Prognostic value and limitations of exercise radionuclide angiography in medically treated coronary artery disease

Prognostication in 3-vessel coronary artery disease based on left ventricular ejection fraction during exercise : influence of coronary artery bypass grafting

BACKGROUND

Previous data indicate that left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) provides prognostic information among patients with coronary artery disease (CAD), but the value of such testing specifically for defining benefits of coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) may relate to severity of exercise-inducible ischemia measured noninvasively before surgery.

METHODS AND RESULTS

To determine the independent prognostic importance of preoperative ischemia severity for predicting outcomes of CABG among patients with extensive CAD, we monitored 167 stable patients with angiographically documented 3-vessel CAD (average follow-up of 9 years in event-free patients) who previously had undergone rest and exercise radionuclide cineangiography. Their course was correlated with data obtained during initial radionuclide testing, coronary arteriography, and clinical evaluation at study entry. Fifty-two patients received medical treatment only, and 115 underwent CABG (44 early [</=1 month after initial study]). Multivariate Cox model analysis indicated that change (Delta) in LVEF from rest to exercise during radionuclide study was the strongest independent predictor of major cardiac events (P=0.003) before surgery and also predicted magnitude of CABG benefit (P=0.04). Patients with DeltaLVEF -8% or less derived significant survival-prolonging and event-reducing benefit from CABG performed </=1 month after initial testing (P<0.02 for cardiac death and P=0.008 for cardiac events], early CABG versus medical-treatment-only patients); similar benefits were absent among patients with DeltaLVEF more than -8%, and among those in whom CABG was deferred.

CONCLUSIONS

Assessment of ischemia severity based on LVEF response to exercise enables effective prognostication among patients with 3-vessel CAD and defines the likelihood of life-prolonging and event-reducing benefits from CABG.

Transesophageal echocardiography with stress for the evaluation of patients with coronary artery disease

Echocardiography permits a comprehensive assessment of resting regional and global left ventricular function, the presence and extent of inducible myocardial ischemia, and the identification of myocardial viability. Accordingly, stress echocardiography has become a valuable tool for the evaluation of patient with known or suspected coronary artery disease. In some patients however, a suboptimal transthoracic echocardiogram may limit the performance of interpretation of the test. Transesophageal echocardiography in combination with stress has been recently used for the evaluation of patients with coronary artery disease. This technique is semi-invasive, more time-consuming, and requires a greater degree of expertise on the part of the personnel assisting with the test. In general, complications and side-effects are self-limited and rarely affect the diagnostic accuracy of the test. Based on its ability to provide high quality images, transesophageal stress echocardiography should be considered in patients who have suboptimal transthoracic ultrasound window for the quantitative assessment of myocardial wall-thickening in clinical investigations of ischemic heart disease.

Prognostic value of stress echocardiography in the evaluation of atypical chest pain patients without known coronary artery disease

Patients with atypical chest pain frequently lack significant coronary artery disease (CAD) and are, therefore, at low risk for future adverse cardiovascular events. We hypothesized that in this group of patients, stress echocardiography could identify those at risk for cardiac events. We retrospectively reviewed (mean follow-up 23.0 +/- 7.2 months) the prognostic value of stress echocardiography for major (cardiac death, myocardial infarction, congestive heart failure, and unstable angina) and total (major events plus coronary revascularization) cardiac events in 661 patients with atypical chest pain, normal global left ventricular (LV) systolic function, and no history of CAD. A positive stress echocardiogram was defined as the development of new or worsening wall motion abnormalities with exercise stress (80%) or dobutamine (20%). A total of 41 cardiac and 16 major events were noted. The event-free survival for total cardiac events was 97% for a normal stress echocardiogram and 93% for a normal stress electrocardiogram (ECG) at 30 months. A positive stress ECG predicted an event-free rate of 86% compared with 74% for stress-induced wall motion abnormalities and 42% if stress-induced LV dysfunction accompanied the wall motion abnormalities. A strategy recommending invasive studies based on positive stress echocardiogram results increased the per-patient cost, but led to greater savings per cardiac event predicted and provided incremental prognostic value for future cardiac events beyond clinical and stress electrocardiographic data. Thus, stress echocardiography in low-risk patients for CAD appears to be more cost effective than a stress ECG.

Worsening left ventricular performance on serial exercise radionuclide angiography does not identify high-risk patients

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether worsening exercise performance on serial exercise radionuclide angiography identifies patients at increased risk of future cardiac events.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

One hundred nine medically treated patients with previous Q-wave myocardial infarction underwent two exercise radionuclide angiographic studies at least 6 months apart (median, 16 months) without an intervening clinical event. Worsening exercise performance between the two studies was defined by five criteria: (1) lower (5% or more) peak exercise ejection fraction; (2) worsening peak exercise wall motion score; (3) combination of criteria 1 and 2; (4) worsening serial delta (exercise - rest) ejection fraction; or (5) increasing exercise ST-segment depression of 1 mm or more. Patients were followed up for a median duration of 3.9 years after the second exercise study.

RESULTS

Five cardiac deaths and 10 nonfatal myocardial infarctions occurred during follow-up. A Cox proportional hazards analysis failed to show an association between any of the aforementioned variables and cardiac events. Of the 15 patients with cardiac events, 4 (27%) had a lower (5% or more) exercise ejection fraction and 2 (13%) had a worsening exercise wall motion score. Of the 94 patients without cardiac events, 37 (39%) had a lower (5% or more) exercise ejection fraction and 28 (30%) had a worsening serial exercise wall motion score (not a statistically significant difference).

CONCLUSION

Worsening exercise performance on serial exercise radionuclide angiography does not identify patients at increased risk of future cardiac events.

Cardiovascular stress testing: a description of the various types of stress tests and indications for their use

OBJECTIVE

To describe the various types of stress tests and to provide guidelines for selecting a specific test for an individual patient.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Myocardial perfusion imaging, radionuclide angiography, stress echocardiography, and cardiopulmonary exercise testing are described. The advantages and limitations of these techniques are reviewed and compared with those of standard treadmill exercise testing. The agents used for pharmacologic stress testing are discussed.

RESULTS

Standard treadmill exercise testing is widely available and is less expensive than the imaging techniques. It is most accurate in patients with normal findings on a resting electrocardiogram who are not taking digoxin. In these patients, standard exercise electrocardiography is almost as accurate as the exercise imaging modalities for identifying those with left main or three-vessel coronary artery disease. Advantages of the stress imaging modalities in comparison with standard exercise electrocardiography include greater accuracy when the resting electrocardiogram shows abnormal findings, higher sensitivity, ability to localize and characterize the extent of myocardial ischemia, and direct measurement of other variables such as left ventricular function. These techniques must be performed carefully in experienced laboratories in order to provide accurate information. Published data are scant that directly compare one technique with another in the same set of patients. The nuclear cardiology techniques have been well validated for detecting left main and three-vessel coronary artery disease and for assessing prognosis. Myocardial perfusion imaging has been well validated for detecting ischemia in patients with abnormal left ventricular function at rest. In comparison with the nuclear cardiology techniques, stress echocardiography is less expensive and provides more ancillary information but has not been as well validated for assessment of severe coronary artery disease or prognosis. Cardiopulmonary exercise testing can be useful in selecting patients for cardiac transplantation and in assessing exertional dyspnea in selected patients. The most common application of pharmacologic stress testing is preoperative risk assessment of patients undergoing noncardiac operations. Pharmacologic stress testing should usually be reversed for patients who are unable to exercise adequately.

CONCLUSION

Most patients with normal findings on a resting electrocardiogram who are not taking digoxin should undergo standard treadmill exercise testing for diagnostic and prognostic purposes. Most patients with abnormal findings on a resting electrocardiogram should undergo one of the stress imaging techniques. Selecting a specific stress imaging techniques. should depend primarily on local expertise with the various techniques and secondarily on the strengths and limitations of the techniques as they relate to the individual patient.

Objective assessment of "cardioprotective" efficacy as a prognostic guide to management of mildly symptomatic revascularizable coronary artery disease

OBJECTIVES

The concept of "cardioprotection" based on ejection fraction was tested to see whether patients with coronary artery disease in whom medical treatment fails to be cardioprotective can be distinguished from those in whom it is safe to continue such treatment.

BACKGROUND

Ejection fraction is of fundamental prognostic importance. Its modification by anti-ischemic medication may allow assessment of cardioprotection from adverse outcome.

METHODS

Exercise ejection fraction and the change in ejection fraction from rest to exercise were measured by radionuclide ventriculography with and without background medication in 102 mildly symptomatic patients with coronary artery disease suitable for revascularization but initially treated medically.

RESULTS

Over 20 months, 23 patients experienced an adverse event. With medication, exercise ejection fraction increased in patients with and without events. By contrast, the ejection fraction response to exercise improved significantly in the event-free group only; the group with events had a persistent decrease in ejection fraction. By Cox analysis, the ejection fraction response to exercise performed with medication made the most significant independent contribution to event-free survival. Comparison of areas under receiver operating characteristic curves suggested that this index is the most useful clinical measure of cardioprotection.

CONCLUSIONS

An exercise-induced decrease in ejection fraction despite anti-ischemic medication implies failure of cardioprotection and a greater short-term risk of adverse outcome and crossover to revascularization in patients initially treated medically. Conversely, a preserved left ventricular performance confers a satisfactory prognosis while continuing with that treatment. Thus, the effect of medication on the ejection fraction response to exercise--a reasonable estimate of its cardioprotective efficacy--may influence the choice of continuing with such treatment or performing early revascularization.

Relation between ischemic threshold measured during dobutamine stress echocardiography and known indices of poor prognosis in patients with coronary artery disease

BACKGROUND

Stress echocardiography has become an accepted methodology for the evaluation of coronary artery disease. One potential advantage of dobutamine over other stressors used with echocardiography is the possibility of assessing the ischemic threshold. However, whether this measurement correlates with indices associated with adverse outcome has not been established.

METHODS AND RESULTS

One hundred four patients (91 men and 13 women; age, 61 +/- 9 years) with coronary artery disease were studied with transesophageal echocardiography during infusion of dobutamine 2.5 to 40 microgram/kg per minute. When regional dyssnergy developed, the dobutamine ischemic threshold (the dose of dobutamine at which induced regional wall motion abnormalities were first detected) was identified. The dobutamine stress echocardiogram was abnormal in 90 patients (sensitivity, 87%). The dobutamine ischemic threshold was 25.4 +/- 11.2 micrograms/kg per minute in patients with single-vessel disease, 14.4 +/- 7.9 in patients with two-vessel disease, and 9.1 +/- 7.9 in patients with three-vessel disease (P < .0001). The dobutamine ischemic threshold correlated with the ejection fraction response to exercise measured by radionuclide angiography: Patients with low ischemic threshold had a mean fall in ejection fraction, and patients with high ischemic threshold or normal tests had a mean increase in ejection fraction.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with coronary artery disease, the ischemic threshold measured during dobutamine stress echocardiography correlates with both the number of stenosed vessels and the left ventricular ejection fraction response to exercise. Because these variables are associated with poor prognosis, these findings provide further support regarding the utility of dobutamine stress echocardiography in the clinical evaluation of patients with chronic coronary artery disease.

Role of nuclear cardiology for determining management of patients with stable coronary artery disease

Both radionuclide angiography and myocardial perfusion imaging provide important insights that determine the management of patients with stable coronary artery disease. Both nuclear cardiology procedures have clearly demonstrated use in the noninvasvie identification of severe (left main or three-vessel) coronary artery disease and the noninvasive assessment of prognosis and thereby determine which patients should be sent to coronary angiography. Both radionuclide angiography and myocardial perfusion imaging provide prognostic information that is independent of resting left ventricular function and coronary anatomy and thereby influence the decision regarding which patients should be sent to coronary revascularization. This review considers the evidence supporting the uses of these nuclear cardiology procedures and provides suggestions regarding their cost-effective application.

Prognostic assessment in coronary artery disease: role of radionuclide angiography

Left ventricular function is one of the most important determinants, if not the most important determinant, of outcome in patients with coronary artery disease. The ability of radionuclide angiography to assess resting and exercise ejection fraction accurately and reproducibly has been shown to be a critical determinant of survival in large-scale studies of survivors of myocardial infarction, as well as patients with chronic stable angina. In addition, several centers have demonstrated that the exercise ejection fraction is an extremely valuable (and perhaps the most valuable) noninvasive parameter in predicting survival among patients with coronary artery disease. The prognostic insights gained from the exercise ejection fraction add incremental predictive information to the coronary anatomic information obtained from coronary arteriography, especially in patients with multivessel disease and those with left ventricular dysfunction at rest.

Absence of severe exercise-induced ischemia does not identify low-risk patients with three-vessel coronary artery disease

The purpose of this study was to determine the prognosis of medically treated patients with three-vessel coronary artery disease and normal left ventricular function who do not have severe ischemia on exercise radionuclide angiography. The absence of severe ischemia was defined prospectively (in accordance with previously published criteria) as the presence of at least one of the following: (1) workload more than 600 kg-m/min, (2) ST-segment depression of less than 1 mm, or (3) unchanged or increased left ventricular ejection fraction during exercise. Of 42 patients (33% in functional class III or IV) followed up for a median duration of 53 months (range, 1 to 84 months), 22 had initial cardiac events during follow-up, including 6 cardiac deaths, 5 nonfatal myocardial infarctions, and 11 late (a median of 29 months after the exercise study) coronary revascularization procedures. At 4 years of follow-up, the overall survival was 83%. Survival free of cardiac death or myocardial infarction was 77%, and survival free of all cardiac events was 59%. Even in the absence of severe exercise-induced ischemia, medically treated patients with three-vessel coronary artery disease and normal left ventricular function still have a poor long-term outcome.

Prognostic value of radionuclide angiography in medically treated patients with coronary artery disease. A comparison with clinical and catheterization variables

To evaluate the usefulness of multiple measures from rest and exercise radionuclide angiography (RNA) in predicting cardiovascular death and cardiovascular events (death or nonfatal myocardial infarction) and to assess the prognostic usefulness of the RNA relative to clinical and catheterization data, we studied 571 stable patients with symptomatic coronary artery disease who had upright rest/exercise first-pass RNA within 3 months of catheterization and were medically treated. With a median follow-up of 5.4 years, 90 patients have died from cardiovascular causes, and 147 patients have either died or suffered a nonfatal myocardial infarction. Using the Cox regression model and a preselected group of RNA variables, the most important RNA predictor of mortality was exercise ejection fraction (chi 2 = 81, p less than 0.00001). Neither rest ejection fraction nor the change in ejection fraction from rest to exercise contributed additional predictive information. Two other RNA study variables, the change in heart rate from rest to exercise and rest end-diastolic volume index, did contribute additional prognostic information to the exercise ejection fraction (chi 2 = 23, p less than 0.0001). Compared with noninvasive clinical data (history, physical examination, electrocardiogram, and chest radiograph), RNA variables were considerably more predictive of mortality (chi 2 = 71 [clinical variables] versus chi 2 = 104 [RNA]). Remarkably, the strength of the relation of RNA variables with mortality was equivalent to that of the set of catheterization variables previously demonstrated in our large angiographic population to be prognostically important (chi 2 = 104 [RNA] versus chi 2 = 102 [catheterization variables]). The RNA contained 84% of the information provided by clinical and catheterization descriptors combined. Furthermore, the RNA contributed significant additional prognostic information to the clinical and catheterization data (chi 2 = 13.6, p = 0.0035). For cardiovascular events, the relative prognostic usefulness of the RNA was similar, although relations with this outcome were generally weaker. Descriptors from the rest/exercise RNA exhibit a powerful relation with long-term outcomes and can be useful in defining risk, even when clinical and catheterization data are available.