TY - JOUR
T1 - Myocardial perfusion assessment in patients with medium probability of coronary artery disease and no prior myocardial infarction
T2 - Comparison of myocardial contrast echocardiography with 99mTc single-photon emission computed tomography
AU - Senior, Roxy
AU - Lepper, Wolfgang
AU - Pasquet, Agnes
AU - Chung, George
AU - Hoffman, Rainer
AU - Vanoverschelde, Jean Louis
AU - Cerqueira, Manuel
AU - Kaul, Sanjiv
N1 - Funding Information:
Supported by a grant from Amersham Health, Amersham, UK, and in part by grants (RO1-HL48890 and RO1-HL66034) from the National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md.
PY - 2004/6
Y1 - 2004/6
N2 - Background No previous studies have compared myocardial contrast echocardiography (MCE) and single-photon emission computerized tomography (SPECT) for the detection of coronary artery disease (CAD) in patients with a medium likelihood of CAD. This study was developed to test the hypothesis that MCE is superior to SPECT for the detection of CAD. Methods Fifty-five patients with a medium probability of CAD and no previous myocardial infarction were recruited. Results of MCE and SPECT were compared to quantitative coronary arteriography, where CAD was defined as >50% stenosis. Each patient was examined for the anterior and posterior circulations. Results On a coronary circulation basis (n = 110), the sensitivity of MCE was significantly greater than that of SPECT for the detection of CAD (86% vs 43%, P < .0001). However, the specificities were similar (88% and 93%, P = .52). Both techniques were marginally more accurate in the anterior compared to the posterior circulation (88% vs 76%, P = .07 for MCE and 79% vs 63%, P = .19, for SPECT). On a patient basis (n = 55), MCE had a higher sensitivity than SPECT for the detection of CAD (83% vs 49%, P < .05). Although specificity tended to be higher for SPECT than MCE (92% vs 58%), it was not significant (P = .33). When CAD was defined as >40% coronary stenosis, the specificity of MCE increased to 83% without any change in sensitivity. Conclusion In this preliminary study, MCE was found to be superior to SPECT during dipyridamole stress for the diagnosis of CAD in patients with a medium pretest probability of CAD. Larger studies are required to confirm these findings.
AB - Background No previous studies have compared myocardial contrast echocardiography (MCE) and single-photon emission computerized tomography (SPECT) for the detection of coronary artery disease (CAD) in patients with a medium likelihood of CAD. This study was developed to test the hypothesis that MCE is superior to SPECT for the detection of CAD. Methods Fifty-five patients with a medium probability of CAD and no previous myocardial infarction were recruited. Results of MCE and SPECT were compared to quantitative coronary arteriography, where CAD was defined as >50% stenosis. Each patient was examined for the anterior and posterior circulations. Results On a coronary circulation basis (n = 110), the sensitivity of MCE was significantly greater than that of SPECT for the detection of CAD (86% vs 43%, P < .0001). However, the specificities were similar (88% and 93%, P = .52). Both techniques were marginally more accurate in the anterior compared to the posterior circulation (88% vs 76%, P = .07 for MCE and 79% vs 63%, P = .19, for SPECT). On a patient basis (n = 55), MCE had a higher sensitivity than SPECT for the detection of CAD (83% vs 49%, P < .05). Although specificity tended to be higher for SPECT than MCE (92% vs 58%), it was not significant (P = .33). When CAD was defined as >40% coronary stenosis, the specificity of MCE increased to 83% without any change in sensitivity. Conclusion In this preliminary study, MCE was found to be superior to SPECT during dipyridamole stress for the diagnosis of CAD in patients with a medium pretest probability of CAD. Larger studies are required to confirm these findings.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=3042770848&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=3042770848&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.ahj.2003.12.030
DO - 10.1016/j.ahj.2003.12.030
M3 - Article
C2 - 15199362
AN - SCOPUS:3042770848
SN - 0002-8703
VL - 147
SP - 1100
EP - 1105
JO - American Heart Journal
JF - American Heart Journal
IS - 6
ER -