Improved Near-Term Coronary Artery Disease Risk Classification With Gated Stress Myocardial Perfusion SPECT

Improved Performance of PET Myocardial Perfusion Imaging Compared to SPECT in the Evaluation of Suspected CAD

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI) with single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) has played a central role in the non-invasive evaluation of patients with obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD) for decades. In this review, we discuss the key differences and advantages of positron emission tomography (PET) MPI over SPECT MPI as it relates to the diagnosis, prognosis, as well as clinical decision-making in patients with suspected CAD.

RECENT FINDINGS

Stress-induced perfusion abnormalities on SPECT help estimate presence, extent, and location of ischemia and flow-limiting obstructive CAD, help with risk stratification, and serve as a gatekeeper to identify patients who will benefit from downstream revascularization versus medical management. Some of the major limitations of SPECT include soft-tissue attenuation artifacts, underestimation of ischemia due to reliance on relative perfusion assessment, and longer protocols with higher radiation dose when performed with traditional equipment. PET MPI addresses most of these limitations and offers better quality images, higher diagnostic accuracy along with shorter protocols and lower radiation dose to the patient. A special advantage of PET scanning lies in the ability to quantify absolute myocardial blood flow and assess true extent of epicardial involvement along with identifying non-obstructive phenotypes of CAD such as diffuse atherosclerosis and microvascular dysfunction. In addition, stress acquisition at/near peak stress with PET allows us to measure left ventricular ejection fraction reserve and myocardial blood flow reserve, which help with identifying patients at a higher risk of future cardiac events and optimally select candidates for revascularization. The several technical advantages of PET MPI position as a superior method to diagnose obstructive and non-obstructive phenotypes of ischemic heart disease affecting the entirety of the coronary circulation offer incremental value for risk stratification and guide post-test management strategy for patients with suspected CAD.

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.

CRAX: A simple cardiovascular risk assessment tool to predict risk of acute myocardial infarction or death

BACKGROUND

Determining the risk of cardiovascular events is essential to optimize patient management.

METHODS AND RESULTS

5842 individuals underwent SPECT myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI) with 4.4 ± 1.2 years of follow-up. Models (the CRAX tool) were derived to predict the cumulative risk of death and acute myocardial infarction (AMI) at 1, 3, and 5 years using clinical and MPI variables. Predictors of AMI and death included age, number of hospitalizations in the 3 years preceding MPI, and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). Additional predictors of death were the use of pharmacological stress, and global stress total perfusion deficit (sTPD), while transient ischemic dilation (TID), and ischemic total perfusion deficit (iTPD) change were predictive of AMI. CRAX predictions were significantly (P < .001) more accurate than clinical variables or MPI results alone, resulting in a significant net reclassification improvement (NRI, 7.5% for AMI, 14.5% death) compared to clinical variables alone. Accuracy for predicting major adverse cardiac events (MACE, comprising all-cause death, AMI, unstable angina, late revascularization) was comparable to that of AMI or death.

CONCLUSIONS

CRAX is a risk assessment tool that predicts the risk of AMI, death, or MACE, and improves prediction compared to clinical variables or MPI results alone.

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.

[Ischemic burden vs. coronary artery morphology : What is crucial for the indication of revascularization?]

Ischemic heart disease still represents the leading cause of death in the western world despite a decrease of mortality in the last decade. For the diagnostics of coronary artery morphology, invasive coronary angiography represents the gold standard. Nevertheless, in recent years the importance of functional diagnostics of the coronary arteries has increased and various imaging procedures for the measurement of fractional flow reserve (FFR) during coronary angiography were established and recommended for ischemia testing in the actual guidelines on myocardial revascularization.Imaging modalities for diagnostics of the functional relevance of coronary artery disease include stress echocardiography, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT), and positron emission tomography (PET). These procedures enable advanced risk stratification and therapy guiding in patients with suspected or known coronary artery disease. In future algorithms, hybrid imaging may facilitate the determination of anatomical and functional aspects after only one investigation.In the present article, the role of ischemia testing is compared with morphological methods for the diagnosis of coronary artery disease, individual risk stratification, and therapy guiding.

Differential risk reclassification improvement by exercise testing and myocardial perfusion imaging in patients with suspected and known coronary artery disease

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study is to compare the incremental prognostic and net risk reclassification value of exercise testing alone vs exercise myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI) for estimating the risk of death in patients with suspected and known coronary artery disease (CAD).

METHODS

6702 patients with suspected CAD and 2008 with known CAD had treadmill exercise MPI and were followed for 2.5 ± 0.9 years for the occurrence of all-cause death. The estimation of risk of death and net reclassification improvement (NRI) were examined in three models. Model 1: clinical variables; Model 2: model 1+Duke Treadmill Score; and Model 3: model 2+ MPI variables. Risk estimates were categorized as <1%, 1-3%, and >3% risk of death per year.

RESULTS

In patients with suspected CAD, the global Chi-square for predicting risk of death increased significantly for Model 2 compared to Model 1 (74.78 vs 63.86 to (P = .001). However, adding MPI variables in Model 3 did not further improve predictive value (Chi-square 79.38, P = .10). In patients with suspected CAD risk, reclassification improved significantly in Model 2 over Model 1 (NRI = 0.12, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.22, P = .019), but not in Model 3 (NRI = 0.0009, 95% CI -0.072 to 0.070; P = .98). In contrast, in patients with known CAD Model 2 did not yield significant improvements for predicting risk and risk reclassification compared to Model 1. However, global Chi-square of Model 3 was significantly higher than that of Model 2 (30.03 vs 6.56, P < .0001) with associated significant reclassification improvement (NRI = 0.26 95% CI 0.067 to 0.46. P = .0084).

CONCLUSION

Risk reclassification by diagnostic testing is importantly influenced by baseline characteristics of patient cohorts. In patients with suspected CAD, NRI is predominately achieved by exercise variables, whereas in patients with known CAD, greatest NRI is obtained by MPI variables.

Cardiovascular outcomes after pharmacologic stress myocardial perfusion imaging

BACKGROUND

While pharmacologic stress single photon emission computed tomography myocardial perfusion imaging (SPECT-MPI) is used for noninvasive evaluation of patients who are unable to perform treadmill exercise, its impact on net reclassification improvement (NRI) of prognosis is unknown.

METHODS

We evaluated the prognostic value of pharmacologic stress MPI for prediction of cardiovascular death or non-fatal myocardial infarction (MI) within 1 year at a single-center, university-based laboratory. We examined continuous and categorical NRI of pharmacologic SPECT-MPI for prediction of outcomes beyond clinical factors alone.

RESULTS

Six thousand two hundred forty patients (median age 66 years [IQR 56-74], 3466 men) were studied and followed for 5963 person-years. SPECT-MPI variables associated with increased risk of cardiovascular death or non-fatal MI included summed stress score, stress ST-shift, and post-stress resting left ventricular ejection fraction ≤50%. Compared to a clinical model which included age, sex, cardiovascular disease, risk factors, and medications, model χ(2) (210.5 vs. 281.9, P < .001) and c-statistic (0.74 vs. 0.78, P < .001) were significantly increased by addition of SPECT-MPI predictors (summed stress score, stress ST-shift and stress resting left ventricular ejection fraction). SPECT-MPI predictors increased continuous NRI by 49.4% (P < .001), reclassifying 66.5% of patients as lower risk and 32.8% as higher risk of cardiovascular death or non-fatal MI. Addition of MPI predictors to clinical factors using risk categories, defined as <1%, 1% to 3%, and >3% annualized risk of cardiovascular death or non-fatal MI, yielded a 15.0% improvement in NRI (95% CI 7.6%-27.6%, P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Pharmacologic stress MPI substantially improved net reclassification of cardiovascular death or MI risk beyond that afforded by clinical factors.

Clinical decision making with myocardial perfusion imaging in patients with known or suspected coronary artery disease

Myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI) to diagnose coronary artery disease (CAD) is best performed in patients with intermediate pretest likelihood of disease; unfortunately, pretest likelihood is often overestimated, resulting in the inappropriate use of perfusion imaging. A good functional capacity often predicts low risk, and MPI for diagnosing CAD should be reserved for individuals with poor exercise capacity, abnormal resting electrocardiography, or an intermediate or high probability of CAD. With respect to anatomy-based testing, coronary CT angiography has a good negative predictive value, but stenosis severity correlates poorly with ischemia. Therefore decision making with respect to revascularization may be limited when a purely noninvasive anatomical test is used. Regarding perfusion imaging, the diagnostic accuracies of SPECT, PET, and cardiac magnetic resonance are similar, though fewer studies are available with cardiac magnetic resonance. PET coronary flow reserve may offer a negative predictive value sufficiently high to exclude severe CAD such that patients with mild to moderate reversible perfusion defects can forego invasive angiography. In addition, combined anatomical and perfusion-based imaging may eventually offer a definitive evaluation for diagnosing CAD, even in higher risk patients. Any remarkable findings on single-photon emission computed tomography and PET MPI studies are valuable for prognostication. Furthermore, assessment of myocardial blood flow with PET is particularly powerful for prognostication as it reflects the end result of many processes that lead to atherosclerosis. Decision making with respect to revascularization is limited for cardiac MRI and PET MPI. In contrast, retrospective radionuclide studies have identified an ischemic threshold, but randomized trials are needed. In patients with at least moderately reduced left ventricular systolic function, viable myocardium as assessed by PET or MRI, appears to identify patients who benefit from revascularization, but well-executed randomized trials are lacking.

Assessing clinical impact of myocardial perfusion studies: ischemia or other prognostic indicators?

One of the major strengths of nuclear myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI) is the robust prognostic databases from observational studies demonstrating significantly different outcomes in patients with low-risk vs high-risk scans. The severity of the MPI defect can be semi-quantitated using the summed stress score (SSS) and summed difference score (SDS). SSS is more strongly associated with mortality, whereas SDS is the better predictor of subsequent coronary angiography and revascularization. The strength of MPI variables as prognostic indicators decreases when adjusted for prognostically important clinical and stress test variables. Nonetheless, most studies of general patient populations have demonstrated that MPI adds incremental prognostic value to clinical and stress test information. In contrast to these positive results from observational studies, the application of MPI ischemia as a treatment guide in several recent trials (DIAD, WOMEN, COURAGE, BARI 2D, STICH) has largely failed to identify patient subsets with improved outcome. This issue will continue to be investigated in the ongoing PROMISE and ISCHEMIA trials.

Prognostic significance of calcified plaque among symptomatic patients with nonobstructive coronary artery disease

BACKGROUND

Coronary artery calcium (CAC) is a well-established predictor of clinical outcomes for population screening. Limited evidence is available as to its predictive value in symptomatic patients without obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD). The aim of the current study was to assess the prognostic value of CAC scores among symptomatic patients with nonobstructive CAD.

METHODS

From the COronary Computed Tomographic Angiography EvaluatioN For Clinical Outcomes: An InteRnational Multicenter (CONFIRM) registry, 7,200 symptomatic patients with nonobstructive CAD (<50% coronary stenosis) on coronary-computed tomographic angiography were prospectively enrolled and followed for a median of 2.1 years. Patients were categorized as without (0% stenosis) or with (>0% but <50% coronary stenosis) a luminal stenosis. CAC scores were calculated using the Agatston method. Univariable and multivariable Cox proportional hazard models were employed to estimate all-cause mortality and/or myocardial infarction (MI). Four-year death and death or MI rates were 1.9% and 3.3%.

RESULTS

Of the 4,380 patients with no luminal stenosis, 86% had CAC scores of <10 while those with a luminal stenosis had more prevalent and extensive CAC with 31.9% having a CAC score of ≥100. Among patients with no luminal stenosis, CAC was not predictive of all-cause mortality (P = .44). However, among patients with a luminal stenosis, 4-year mortality rates ranged from 0.8% to 9.8% for CAC scores of 0 to ≥400 (P < .0001). The mortality hazard was 6.0 (P = .004) and 13.3 (P < .0001) for patients with a CAC score of 100-399 and ≥400. In patients with a luminal stenosis, CAC remained independently predictive in all-cause mortality (P < .0001) and death or MI (P < .0001) in multivariable models containing CAD risk factors and presenting symptoms.

CONCLUSIONS

CAC allows for the identification of those at an increased hazard for death or MI in symptomatic patients with nonobstructive disease. From the CONFIRM registry, the extent of CAC was an independent estimator of long-term prognosis among symptomatic patients with luminal stenosis and may further define risk and guide preventive strategies in patients with nonobstructive CAD.

Assessing the prognostic implications of myocardial perfusion studies: identification of patients at risk vs patients who may benefit from intervention?

Stress myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI) has a well-established role in improving risk stratification. Recent analyses, compared with older data, suggest that the yield of stress MPI has decreased. In part, this trend relates to testing patients with heterogeneous, but improved, risk factor modification. In this setting, positron emission tomography with myocardial flow reserve enhances risk stratification as it reflects the end result of atherosclerosis. Recent studies have also emphasized the clinical impact of incremental risk stratification by assessing net reclassification improvement (NRI). Previous retrospective studies have favored an ischemic threshold to select patients that benefit from revascularization, but this finding has not been corroborated in randomized trials. However, no large randomized trial has directly tested a strategy of revascularization for patients with at least a moderate amount of ischemia at risk. Unfortunately, even when faced with a significantly abnormal MPI result, subsequent action is too often absent.

Incremental prognostic value of stress myocardial perfusion imaging in asymptomatic diabetic patients

OBJECTIVE

Stress myocardial perfusion single-photon emission computed tomography (MPS) variables are robust estimators of prognosis. No data are available on the comparative ability of stress MPS risk markers using varied iterative and risk classification approaches in asymptomatic diabetic patients. We compared analytical approaches to estimate the added value of MPS variables in estimating coronary artery disease (CAD) outcomes in asymptomatic diabetic patients. We also evaluated the temporal characteristics of cardiac risk according to MPS findings.

METHODS

A total of 436 consecutive asymptomatic diabetic patients who underwent stress-rest gated MPS were prospectively enrolled. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards model was employed to estimate cardiac death and nonfatal myocardial infarction (MI). Risk reclassification was calculated and parametric survival analysis was used to predict time to events.

RESULTS

At multivariable analysis, post-stress left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) and stress MPS ischemia were independent predictors of CAD death or MI (both p < 0.01). The net reclassification improvement by adding MPS results to a model including pre-test CAD likelihood was 0.25 (95% confidence interval 0.06-0.44; p < 0.01). Parametric survival analysis showed the highest probability of CAD death or MI and the major risk acceleration in time in patients with stress MPS ischemia and post-stress LVEF ≤45%.

CONCLUSION

In asymptomatic diabetic patients, analytical approaches that establish the reclassification of events may serve for estimation of improved outcomes for stress MPS. Post-stress LVEF and stress-induced ischemia by gated MPS influence the temporal characteristic of the patient's risk at long-term follow-up.

Cost-effectiveness and future implications for cardiovascular imaging

This review highlights the current economic climate for health care and the evidentiary standards that are increasingly applied to appropriate use of cardiovascular imaging. Additionally, the evidence on cost efficiency and effectiveness is explored in this review. Ongoing multicentre registries and clinical trials will further enrich this evidence base with regard to value-based imaging strategies that provide enhanced effectiveness and efficiency resulting in improved patient outcomes.

Prognostic value of stress myocardial perfusion positron emission tomography: results from a multicenter observational registry

OBJECTIVES

The primary objective of this multicenter registry was to study the prognostic value of positron emission tomography (PET) myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI) and the improved classification of risk in a large cohort of patients with suspected or known coronary artery disease (CAD).

BACKGROUND

Limited prognostic data are available for MPI with PET.

METHODS

A total of 7,061 patients from 4 centers underwent a clinically indicated rest/stress rubidium-82 PET MPI, with a median follow-up of 2.2 years. The primary outcome of this study was cardiac death (n = 169), and the secondary outcome was all-cause death (n = 570). Net reclassification improvement (NRI) and integrated discrimination analyses were performed.

RESULTS

Risk-adjusted hazard of cardiac death increased with each 10% myocardium abnormal with mildly, moderately, or severely abnormal stress PET (hazard ratio [HR]: 2.3 [95% CI: 1.4 to 3.8; p = 0.001], HR: 4.2 [95% CI: 2.3 to 7.5; p < 0.001], and HR: 4.9 [95% CI: 2.5 to 9.6; p < 0.0001], respectively [normal MPI: referent]). Addition of percent myocardium ischemic and percent myocardium scarred to clinical information (age, female sex, body mass index, history of hypertension, diabetes, dyslipidemia, smoking, angina, beta-blocker use, prior revascularization, and resting heart rate) improved the model performance (C-statistic 0.805 [95% CI: 0.772 to 0.838] to 0.839 [95% CI: 0.809 to 0.869]) and risk reclassification for cardiac death (NRI 0.116 [95% CI: 0.021 to 0.210]), with smaller improvements in risk assessment for all-cause death.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with known or suspected CAD, the extent and severity of ischemia and scar on PET MPI provided powerful and incremental risk estimates of cardiac death and all-cause death compared with traditional coronary risk factors.

Prediction models for risk classification in cardiovascular disease

Risk stratification is an increasingly important tool for the management of patients with different diseases and also for decision making in subjects not yet with overt disease but who are at risk of disease in the short or long term or during their lifetime. Careful risk assessment in the individual patient, based on clinical, laboratory and imaging data, can be helpful for making decisions about treatment or other prevention strategies. As regards cardiovascular disease, many models have been suggested and are available for the prediction of diagnosis and prognosis and there are several algorithms for risk prediction. However, current risk screening methods are not perfect. This review evaluates relative strengths and limitations of traditional and more recent methods for assessing the performance of prediction models.

Evaluating imaging and computer-aided detection and diagnosis devices at the FDA

This report summarizes the Joint FDA-MIPS Workshop on Methods for the Evaluation of Imaging and Computer-Assist Devices. The purpose of the workshop was to gather information on the current state of the science and facilitate consensus development on statistical methods and study designs for the evaluation of imaging devices to support US Food and Drug Administration submissions. Additionally, participants expected to identify gaps in knowledge and unmet needs that should be addressed in future research. This summary is intended to document the topics that were discussed at the meeting and disseminate the lessons that have been learned through past studies of imaging and computer-aided detection and diagnosis device performance.

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

BACKGROUND

Nomograms can be useful tools for estimating coronary artery disease (CAD) risk. We sought to devise risk-based nomograms for stress myocardial perfusion SPECT to include measures of % ischemic myocardium and left ventricular function.

METHODS

A total of 4,575 patients were consecutively and prospectively enrolled in the Myoview Prognosis Registry. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards model were employed to estimate CAD death or MI. Nomograms were devised from the results of the Cox models.

RESULTS

CAD death or MI rates worsened in a gradient manner by the % ischemic myocardium. Higher risk patients were those with a rest and/or post-stress LVEF ≤ 45%. A nomogram was developed to estimate 2-year CAD death or MI-free survival for exercising and pharmacologic stress patients by their post-stress LVEF and % ischemic myocardium MPS results. Patients undergoing pharmacologic stress with a rest and/or post-stress LVEF ≤ 45% with high risk ischemic findings had the lowest CAD death or MI event-free survival. For exercising patients with a preserved resting LVEF > 45%, 2-year CAD death or MI event-free survival ranged from 99.4% to 89% for 0% to ≥20% ischemic myocardium. Those at highest risk included patients undergoing pharmacologic stress with depressed LVEF. For pharmacologic stress patients with a resting LVEF ≤45%, 2-year CAD death or MI event-free survival ranged from 89% to 48% for 0% to ≥20% ischemic myocardium. For pharmacologic stress patients with a post-stress LVEF ≤ 45%, 2-year CAD death or MI event-free survival ranged from 88% to 46% for 0% to ≥20% ischemic myocardium. A validation cohort revealed moderate-strong correlation between observed and predicted survival (r = 0.71). Average discordance between observed and predicted survival was ≤2% but was greater for higher risk patients with lower predicted survival estimates.

CONCLUSIONS

Risk-based nomograms estimating important CAD outcomes may serve as a clinically useful tool to target therapeutic intervention for high risk patient subsets.

Myocardial perfusion imaging and risk classification for coronary heart disease in diabetic patients. The IDIS study: a prospective, multicentre trial

PURPOSE

To determine whether stress-rest myocardial perfusion single-photon emission (MPS) computed tomography improves coronary heart disease (CHD) risk classification in diabetic patients.

METHODS

In 822 consecutive diabetic patients, risk estimates for a CHD event were categorized as 0% to <3%, 3% to <5%, and ≥5% per year using Cox proportional hazards models. Model 1 used traditional CHD risk factors and electrocardiography (ECG) stress test data and model 2 used these variables plus MPS imaging data. We calculated the net reclassification improvement (NRI) and compared the distribution of risk using model 2 vs. model 1. CHD death, myocardial infarction and unstable angina requiring coronary revascularization were the outcome measures.

RESULTS

During follow-up (58 ± 11 months), 148 events occurred. Model 2 improved risk prediction compared to model 1 (NRI 0.25, 95% confidence interval, CI, 0.15-0.34; p < 0.001). Overall, 301 patients were reclassified to a higher risk category, with an event rate of 28%, and 26 to a lower risk category, with an event rate of 15%. Among patients at 3% to <5% risk, 53% were reclassified at higher risk and 25% at lower risk (NRI 0.42, 95% CI 0.07-0.76; p < 0.05). The cost per NRI was $880.80 for MPS imaging as compared to an outpatient visit with an ECG stress test.

CONCLUSION

The addition of MPS imaging data to a prediction model based on traditional risk factors and ECG stress test data significantly improved CHD risk classification in patients with diabetes.