Long-term mortality following normal exercise myocardial perfusion SPECT according to coronary disease risk factors

Prognostic Value of Stress Myocardial Perfusion Imaging Across the Spectrum of Cardiovascular Risk

BACKGROUND

Single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI) is widely used to identify ischemia. There is limited research to evaluate if there is a risk threshold below which SPECT-MPI may not add significant prognostic value.

METHODS

Between January 1, 2012, and December 31, 2018, individuals who underwent SPECT-MPI were stratified into 4 risk groups. The primary outcome was acute myocardial infarction (MI) or death. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression analysis was used to calculated hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

RESULTS

Among 48,845 patients (52.3% male, median age 67 years), 8.5% were low risk, 4.8% borderline risk, 18.1% intermediate risk, and 68.6% high risk based on the American College of Cardiology pooled cohort equation. Ischemia was more commonly detected in the high-risk cohort (19.4% in high-risk vs 6.5% in low-risk). SPECT-MPI testing was associated with a significantly increased use of preventive medications such as statin therapy, regardless of stress test results. At a median follow-up of 4.2 years, there was no significant association between ischemia and death or MI in the low-risk cohort (adjusted HR, 1.91; 95% CI, 0.94-3.92) or the borderline-risk cohort (adjusted HR, 1.58; 95% CI, 0.79-3.15). Ischemia was associated with a higher risk of death or MI in the intermediate-risk (adjusted HR, 1.57; 95% CI, 1.24-1.99) and high-risk groups (adjusted HR, 1.54; 95% CI, 1.44-1.64).

CONCLUSIONS

SPECT-MPI was less useful for risk stratification among low-risk patients because of their low event rates regardless of test results.

Comparative predictors of mortality among patients referred for stress single-photon emission computed tomography versus positron emission tomography myocardial perfusion imaging

BACKGROUND

There is currently little information regarding the usage and comparative predictors of mortality among patients referred for single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) versus positron emission tomography (PET) myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI) within multimodality imaging laboratories.

METHODS

We compared the clinical characteristics and mortality outcomes among 15,718 patients referred for SPECT-MPI and 6202 patients referred for PET-MPI between 2008 and 2017.

RESULTS

Approximately two-thirds of MPI studies were performed using SPECT-MPI. The PET-MPI group was substantially older and included more patients with known coronary artery disease (CAD), hypertension, diabetes, and myocardial ischemia. The annualized mortality rate was also higher in the PET-MPI group, and this difference persisted after propensity matching 3615 SPECT-MPI and 3615 PET-MPI patients to have similar clinical profiles. Among the SPECT-MPI patients, the most potent predictor of mortality was exercise ability and performance, including consideration of patients' mode of stress testing and exercise duration. Among the PET-MPI patients, myocardial flow reserve (MFR) was the most potent predictor of mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

In our real-world setting, PET-MPI was more commonly employed among older patients with more cardiac risk factors than SPECT-MPI patients. The most potent predictors of mortality in our SPECT and PET-MPI groups were variables exclusive to each test: exercise ability/capacity for SPECT-MPI patients and MFR for PET-MPI patients.

Is typical angina still prognostically important? The influence of "treatment bias" upon prognostic assessments

BACKGROUND

Since typical angina has become less frequent, it is unclear if this symptom still has prognostic significance.

METHODS

We evaluated 38,383 patients undergoing stress/rest SPECT myocardial perfusion imaging followed for a median of 10.9 years. After dividing patients by clinical symptoms, we evaluated the magnitude of myocardial ischemia and subsequent mortality among medically treated versus revascularized subgroups following testing.

RESULTS

Patients with typical angina had more frequent and greater ischemia than other symptom groups, but not higher mortality. Among typical angina patients, those who underwent early revascularization had substantially greater ischemia than the medically treated subgroup, including a far higher proportion with severe ischemia (44.9% vs 4.3%, P < 0.001) and transient ischemic dilation of the LV (31.3% vs 4.7%, P < 0.001). Nevertheless, the revascularized typical angina subgroup had a lower adjusted mortality risk than the medically treated subgroup (HR = 0.72, 95% CI: 0.57-0.92, P = 0.009) CONCLUSIONS: Typical angina is associated with substantially more ischemia than other clinical symptoms. However, the high referral of patients with typical angina patients with ischemia to early revascularization resulted in this group having a lower rather than higher mortality risk versus other symptom groups. These findings illustrate the need to account for "treatment bias" among prognostic studies.

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.

Breathlessness Predicts Mortality in Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Breathlessness is a commonly encountered symptom, and although its relationship with mortality is well established for many conditions, less clear is this relationship in healthy adults. This systematic review and meta-analysis examines whether breathlessness is associated with mortality in a general population. This is important in understanding the impact of this common symptom on a patient's prognosis. This review was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42023394104). Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL and EMCARE were searched for the terms 'breathlessness' and 'survival' or 'mortality' on January 24, 2023. Longitudinal studies of >1,000 healthy adults comparing mortality between breathless and non-breathless controls were eligible for inclusion. If an estimate of effect size was provided, studies were included in the meta-analysis. Eligible studies underwent critical appraisal, data extraction and risk of bias assessment. A pooled effect size was estimated for the relationship between the presence of breathlessness and mortality and levels of severity of breathlessness and mortality. Of 1,993 studies identified, 21 were eligible for inclusion in the systematic review and 19 for the meta-analysis. Studies were of good quality with a low risk of bias, and the majority controlled for important confounders. Most studies identified a significant relationship between the presence of breathlessness and increased mortality. A pooled effect size was estimated, with the presence of breathlessness increasing the risk of mortality by 43% (risk ratio (RR): 1.43, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.28-1.61). As breathlessness severity increased from mild to severe, mortality increased by 30% (RR: 1.30, 95% CI: 1.21-1.38) and 103%, respectively (RR: 2.03, 95% CI: 1.75-2.35). The same trend was seen when breathlessness was measured using the modified Medical Research Council (mMRC) Dyspnoea Scale: mMRC grade 1 conferred a 26% increased mortality risk (RR: 1.26, 95% CI: 1.16-1.37) compared with 155% for grade 4 (RR: 2.55, 95% CI: 1.86-3.50). We conclude that mortality is associated with the presence of breathlessness and its severity. The mechanism underlying this is unclear and may reflect the ubiquity of breathlessness as a symptom of many diseases.

Assessment of lifestyle-related risk factors enhances the effectiveness of cardiac stress testing

Cardiac stress tests have been widely utilized since the 1960s for the diagnostic and prognostic assessment of patients with suspected coronary artery disease (CAD). Clinical risk is primarily based on assessing the presence and magnitude of inducible myocardial ischemia. However, the primary factors driving mortality risk have changed over recent decades. Factors such as typical angina and inducible ischemia have decreased, whereas the percentage of patients with diabetes, obesity and hypertension have increased. There has also been a marked temporal increase in the percentage of patients who require pharmacologic testing due to inability to perform treadmill exercise at the time of cardiac stress testing and this need has emerged as the most potent predictor of mortality risk in contemporary stress test populations. However, the long-term clinical risk posed by the inability to perform exercise and concomitant CAD risk factors are rarely reflected in the assessment of patients' prognostic risk in cardiac stress test reports. In this review, we suggest that the clinical utility of present-day cardiac stress testing can be improved by developing a more comprehensive assessment that integrates and reports all factors which modulate patients' long-term clinical risk following stress testing. This should include assessment of patients' CAD risk factors, physical activity habits and mobility risks, identification of the reasons why patients could not exercise at the time of cardiac stress testing. In addition, the assessment of four core non-aerobic functional parameters should be considered among patients who cannot exercise: assessment of gait speed, handgrip strength, lower extremity strength, and standing balance.

Comparison of diabetes to other prognostic predictors among patients referred for cardiac stress testing: A contemporary analysis from the REFINE SPECT Registry

BACKGROUND

Diabetes mellitus (DM) is increasingly prevalent among contemporary populations referred for cardiac stress testing, but its potency as a predictor for major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) vs other clinical variables is not well delineated.

METHODS AND RESULTS

From 19,658 patients who underwent SPECT-MPI, we identified 3122 patients with DM without known coronary artery disease (CAD) (DM+/CAD-) and 3564 without DM with known CAD (DM-/CAD+). Propensity score matching was used to control for the differences in characteristics between DM+/CAD- and DM-/CAD+ groups. There was comparable MACE in the matched DM+/CAD- and DM-/CAD+ groups (HR 1.15, 95% CI 0.97-1.37). By Chi-square analysis, type of stress (exercise or pharmacologic), total perfusion deficit (TPD), and left ventricular function were the most potent predictors of MACE, followed by CAD and DM status. The combined consideration of mode of stress, TPD, and DM provided synergistic stratification, an 8.87-fold (HR 8.87, 95% CI 7.27-10.82) increase in MACE among pharmacologically stressed patients with DM and TPD > 10% (vs non-ischemic, exercised stressed patients without DM).

CONCLUSIONS

Propensity-matched patients with DM and no known CAD have similar MACE risk compared to patients with known CAD and no DM. DM is synergistic with mode of stress testing and TPD in predicting the risk of cardiac stress test patients.

Perspectives in noninvasive imaging for chronic coronary syndromes

Both the latest European guidelines on chronic coronary syndromes and the American guidelines on chest pain have underlined the importance of noninvasive imaging to select patients to be referred to invasive angiography. Nevertheless, although coronary stenosis has long been considered the main determinant of inducible ischemia and symptoms, growing evidence has demonstrated the importance of other underlying mechanisms (e.g., vasospasm, microvascular disease, energetic inefficiency). The search for a pathophysiology-driven treatment of these patients has therefore emerged as an important objective of multimodality imaging, integrating "anatomical" and "functional" information. We here provide an up-to-date guide for the choice and the interpretation of the currently available noninvasive anatomical and/or functional tests, focusing on emerging techniques (e.g., coronary flow velocity reserve, stress-cardiac magnetic resonance, hybrid imaging, functional-coronary computed tomography angiography, etc.), which could provide deeper pathophysiological insights to refine diagnostic and therapeutic pathways in the next future.

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.

Contemporary Management of Stable Coronary Artery Disease - Implications of the ISCHEMIA Trial

Coronary artery disease (CAD) remains a leading cause of mortality and morbidity in developed countries. Although urgent revascularization is the cornerstone of management of acute coronary syndrome (ACS), for patients with stable CAD recent large-scale clinical trials indicate that a mechanical 'fix' of a narrowed artery is not obviously beneficial; ACS and stable CAD are increasingly recognized as different clinical entities. We review the perspectives on (1) modifying the diagnostic pathway of stable CAD with the incorporation of modern estimates of pretest probability, (2) non-imaging evaluations based on their availability, (3) the optimal timing of invasive coronary angiography and revascularization, and (4) the implementation of medical therapy during the work-up.

Optimizing the Assessment of Patient Clinical Risk at the Time of Cardiac Stress Testing

Due to a marked temporal decline in inducible myocardial ischemia over recent decades, most diagnostic patients now referred for cardiac stress testing have nonischemic studies. Among nonischemic patients, however, long-term risk is heterogeneous and highly influenced by a variety of clinical parameters. Herein, we review 8 factors that can govern long-term clinical risk: coronary risk factor burden; patient symptoms; exercise capacity and exercise test responses; the need for pharmacologic stress testing; autonomic function; musculoskeletal status; subclinical atherosclerosis; and psychosocial risk. To capture the clinical benefit provided by both assessing myocardial ischemia and these additional parameters, the authors propose that a cardiac stress tests report have an additional component beyond statements as to the likelihood of obstructive coronary artery disease and/or magnitude of ischemia. This added component could be a comment section designed to make referring physicians aware of aspects of long-term risk that may influence clinical management and potentially lead to changes in the intensity of risk factor management, frequency of follow-up, need for further testing, or other management decisions. In this manner, the increasingly frequent normal stress test result might more commonly influence treatment recommendations and even patient behavior, thus leading to improvement in patient outcomes even in the setting of normal stress test results.

My warranty has expired: I need to be retested

The concept of warranty period, the duration of time during which the patient's risk remains low, is appealing. However, some points remain to be resolved before its translation in the clinical arena. Methodological issues should be standardized in order to compare the results of studies in different patient populations. Also, the definition of a "normal" study should always take into consideration the history of prior revascularization, the achieved level of exercise, and the stressor used. The promise of warranty can be questioned by the patient's baseline demographic and clinical characteristics and may also be influenced by life-style modification in the course of the follow-up. The "warranty period" concept should shift from data reflecting the time to a cardiac event to the development of ischemia, given an opportunity for intervention before a cardiac event occurs. In this context, clarify the role of serial imaging can be extremely useful, in particular to evaluate if and when retesting a patient after a normal scan.

Negative predictive value of stress myocardial perfusion imaging and coronary computed tomography angiography: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Comparing the prognostic value of a negative finding by stress single-photon emission computed tomography myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI) and coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) may be useful to evaluate how better identify low-risk patients. We performed a meta-analysis to compare the long-term negative predictive value (NPV) of normal stress MPI and normal CCTA in subjects with suspected coronary artery disease (CAD).

METHODS AND RESULTS

Studies published between January 2000 and November 2016 were identified by database search. We included MPI and CCTA studies that followed-up ≥100 subjects for ≥5 years and providing data on clinical outcome for patients with negative tests. Summary risk estimates for normal perfusion at MPI or <50% coronary stenosis at CCTA were derived in random effect regression analysis, and causes of heterogeneity were determined in meta-regression analysis. We identified 12 eligible articles (6 MPI and 6 CCTA) including 33,129 patients (26,757 in MPI and 6372 in CCTA studies) with suspected CAD. The pooled annualized event rate (AER) for occurrence of hard events (death and nonfatal myocardial infarction) was 1.06 (95% confidence interval, CI 0.49-1.64) in MPI and 0.61 (95% CI 0.35-0.86) in CCTA studies. The pooled NPV was 91% (95% CI 86-96) in MPI and 96 (95% CI 95-98) in CCTA studies. The summary rates between MPI and CCTA were not statistically different. At meta-regression analysis, no significant association between AER and clinical and demographical variables considered was found for overall studies.

CONCLUSIONS

Stress MPI and CCTA have a similar ability to identify low-risk patients with suspected CAD.

Adenosine triphosphate stress myocardial perfusion imaging for risk stratification of patients aged 70 years and older with suspected coronary artery disease

OBJECTIVE

We investigated the cardiac risk stratification value of adenosine triphosphate stress myocardial perfusion imaging (ATP-MPI) in patients aged 70 years and older with suspected coronary artery disease (CAD).

METHODS

We identified a series of 415 consecutive patients aged 70 years and older with suspected CAD, who had undergone ATP-MPI with 99mTc-MIBI. The presence of a fixed and/or reversible perfusion defect was considered as an abnormal MPI. Follow-up was available in 399 patients (96.1%) over 3.45 ± 1.71 years after excluding 16 patients who underwent early coronary revascularization <60 days after MPI. The major adverse cardiac events (MACE), including cardiac death, nonfatal infarction, and late coronary revascularization, were recorded.

RESULTS

One hundred twenty-five (31.3%) patients had abnormal MPI and the remaining had normal MPI. A multivariable analysis using Cox regression demonstrated that abnormal MPI was independently associated with MACE (hazard ratio 19.50 and 95% confidence interval 5.91-64.31, P value .000). The patients with SSS > 8 had significantly higher cumulative MACE rate than patients with SSS ≤ 8 had (37.8% vs 5.2%, respectively, P < .001). The Kaplan-Meier cumulative MACE-free survival in patients with abnormal MPI (57.0%) was significantly lower than that in patients with normal MPI (89.6%), P < .0001. Among patients with SSS > 8, the Kaplan-Meier cumulative MACE-free survival were 36.9% in patients ≥80 years old and 49.5% in patients 70-79 years old, respectively, P < .05. However, among patients with SSS ≤ 8, there was no difference between the Kaplan-Meier cumulative MACE-free survivals of these two age groups.

CONCLUSIONS

ATP-MPI data are useful for the prediction of major adverse cardiac events in patients aged 70 years and older with suspected CAD.

Influence of cardiac stress protocol on myocardial perfusion imaging accuracy: The role of exercise level on the evaluation of ischemic burden

BACKGROUND

Some specifics of cardiac stress protocols, i.e., stressor used or exercise level achieved, may impact myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI) accuracy.

METHODS

Four-hundred and seventy-five patients were submitted to MPI and coronary angiography. MPI was performed after exercise (303 patients) or dipyridamole stress (172 patients). A coronary stenosis ≥70% was considered significant. In case of exercise test, a peak heart rate (HR) <85% of the maximal age predicted was considered submaximal and categorized as follows: >75% and <85% ("Group 1"); <75% ("Group 2").

RESULTS

At coronary angiography, 312/475 (66%) patients showed significant stenosis. In the overall population, MPI showed a high accuracy in unmasking significant coronary stenosis, independently of the stress protocol adopted (AUC .76 for exercise vs .78 for vasodilator; P = NS). However, in case of an exercise stress test, a significant interaction between peak %HR and MPI diagnostic power was evident. While an elevated accuracy was still maintained in "Group 1" patients (AUC .79; P vs maximal exercise = NS), a significant drop was demonstrated in "Group 2" patients (AUC .66; P vs maximal exercise = .012, and P vs "Group 1" = .042).

CONCLUSIONS

The accuracy of MPI is not influenced by the stress protocol adopted. Exercise MPI maintains an elevated accuracy as long as the %HR remains >75%.

Long-Term Risk Assessment After the Performance of Stress Myocardial Perfusion Imaging

Stress-rest myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI) is a potent method for assessing the presence and magnitude of inducible myocardial ischemia. Stress MPI currently faces increased scrutiny for its therapeutic effectiveness because of the emergence of other competing means for assessing clinical risk. New data have examined the usefulness stress-rest-MPI as a predictor for long-term clinical outcomes, in contrast to its traditional role for assessing short-term cardiovascular risk. These data indicates that temporal risk is highly influenced by both the magnitude of ischemia and various baseline clinical factors. An optimized assessment of stress MPI, which includes long-term risk prediction, might improve the potential future clinical effectiveness of this imaging modality.

Review of cardiovascular imaging in The Journal of Nuclear Cardiology in 2014: Part 2 of 2: Myocardial perfusion imaging

In this new feature of The Journal of Nuclear Cardiology we will summarize key articles that were published in the Journal in the previous year. In the first article of this 2-part series we concentrated on publications dealing with cardiac positron emission tomography, computed tomography, and neuronal imaging. This review will focus on myocardial perfusion imaging summarizing advances in the field including in diagnosis, prognosis, appropriateness, and safety of testing.

Chronotropic response to vasodilator-stress in patients submitted to myocardial perfusion imaging: impact on the accuracy in detecting coronary stenosis

AIMS

A lower heart rate response (HRR) during vasodilator MPI has been shown to have a relevant adverse prognostic impact. We sought to evaluate the interaction among individual HRR to vasodilator stress and myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI) accuracy in patients with suspected ischemic heart disease (IHD).

METHODS AND RESULTS

One hundred and sixty-five consecutive patients were submitted to vasodilator-stress MPI on a cardiac camera equipped with cadmium-zinc-thelluride detectors and coronary angiography. A coronary stenosis >70 % was considered significant. In every patient, the summed difference score (SDS) was computed from MPI images. Patients were categorized according to the tertiles of the distribution of individual HRR during dipyridamole: "Group 1" (HRR < 8 bpm; lowest tertile); "Group 2" (8 ≤ HRR ≤ 12 bpm; middle tertile); "Group 3" (HRR >12 bpm; highest tertile). Significant coronary artery disease (CAD) was present in 102 (62 %) patients. In the overall population, MPI showed a significant accuracy (AUC: 0.81, 95 % CI 0.74-0.86; p < 0.001) in unmasking the presence of significant coronary stenosis. Interestingly, in patients with a blunted HRR during dipyridamole ("Group 1") MPI showed a significantly lower sensitivity (68 %) in detecting CAD than in those with a higher HRR ("Group 3") (91 %, p = 0.007), despite a preserved specificity (76 % vs 77 %, P=NS). Similarly, the correlation among CAD extent and post-stress LV functional stunning was limited to "Group 3" patients, while it disappeared in those with blunted HRR.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with suspected IHD, MPI sensitivity is strongly influenced by the magnitude of patient heart rate increase to the pharmacologic stressor, suggesting an interaction among blunted HRR and lower accuracy in unmasking CAD.

Warranty periods for normal myocardial perfusion stress SPECT

BACKGROUND

To assess different warranty periods following a normal myocardial perfusion SPECT based on patients' clinical characteristics and the type of stress performed.

METHODS AND RESULTS

A study was done of 2,922 consecutive patients (62.9 ± 13 years; 53.4% women) with a normal stress-rest SPECT. The warranty period was defined as the period during which patients remained at a low risk (<1% events/year) of total mortality (TM), or hard events (HE) (cardiac death or non-fatal myocardial infarction). Of these patients, 2,051 were given an exercise myocardial perfusion imaging (Ex-MPI); 461 submaximal exercise plus dipyridamole (Ex+Dipy-MPI); and 410 dipyridamole (Dipy-MPI). During a mean follow-up of 5 ± 3.3 years, a significant reduction (P < .05) of the warranty period for TM (13.5, 9.6 and 8 months) and HE (34.8, 20.5 and 8.2 months) was observed, for Ex-MPI, Ex+Dipy-MPI and Dipy-MPI, respectively. Other warranty period determinants were the clinical variables of age, sex, diabetes and known coronary artery disease. An abnormal left ventricular ejection fraction on gated-SPECT also significantly shortened the warranty period for HE in patients undergoing Ex+Dipy-MPI (P = .001) or Dipy-MPI alone (P = .007).

CONCLUSIONS

The warranty period for a normal stress-rest SPECT is highly variable since it is primarily determined by the type of stress, the patient's clinical characteristics and LVEF.