Outcome of patients with high-risk Duke treadmill score and normal myocardial perfusion imaging on spect

Vall d'Hebron Risk Score II for myocardial infarction and cardiac death

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to create a new Vall d'Hebron Risk Score-II (VH-RS-II) for non-fatal myocardial infarction (MI) and/or cardiac death (CD), excluding patients with coronary revascularisation (CR) during the follow-up.

METHODS

We analysed 5215 consecutive patients underwent gated single photon emission CT (SPECT); 2960 patients (age 64.2±11, male 58.1%) had no previous MI and/or CR, and 2255 patients (age 63.3±11, male 81.9%) had previous MI and/or CR. During a follow-up of 4.3±2.6 years, the cardiac event (MI and CD) was evaluated. This study was reviewed and approved by the ethics committee of our institution (number form trial register, PR(AG)168.2012). To obtain the predictor model, multivariate Cox regression analysis and multivariate logistic regression analysis were used. RS-VH-II was validated with 679 patients.

RESULTS

In patients without previous MI and/or CR, age (HR: 1.01; p<0.001), diabetes (HR: 2.1, p=0.001), metabolic equivalent (METs) (HR: 0.89, p=0.038), ST segment depression (HR: 1.4, p=0.011), ejection fraction (EF) (HR: 0.97, p<0.001) and summed stress score (HR: 1.2, p<0.001) were the independent predictors of CE (C-statistic: 0.8). In patients with previous MI and/or CR, age (HR: 1.06, p<0.001), male (HR: 1.9, p=0.047), smoker (HR: 1.5, p=0.047), METs (HR: 0.8, p<0.001), ST segment depression (HR: 1.4, p=0.002), EF (HR: 0.96; p<0.001) and summed difference score (HR: 1.03, p=0.06) were the independent predictors of CE (C-statistic:0.8).

CONCLUSION

The VH-RS-II obtained from different clinical exercise and gated SPECT variables allow the risk stratification for MI and CD in patients with or without previous MI and/or CR in due form.

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: 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: 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.

A novel clinical risk prediction model for myocardial infarction, coronary revascularization, and cardiac death according to clinical, exercise, and gated SPECT variables (VH-RS)

AIMS

To create a risk score for cardiac events (CE) according to clinical, exercise, and gated SPECT variables.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We analysed 5707 consecutive patients; 3181 patients (age 64.2 ± 11 years, male 59.6%) with suspected coronary artery disease (CAD) [without previous myocardial infarction (MI) or coronary revascularization (CR)] and 2526 patients (age 63.3 ± 11 years, male 81.7%) with established CAD (with previous MI or CR). To create the Vall d'Hebron Risk Score (VH-RS), first we analyse the predictors of CE (non-fatal MI, CR, and/or cardiac death), then the probability of CE for every patient according to the predictive variables. According to risk we stratified patients into four risk levels: very low risk (VLR), low risk (LR), moderate risk (MR), and high risk (HRi) using Multiple Cox Regression analysis models. Finally, we validate the VH-RS in another prospective cohort of 734 patients. In patients with suspected CAD; age (P < 0.001); gender (P = 0.001); hyperlipidaemia (P < 0.001); nitrates (P = 0.04); ejection fraction (EF) (P = 0.001); summed stress score (P < 0.001); METs (P < 0.001); exercise angina (P = 0.006); and mm of ST segment depression (P = 0.004) were the independent predictors of CE (C-statistic: 0.8; P < 0.001). In patients with established CAD, EF (P < 0.001); summed difference score (P = 0.001); age (P < 0.001); smoker (P = 0.002); nitrates (P = 0.003); exercise angina (P = 0.001); METs (P < 0.001); and mm of ST segment depression (P = 0.011) were the independent predictors of CE (C-statistic: 0.7; P < 0.001). The risk score obtained from these variables allows the stratification of patients into four risk levels: VLR, LR, MR, and HRi.

CONCLUSIONS

The cardiac risk stratification by mean of clinical, exercise, and gated SPECT variables is an objective aid to assessing an individual's cardiac risk.

Higher event rate in patients with high-risk Duke Treadmill Score despite normal exercise-gated myocardial perfusion imaging

This prospective study was carried out to find the negative predictive value of various Duke Treadmill Scores (DTSs) in patients with normal myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI). This study was conducted from August 2012 to July 2015, and 603 patients having normal exercise MPIs were included. Patients were followed for 2 years for fatal myocardial infarction (FMI) and nonfatal myocardial infarction (NFMI). Follow-up was not available in 23 patients, leaving a cohort of 583 participants. DTS was low risk (≥5) in 286, intermediate risk (between 4 and − 10) in 211, and high risk (≤−11) in 86 patients. Patients with high- and intermediate-risk DTS were significantly elder than low-risk DTS cohort. Patients with high-risk DTS had significantly higher body mass index with male preponderance compared to other groups. No significant difference was found among three groups regarding modifiable or nonmodifiable risk factors and left ventricular ejection fraction. On follow-up, single FMI was observed in high-risk DTS group (log-rank test value = 5.779, P = 0.056). Five NFMI events were observed in high-risk DTS (94.2% survival; log-rank test value = 19.398, P = 0.0001; significant) as compared to two events each in low- and intermediate-risk DTS (nonsignificant). We conclude that patients with normal exercise MPI and low-to-intermediate risk DTS have significantly low NFMI. High-risk DTS despite normal exercise MPI had high NFMI. Further, validation studies to find the predictive value of symptomatic and asymptomatic ST deviation resulting in high-risk DTS in patients with normal exercise MPI are warranted.

Review of cardiovascular imaging in the journal of nuclear cardiology in 2016: Part 2 of 2-myocardial perfusion imaging

In 2016, the Journal of Nuclear Cardiology published many high-quality articles. Similar to previous years, we will summarize here a selection of the articles that were published in the Journal in 2016 to provide a concise review of the main advancements that have recently occurred in the field. In the first article of this two-part series we focused on publications dealing with positron emission tomography, computed tomography, and magnetic resonance. This review will place emphasis on myocardial perfusion imaging using single-photon emission-computed tomography summarizing advances in the field including in diagnosis, prognosis, and appropriate use.