Left ventricular (LV) transient ischemic dilatation (TID) is not clear how it relates to inducible myocardial ischemia during stress echocardiography (SE).

Eighty-eight SEs were examined from the site certification phase of the ISCHEMIA Trial. LV end-diastolic volume (EDV) and end-systolic volume (ESV) were measured at rest and peak stages and the percent change calculated. Moderate or greater ischemia was defined as ≥3 segments with stress-induced severe hypokinesis or akinesis. Optimum cut points in stress-induced percent EDV and ESV change that identified moderate or greater myocardial ischemia were analyzed. Analysis from percentage distribution identified a > 13% LV volume increase in EDV or a > 9% LV volume increase in ESV as the optimum cutoff points for moderate or greater ischemia. Using these definitions for TID, there were 27 (31%) with TIDESV and 12 (14%) with TIDEDV . By logistic regression analysis and receiver operating characteristic curves, the percent change in ESV had a stronger association with moderate or greater myocardial ischemia than that of EDV change. Compared to those without TIDESV , cases with TIDESV had larger extent of inducible wall-motion abnormalities, lower peak stress LVEF, and higher likelihood of moderate or grater ischemia. For moderate or greater myocardial ischemia detection, TIDESV had a sensitivity of 46%, specificity of 83%, positive predictive value of 70%, and negative predictive value of 64%.

Transient ischemic dilatation by SE is a marker of extensive myocardial ischemia and can be used as an additional marker of higher risk.

Stress echocardiography (SE) is dependent on subjective interpretations. As a prelude to the International Study of Comparative Health Effectiveness with Medical and Invasive Approaches (ISCHEMIA) Trial, potential sites were required to submit two SE, one with moderate or severe left ventricular (LV) myocardial ischemia and one with mild ischemia. We evaluated the concordance of site and core lab interpretations.

Eighty-one SE were submitted from 41 international sites. Ischemia was classified by the number of new or worsening segmental LV wall motion abnormalities (WMA): none, mild (1 or 2) or moderate or severe (3 or more) by the sites and the core lab.

Core lab classified 6 SE as no ischemia, 35 mild and 40 moderate or greater. There was agreement between the site and core in 66 of 81 total cases (81%, weighted kappa coefficient [K] =0.635). Agreement was similar for SE type - 24 of 30 exercise (80%, K = 0.571) vs. 41 of 49 pharmacologic (84%, K = 0.685). The agreement between poor or fair image quality (27 of 36 cases, 75%, K = 0.492) was not as good as for the good or excellent image quality cases (39 of 45 cases, 87%, K = 0.755). Differences in concordance were noted for degree of ischemia with the majority of discordant interpretations (87%) occurring in patients with no or mild LV myocardial ischemia.

While site SE interpretations are largely concordant with core lab interpretations, this appears dependent on image quality and the extent of WMA. Thus core lab interpretations remain important in clinical trials where consistency of interpretation across a range of cases is critical.

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01471522.

Coronary artery disease (CAD) may be present in kidney transplant (KT) candidates without the presence of CAD clinical symptoms. This study joins an ongoing discussion about appropriate noninvasive diagnostic approaches for ischemic heart disease (IHD) assessment and patient selection for revascularization procedures. The aim of this study was to evaluate the role of dobutamine stress echocardiography (DSE) in IHD diagnosis in initially asymptomatic maintenance hemodialysis (HD) patients.

Forty HD patients aged 52.4 ± 2.0 years, were studied for 2.5 years. At inclusion, they were free of both symptoms and history of IHD. Standard electrocardiography (ECG), chest X-ray, standard echocardiography, DSE, 24-hour Holter ECG, and Doppler ultrasonography (carotids and lower extremities) were performed. Results were analyzed according to a predefined diagnostic algorithm.

DSE yielded negative results in all patients. Left ventricular (LV) ejection fraction ≤ 60%, LV hypertrophy, and Holter ECG silent ischemia features were noticed in 15%, 70%, and 10% of patients, respectively. Atherosclerotic lesions in lower extremities and carotid arteries were present in 50% and 37.5% of patients, respectively. During the follow-up, 9/40 patients died, including 6 cardiovascular (CV) deaths: 2 with intermediate and 4 with high CV risk according to the proposed algorithm.

In asymptomatic KT candidates, not only DSE, but also other noninvasive tests (eg, echocardiography and Doppler ultrasonography of the carotid and peripheral arteries) along with a detailed profile of the remaining CV risk factors should be performed and analyzed. Defined composition of risk factors and particular changes in noninvasive tests may be an indication for coronary angiography.

Dobutamine stress echocardiography (DSE) is an accepted test for the diagnosis of coronary artery disease (CAD), despite its wide diagnostic accuracy.

Which factors cause test variability of DSE for the diagnosis of CAD.

In a retrospective analysis of 46 studies in 5,353 patients, the potential causes of diagnostic variability were systematically analyzed, including patient selection, definition of CAD, chest pain characteristics, confounding factors for DSE (left ventricular hypertrophy, left bundle branch block, female gender), work-up bias (present when patient's chance to undergo coronary angiography is influenced by the result of DSE), review bias (present when DSE is interpreted in relation to CAG), DSE protocol and definition of a positive DSE.

Diagnostic variability was related to definition of a positive test, but not related to the definition of CAD or DSE protocol. However, only three of eight methodological standards for research design found general compliance. Differences in the selection of the study population (quality of echocardiographic window, angina pectoris), handling of confounding factors and analysis of disease in individual coronary arteries were observed. Lack of data on analysis of relevant chest pain syndromes and handling of nondiagnostic test results hampered further evaluation of these standards.

Methodological problems may explain the wide range in diagnostic variability of DSE. An improvement of clinical relevance of DSE testing is possible by stronger adherence to common and new methodological standards.

Clinical characteristics of patients, angiographic referral bias, and several technical factors may all affect the reported diagnostic accuracy of tests. The aim of this study was to assess their influence on the diagnostic accuracy of dobutamine stress echocardiography (DSE).

The medical literature from 1991 to 2006 was searched for diagnostic studies using DSE and meta-analysis was applied to the 62 studies thus retrieved, including 6881 patients. These studies were analyzed for patient characteristics, angiographic referral bias, and several technical factors.

The sensitivity of DSE was significantly related to the inclusion of patients with prior myocardial infarctions (0.834 vs 0.740, P < .01) and defining the results of DSE as already positive in case of resting wall motion abnormalities rather than obligatory myocardial ischemia (0.786 vs 0.864, P < .01). Specificity tended to be lower when patients with resting wall motion abnormalities were included in a study (0.812 vs 0.877, P < .10). The presence of referral bias adversely affected the specificity of DSE (0.771 vs 0.842, P < .01).

This analysis suggests that the reported sensitivity of DSE is likely higher and the specificity lower than expected in routine clinical practice because of the inappropriate inclusion of patients with prior myocardial infarctions, the definition of positive results on DSE, and the negative influence of referral bias. However, in the patient subset that will be sent to coronary angiography, the opposite results can be expected.

Stress echocardiography is the combination of 2D echocardiography with a physical, pharmacological or electrical stress. The diagnostic end point for the detection of myocardial ischemia is the induction of a transient worsening in regional function during stress. Stress echocardiography provides similar diagnostic and prognostic accuracy as radionuclide stress perfusion imaging, but at a substantially lower cost, without environmental impact, and with no biohazards for the patient and the physician. Among different stresses of comparable diagnostic and prognostic accuracy, semisupine exercise is the most used, dobutamine the best test for viability, and dipyridamole the safest and simplest pharmacological stress and the most suitable for combined wall motion coronary flow reserve assessment. The additional clinical benefit of myocardial perfusion contrast echocardiography and myocardial velocity imaging has been inconsistent to date, whereas the potential of adding - coronary flow reserve evaluation of left anterior descending coronary artery by transthoracic Doppler echocardiography adds another potentially important dimension to stress echocardiography. New emerging fields of application taking advantage from the versatility of the technique are Doppler stress echo in valvular heart disease and in dilated cardiomyopathy. In spite of its dependence upon operator's training, stress echocardiography is today the best (most cost-effective and risk-effective) possible imaging choice to achieve the still elusive target of sustainable cardiac imaging in the field of noninvasive diagnosis of coronary artery disease.

We sought to evaluate the risk stratification ability and incremental prognostic value of stress echocardiography over historic, clinical, and stress electrocardiographic (ECG) variables, over a wide spectrum of bayesian pretest probabilities of coronary artery disease (CAD).

Stress echocardiography is an established technique for the diagnosis of CAD. However, data on incremental prognostic value of stress echocardiography over historic, clinical, and stress ECG variables in patients with known or suggested CAD is limited.

We evaluated 3259 patients (60 +/- 13 years, 48% men) undergoing stress echocardiography. Patients were grouped into low (<15%), intermediate (15-85%), and high (>85%) pretest CAD likelihood subgroups using standard software. The historical, clinical, stress ECG, and stress echocardiographic variables were recorded for the entire cohort. Follow-up (2.7 +/- 1.1 years) for confirmed myocardial infarction (n = 66) and cardiac death (n = 105) was obtained.

For the entire cohort, an ischemic stress echocardiography study confers a 5.0 times higher cardiac event rate than the normal stress echocardiography group (4.0% vs 0.8%/y, P < .0001). Furthermore, Cox proportional hazard regression model showed incremental prognostic value of stress echocardiography variables over historic, clinical, and stress ECG variables across all pretest probability subgroups (global chi2 increased from 5.1 to 8.5 to 20.1 in the low pretest group, P = .44 and P = .01; from 20.9 to 28.2 to 116 in the intermediate pretest group, P = .47 and P < .0001; and from 17.5 to 36.6 to 61.4 in the high pretest group, P < .0001 for both groups).

A normal stress echocardiography portends a benign prognosis (<1% event rate/y) in all pretest probability subgroups and even in patients with high pretest probability and yields incremental prognostic value over historic, clinical, and stress ECG variables across all pretest probability subgroups. The best incremental value is, however, in the intermediate pretest probability subgroup.

The relative performance of alternative stressors for stress echocardiography for the diagnosis of coronary artery disease (CAD) is not well established.

All studies published between 1981 to December 2001 who met inclusion criteria were included in this analysis. We performed a summary receiver operator characteristic (SROC) analysis and calculated weighted mean of the likelihood ratio and sensitivity/specificity. A covariate analysis using meta-regression methods was also performed.

Forty-four studies presented data on Exercise, 11 on Adenosine, 80 on Dobutamine, 40 on Dipyridamole, 16 on transatrial pacing transesophageal echocardiography (Tap-TEE), and 7 on transatrial pacing transthorasic echocardiography (Tap-TTE). SROC analysis showed that the following order of most discriminatory to least: Tap-TEE, Exercise, Dipyridamole, Dobutamine and Adenosine. Weighted means sensitivity/specificity were Exercise: 82.6/84.4%, Adenosine: 68.4/80.9%, Dobutamine: 79.6/85.1%, Dipyridamole: 71.0/92.2%, Tap-TTE: 90.7/86.1%, and Tap-TEE: 86.2/91.3%. Covariate analysis showed that the discriminatory power of Exercise decreased with increasing mean age.

Tap-TEE is a very accurate test for both ruling in and ruling out CAD although its invasiveness may limit its clinical acceptability. Exercise is a well-balanced satisfactory test for both ruling in and ruling out but performance might be lower for the elderly. Dobutamine offers a reasonable compromise for Exercise. Dipyridamole might be good for ruling in but not for ruling out CAD. The incapability in ruling-out CAD was a major problem in clinical application of the stress. Adenosine was the least useful stressor in diagnosing CAD.

The purpose of the study was to define an appropriate parameter for risk stratification and prognosis of patients undergoing stress echocardiography.

Among stress echocardiography variables, peak wall-motion score index (WMSI) and ejection fraction (EF) have been shown to be independent and significant predictors of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. Data on the impact and importance of each parameter in risk stratification and prognosis are limited.

We evaluated 1560 patients (59 +/- 13 years; 51% men) undergoing stress echocardiography (36% treadmill, 64% dobutamine). Peak WMSI was derived from the cumulative sum of 16 left ventricular segments divided by sum of visualized segments at peak stress. The ratio of peak WMSI to EF was calculated for the entire cohort. Based on this ratio and using the receiver operating characteristic curve, patients were divided into 3 groups: low- (< 1.9), intermediate- (1.9-3.1), and high- (> 3.1) risk subgroups. Follow-up (2.8 +/- 1.1 years) for confirmed myocardial infarction (n = 26) and cardiac death (n = 38) were obtained.

Stress echocardiography effectively risk stratified patients into low- (0.7%/y), intermediate- (2.0%/y), and high- (4.4%/y) risk subgroups (P < .0001) based on the ratio of peak WMSI to EF. Cox proportional hazard model showed that risk stratification based on the ratio of peak WMSI to EF (global chi2 = 106.05; P < .0001) provided incremental value beyond that provided by risk stratification by peak WMSI (global chi2 = 79.23; P < .0001) or risk stratification by EF alone (global chi2 = 87.12; P < .0001).

The ratio of peak WMSI to EF (stress function index) provides best incremental prognostic value and effectively risk stratifies patients into low-, intermediate-, and high-risk subgroups and is better than risk stratification by either peak WMSI or EF alone. The results of stress echocardiography should routinely combine peak WMSI and EF for effective risk stratification.

Screening for coronary artery disease is constrained by its low prevalence in unselected patients. We compared the ability of clinical scores to identify a high-risk group with diabetes mellitus and investigated a Bayesian strategy by combination with exercise echocardiography (ExE).

The Framingham risk score (FRS), a score based on the American Diabetes Association (ADA) screening guidelines, the United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS) risk engine, and a disease-specific diabetic cardiac risk score (DCRS) were calculated in 199 asymptomatic patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus undergoing ExE. The frequency of abnormal ExE and the proportion of these with coronary stenoses were sought in groups designated as high risk on the basis of optimal cutoffs for each score. All patients were followed up for 1 year.

High risk was identified in fewer patients with the DCRS (27%) than FRS (38%, P = .02), ADA (41%, P = .004), and UKPDS (43%, P = .001). Exercise echocardiography was positive in 27 (14%); 11 of 23 proceeding to angiography showed significant stenoses. Areas under the receiver operator characteristic curves for prediction of a positive ExE were similar for DCRS, UKPDS, and FRS but less for ADA (P = .04). Positive ExE was uncommon in low-risk patients (8%-11%) and most were false positives (58%-80%). Cardiovascular events (n = 9) were more likely in the high-risk compared with the low-risk UKPDS (9% vs 2%, P = .03) and DCRS (12% vs 2%, P = .01).

Combination of the UKPDS or DCRS with ExE may optimize detection of coronary artery disease and cardiac events in asymptomatic patients, while minimizing the numbers of ExE and false-positive rate.

There are between 3 and 5 million visits to EDs each year for complaints of chest pain. Of these, about one half of the patients have a noncardiac cause for their chest pain. Of the remainder, about 30% to 50% have significant coronary disease. It is quite clear that patients who are at high risk for a coronary event should be admitted to the hospital. For the low-to-moderate risk patients, the decision to admit or discharge the patient from the ED is not quite so easy. The emergency physician has to decide which tests can be helpful in the decision-making process, this can be undertaken in conjunction with a consultative cardiologist. It can be argued that if a patient does not have a normal test result whichever that evaluatory test is), then the patient should be admitted for further work-up and evaluation. The easiest test to perform in the ED setting is an echocardiogram. The images can be sent by telecommunication to a qualified echocardiogram reader for interpretation. This also has a reasonable NPV, although not necessarily as good as some of the other modalities available, unless interpreted in light of cardiac enzyme test results. If the index of suspicion is still high, then a stress echocardiogram can be considered. This has an excellent NPV and can be easily performed in [table: see text] most patients. This should not be undertaken in the face of an evolving MI, and patients should be observed for at least 8 hours after their initial presentation to the ED prior to undergoing a provocative test. Nuclear scintigraphy, another modality available for cardiac risk stratification, can be a logistical nightmare. The nuclear isotopes are strictly regulated by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. The emergency physician may inject the isotopes, provided that he or she has undergone the necessary radiation training. Also, the patient must be removed from the ED to a radioisotope-approved area for the duration of the scan. One of the most difficult questions left open after review of all these analytical modalities is the duration of time these test results remain valid; when does an individual patient need to be reevaluated as to their specific pretest probability? The answer to this question lies in the presenting clinical scenario. If the patient presents with a similar inciting trigger for his or her symptoms, and the cardiac risk profile has not changed appreciably, then the previous study (whether a provocative stress test or even a cardiac catheterization) probably can be reliably counted. If the patient's risk profile has changed or the symptoms are new or more intense, the physician is compelled to pursue this encounter as a new, acute event. This can be true even in the setting of a previous cardiac catheterization that showed nonobstructive coronary disease, because plaque rupture can be acute and unpredictable. Ultimately, optimal care calls for each institution to develop a specific approach, in conjunction with their consultative cardiologist or critical care specialist, to enhance patient care, safety, and diagnostic outcome, while maintaining cost efficiency.

Dobutamine-stress and dipyridamole-stress echocardiographies are widely used for pharmacological stress echocardiography, with wide geographical variations.

To assess whether evidence derived from the literature indicates or disapproves that either stress modality confers diagnostic superiority.

We performed a meta-analysis of peer-reviewed literature of published trials with head-to-head comparison, on the same population, of high-dose (0.84 mg/kg) dipyridamole-stress versus high-dose (up to 40 micrograms/kg per min) dobutamine-stress echocardiography. Data from 12 studies performed in 12 institutions in seven countries were analysed. Angiographic information about 818 patients was considered.

The diagnostic accuracies of the two tests were similar (631 of 818, 77%, for dipyridamole versus 654 of 818, 80%, for dobutamine, NS). Overall sensitivities were 403 of 568 (71%) for dipyridamole and 437 of 568 (77%) for dobutamine (P < 0.05). Sensitivities for patients with single-vessel disease were 177 of 275 (64%) for dipyridamole and 203 of 275 (74%) for dobutamine (P < 0.05). Sensitivities for patients with multivessel disease were 162 of 203 (80%) for dipyridamole and 163 of 203 (80%) for dobutamine (NS). Specificities were 232 of 250 (93%) for dipyridamole and 217 of 250 (87%) for dobutamine (P < 0.05). Data from an additional 26 studies with dipyridamole alone and 47 studies with dobutamine alone were analysed. The diagnostic accuracies were 80% for dipyridamole (n = 2038 patients; 95% confidence interval 75-82%) and 82% for dobutamine (n = 4264 patients; 95% confidence interval 79-84%).

High-dose dobutamine-stress and high-dose dipyridamole-stress echocardiographies have comparable diagnostic accuracies, with a slightly higher sensitivity with dobutamine and a slightly higher specificity with dipyridamole.

Although dobutamine stress echocardiography is important for assessing cardiac ischemia and viability, analysis of wall motion is qualitatively performed. We quantitatively evaluated left ventricular wall motion using a newly developed omnidirectional M-mode echocardiography that can depict the M-mode at the site of region of interest on the 2-dimensional image in real time, and established its usefulness for analyzing the myocardial response to dobutamine infusion. Dobutamine stress echocardiography with omnidirectional M-mode was performed in 57 patients with coronary lesions. In 38 of these patients, exercise stress single-photon emission computed tomographic thallium scintigraphy (Tl-201 SPECT) was performed. Endocardial excursion of 103 regions was measured from omnidirectional M-mode at baseline, low-dose (6 microg/kg/min), and at peak dose (30 microg/kg/min) dobutamine. A decrease and increase in wall excursion was scored (from -3 to 3) for a changes of every 2 mm, and a quantitative wall motion score (QWMS) was calculated as a summation of the scores from baseline to low dose and from low to peak doses. Quantitative coronary stenosis score (QCSS) was calculated as a summation of stenotic and collateral scores. The stenosis scores were graded as: 1 = 0% to 50%, 2 = 50% to 75%, 3 = 75% to 90%, 4 = 90% to 95%, 5 = 95% to 100%; collateral scores were graded as: -1 = poor collateral, -2 = good collateral. Based on the QWMS at each dose of dobutamine, the serial changes in wall motion were divided into 4 groups: augmented, biphasic, no change, and worsening. The QCSS was clearly different among these groups. QWMS was significantly correlated with QCSS (r = 0.657, p <0.001). The incidence of redistribution in Tl-201 SPECT was high in the region with low score of QWMS. In conclusion, omnidirectional M-mode is useful for quantitatively determining the grade of cardiac ischemia by assessing the serial change of ventricular wall motion during dobutamine infusion.