Utilization of stress echocardiography in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease

Left Ventricular Myocardial and Cavity Velocity Disturbances Are Powerful Predictors of Significant Coronary Artery Stenosis

Background and Aim: Dobutamine stress echocardiography (DSE) is a well-established noninvasive investigation for significant coronary artery disease (CAD). The aim of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of cardiac Doppler parameters in predicting CAD. Methods: We prospectively studied 103 consecutive patients with suspected CAD based on typical symptoms; 59 proved to have CAD, and 44 patients proved to have no-CAD (n = 44). All patients underwent a complete stress Doppler echocardiographic examination. Total isovolumic time (T-IVT) as a marker of cavity dyssynchrony and wall motion score index (WMSI) were also calculated. Results: At peak dobutamine stress, the compromised LV longitudinal excursion (MAPSE), systolic septal and lateral velocities (s’), and diastolic indices were more pronounced in the CAD patients compared with those without CAD, but LV dimension did not differ between groups (p > 0.05). The WMSI was higher and t-IVT more prolonged in patients with CAD (p < 0.01 for both). Similarly, the changes were more pronounced in patients with significant CAD compared with insignificant CAD. On multivariate model, Δ mean s’, OR 2.016 (1.610 to 3.190; p < 0.001), Δ E velocity OR 2.502 (1.179 to 1.108; p < 0.001), Δ t-IVT 2.206 (1.180 to 2.780; p < 0.001) and Δ WMSI OR 1.911 (1.401 to 3.001; p = 0.001) were the most powerful independent predictors of the presence of CAD, particularly when significant (>75%). Δ mean s’ < 5.0 was 85% sensitive, 89% specific with AUC 0.92. Respective values for Δ E velocity <6.0 cm/s were 82%, 90% and 0.91; for Δ t-IVT > 4.5, 78%, 77% and 0.81 and for Δ FT ≥ 150 ms, 76%, 78% and 0.84 in predicating significant CAD. WMSI ≥ 0.7 was 75% sensitive, 77% specific with AUC of 0.81 in predicting significant CAD. The accuracy of DSE was higher in significant CAD compared to insignificant CAD (80% vs. 74%; p = 0.03). Conclusions: Compromised LV longitudinal systolic function, lower delta E wave, prolonged t-IVT, and increased WMSI were the most powerful independent predictors of the presence and significance of CAD. These finding strengthen the role of comprehensive DSE analysis in diagnosing ischemic disturbances secondary to significant CAD.

Clinical outcomes of discordant exercise electrocardiographic and echocardiographic findings compared with concordant findings in patients with chest pain and no history of coronary artery disease: An observational study

The aim of this study was to evaluate comparative clinical outcomes of discordant electrocardiographic (ECG) and echocardiographic (Echo) findings compared with concordant findings during treadmill exercise echocardiography in patients with chest pain and no history of coronary artery disease (CAD).A total of 1725 consecutive patients who underwent treadmill echocardiography with chest pain and no history of CAD were screened. The patients were classified into 4 groups: ECG-/Echo- (negative ECG and Echo), ECG+/Echo- (positive ECG and negative Echo), ECG-/Echo+, and ECG+/Echo+. Concomitant CAD was determined using coronary angiography or coronary computed tomography. Major adverse cardiac events (MACEs) were defined as a composite of coronary revascularization, acute myocardial infarction, and death.MACEs were similar between ECG-/Echo- and ECG+/Echo- groups. Compared with ECG+/Echo- group, ECG-/Echo+ group had more MACEs (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] adjusted by clinical risk factors [95% confidence interval {CI}], 3.57 [1.75-7.29], P < .001). Compared with ECG+/Echo+ group, ECG-/Echo+ group had lower prevalence of concomitant CAD and fewer MACEs (HR, 0.49 [0.29-0.81], P = .006).Positive exercise Echo alone during treadmill exercise echocardiography had worse clinical outcomes than positive ECG alone, and the latter had similar outcomes to both negative ECG and Echo. Positive exercise Echo alone also had better clinical outcomes than both positive ECG and Echo. Therefore, exercise Echo findings might be superior for predicting clinical outcomes compared with exercise ECG findings. Additional consideration of ECG findings on positive exercise Echo will also facilitate better prediction of clinical outcomes.