical feasibility of each strategy. SPECT at 12 months (primary endpoint of RI that the trial was powered for; a measure of revascularization midterm efficacy and an independent predictor of long-term prognosis) preceded routine angiographic control.

RESULTS

Data are given, respectively, for the CABG, HCR, and MV-PCI arms. Incomplete revascularization rate was 8.0% vs. 7.7% vs. 5.7% (p=0.71). Hospital stay was 13.8 vs. 13.5 vs. 4.5 days (p < 0.001), and sick-leave duration was 23 vs. 16 vs. 8 weeks (p < 0.001). At 12 months, RI was 5 (2, 9)% vs. 5 (3, 7)% vs. 6 (3, 10)% (median; Q1, Q3) with noninferiority p values of 0.0006 (HCR vs. CABG) and 0.016 (MV-PCI vs. CABG). Rates of angiographic graft stenosis/occlusion or in-segment restenosis were 20.4% vs. 8.2% vs. 5.9% (p=0.05). Clinical target vessel/graft failure occurred in 12.0% vs. 11.5% vs. 11.3% (p=0.62). Major adverse cardiac and cerebral event (MACCE) rate was similar (12% vs. 13.4% vs. 13.2%; p=0.83).

CONCLUSION

In this first randomized controlled study comparing CABG, HCR, and MV-PCI, residual myocardial ischemia and MACCE were similar at 12 months. There was no midterm indication of any added value of HCR. Hospital stay and sick-leave duration were shortest with MV-PCI. While longer-term follow-up is warranted, these findings may impact patient and physician choices and healthcare resources utilization. This trial is registered with NCT01699048.

Non-infarct related artery revascularization in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction patients with multivessel disease

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Multivessel disease (MVD) is common in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and is associated with significant risk of future cardiovascular (CV) events including short and longer-term mortality. In this review, we examine the pathophysiologic construct contributing to adverse prognosis of MVD in STEMI, relevant available evidence that currently guides the management of the noninfarct-related artery (IRA) stenosis and define the remaining knowledge gaps for future studies.

RECENT FINDINGS

Results of recent small sized randomized trials, when pooled, suggest improvement in CV outcomes including CV mortality and repeat revascularization with revascularization of the non-IRA stenosis compared with medical management alone. In addition, there does not appear to be an increase in bleeding, contrast-induced nephropathy or stroke, as suggested by earlier observational data.

SUMMARY

These recent data have led to a Class IIb recommendation in the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association guidelines stating that non-IRA revascularization may be considered in selected patients with STEMI and MVD who are hemodynamically stable, either at the time of primary PCI or as a planned staged procedure. The ongoing COMPLETE and CULPRIT-SHOCK studies will provide additional data to further inform the role of non-IRA revascularization and its timing in the management of these patients.

The role of pharmacological stress testing in women

Pharmacological stress is an alternative method to dynamic exercise that combined with noninvasive imaging allows the detection of flow-limiting coronary artery disease (CAD). It represents the stress procedure of choice in patients who cannot exercise appropriately. In women, pharmacological stress combined with myocardial perfusion scintigraphy (MPS) has demonstrated to be highly accurate for the detection of obstructive CAD and a valuable tool that helps separate patients at low cardiac risk from those with an adverse prognosis. Pharmacological stress with positron emission tomographic (PET) imaging is increasingly used in the investigation of suspected obstructive CAD; available evidence shows that the diagnostic profile and prognostic value of stress PET imaging is similar to that of stress MPS in women.

Multivariate Methods for Genetic Variants Selection and Risk Prediction in Cardiovascular Diseases

Over the last decade, high-throughput genotyping and sequencing technologies have contributed to major advancements in genetics research, as these technologies now facilitate affordable mapping of the entire genome for large sets of individuals. Given this, genome-wide association studies are proving to be powerful tools in identifying genetic variants that have the capacity to modify the probability of developing a disease or trait of interest. However, when the study’s goal is to evaluate the effect of the presence of genetic variants mapping to specific chromosomes regions on a specific phenotype, the candidate loci approach is still preferred. Regardless of which approach is taken, such a large data set calls for the establishment and development of appropriate analytical methods in order to translate such knowledge into biological or clinical findings. Standard univariate tests often fail to identify informative genetic variants, especially when dealing with complex traits, which are more likely to result from a combination of rare and common variants and non-genetic determinants. These limitations can partially be overcome by multivariate methods, which allow for the identification of informative combinations of genetic variants and non-genetic features. Furthermore, such methods can help to generate additive genetic scores and risk stratification algorithms that, once extensively validated in independent cohorts, could serve as useful tools to assist clinicians in decision-making. This review aims to provide readers with an overview of the main multivariate methods for genetic data analysis that could be applied to the analysis of cardiovascular traits.

Comparative definitions for moderate-severe ischemia in stress nuclear, echocardiography, and magnetic resonance imaging

The lack of standardized reporting of the magnitude of ischemia on noninvasive imaging contributes to variability in translating the severity of ischemia across stress imaging modalities. We identified the risk of coronary artery disease (CAD) death or myocardial infarction (MI) associated with ≥10% ischemic myocardium on stress nuclear imaging as the risk threshold for stress echocardiography and cardiac magnetic resonance. A narrative review revealed that ≥10% ischemic myocardium on stress nuclear imaging was associated with a median rate of CAD death or MI of 4.9%/year (interquartile range: 3.75% to 5.3%). For stress echocardiography, ≥3 newly dysfunctional segments portend a median rate of CAD death or MI of 4.5%/year (interquartile range: 3.8% to 5.9%). Although imprecisely delineated, moderate-severe ischemia on cardiac magnetic resonance may be indicated by ≥4 of 32 stress perfusion defects or ≥3 dobutamine-induced dysfunctional segments. Risk-based thresholds can define equivalent amounts of ischemia across the stress imaging modalities, which will help to translate a common understanding of patient risk on which to guide subsequent management decisions.

A prediction model for 5-year cardiac mortality in patients with chronic heart failure using ¹²³I-metaiodobenzylguanidine imaging

Purpose

Prediction of mortality risk is important in the management of chronic heart failure (CHF). The aim of this study was to create a prediction model for 5-year cardiac death including assessment of cardiac sympathetic innervation using data from a multicenter cohort study in Japan.

Methods

The original pooled database consisted of cohort studies from six sites in Japan. A total of 933 CHF patients who underwent ¹²³I-metaiodobenzylguanidine (MIBG) imaging and whose 5-year outcomes were known were selected from this database. The late MIBG heart-to-mediastinum ratio (HMR) was used for quantification of cardiac uptake. Cox proportional hazard and logistic regression analyses were used to select appropriate variables for predicting 5-year cardiac mortality. The formula for predicting 5-year mortality was created using a logistic regression model.

Results

During the 5-year follow-up, 205 patients (22 %) died of a cardiac event including heart failure death, sudden cardiac death and fatal acute myocardial infarction (64 %, 30 % and 6 %, respectively). Multivariate logistic analysis selected four parameters, including New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class, age, gender and left ventricular ejection fraction, without HMR (model 1) and five parameters with the addition of HMR (model 2). The net reclassification improvement analysis for all subjects was 13.8 % (p < 0.0001) by including HMR and its inclusion was most effective in the downward reclassification of low-risk patients. Nomograms for predicting 5-year cardiac mortality were created from the five-parameter regression model.

Conclusion

Cardiac MIBG imaging had a significant additive value for predicting cardiac mortality. The prediction formula and nomograms can be used for risk stratifying in patients with CHF.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s00259-014-2759-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Gated SPECT in assessment of regional and global left ventricular function: an update

Gated myocardial perfusion SPECT (GSPECT) is a major clinical tool, widely used for performing myocardial perfusion imaging procedures. In this review, we have presented the fundamentals of GSPECT and the ways in which the functional measurements it provides have contributed to the emergence of myocardial perfusion SPECT in its important role as a major tool of modern cardiac imaging. GSPECT imaging has shown unique capability to provide accurate, reproducible and operator-independent quantitative data regarding myocardial perfusion, global and regional systolic and diastolic function, stress-induced regional wall-motion abnormalities, ancillary markers of severe and extensive disease, left ventricular geometry and mass, as well as the presence and extent of myocardial scar and viability. Adding functional data to perfusion provides an effective means of increasing both diagnostic accuracy and reader's confidence in the interpretation of the results of perfusion scans. Assessment of global and regional LV function has improved the prognostic power of myocardial perfusion SPECT and has been shown in a large registry to add to the perfusion assessment in predicting benefit from revascularization.

Evaluation of suspected ischemic heart disease in symptomatic women

There is a wealth of evidence about the role of a variety of diagnostic testing modalities to define coronary artery disease (CAD) risk in women presenting for evaluation of suspected myocardial ischemia. The exercise electrocardiogram (ECG) is the core index procedure, which can define risk in women capable of performing maximal exercise. Stress imaging, using echocardiography or myocardial perfusion single-photon emission computed tomography/positron emission tomography, is useful for symptomatic women with an abnormal resting ECG or for those who are functionally disabled. For women with low-risk stress imaging findings, there is a very low risk of CAD events, usually < 1%. There is a gradient relationship between the extent and severity of inducible abnormalities and CAD event risk. Women at high risk are those defined as having moderate to severely abnormal wall motion or abnormal perfusion imaging findings. In addition to stress imaging, the evidence of the relationship between CAD extent and severity and prognosis has been clearly defined with coronary computed tomographic angiography. In women, prognosis for those with mild but nonobstructive CAD is higher when compared with those without any CAD. The current evidence base clearly supports that women presenting with chest pain can benefit from one of the commonly applied diagnostic testing modalities.

Influence of sex on risk stratification with stress myocardial perfusion Rb-82 positron emission tomography: Results from the PET (Positron Emission Tomography) Prognosis Multicenter Registry

OBJECTIVES

The aim of the current analysis was to compare sex differences in the prognostic accuracy of stress myocardial perfusion rubidum-82 (Rb-82) positron emission tomography (PET).

BACKGROUND

The diagnostic evaluation of women presenting with suspected cardiac symptoms is challenging with reported reduced accuracy, attenuation artifact, and more recent concerns regarding radiation safety. Stress myocardial perfusion Rb-82 PET is a diagnostic alternative with improved image quality and radiation dosimetry. Currently, the prognostic accuracy of stress Rb-82 PET in women has not been established.

METHODS

A total of 6,037 women and men were enrolled in the PET Prognosis Multicenter Registry. Patients were followed for the occurrence of coronary artery disease (CAD) mortality, with a median follow-up of 2.2 years. Cox proportional hazards modeling was used to estimate CAD mortality. The net re-classification improvement index (NRI) was calculated.

RESULTS

The 5-year CAD mortality was 3.7% for women and 6.0% for men (p < 0.0001). Unadjusted CAD mortality ranged from 0.9% to 12.9% for women (p < 0.0001) and from 1.5% to 17.4% for men (p < 0.0001) for 0% to ≥15% abnormal myocardium at stress. In multivariable models, the percentage of abnormal stress myocardium was independently predictive of CAD mortality in women and men. An interaction term of sex by the percentage of abnormal stress myocardium was nonsignificant (p = 0.39). The categorical NRI when Rb-82 PET data was added to a clinical risk model was 0.12 for women and 0.17 for men. Only 2 cardiac deaths were reported in women <55 years of age; accordingly the percentage of abnormal myocardium at stress was of borderline significance (p = 0.063), but it was highly significant for women ≥55 years of age (p < 0.0001), with an increased NRI of 0.21 (95% confidence interval: 0.09 to 0.34), including 17% of CAD deaths and 3.9% of CAD survivors that were correctly re-classified in this older female subset.

CONCLUSIONS

Stress Rb-82 PET provides significant and clinically meaningful effective risk stratification of women and men, supporting this modality as an alternative to comparative imaging modalities. Rb-82 PET findings were particularly helpful at identifying high-risk, older women.