Stress testing and non-invasive coronary angiography in patients with suspected coronary artery disease: time for a new paradigm

Armin Arbab-Zadeh, Armin Arbab-Zadeh

Abstract

Diagnosis and management of coronary artery disease represents major challenges to our health care system, affecting millions of patients each year. Until recently, the diagnosis of coronary artery disease was possible only through cardiac catheterization and invasive coronary angiography. To avoid the risks of an invasive procedure, stress testing is often employed for an initial assessment of patients with suspected coronary artery disease, serving as a gatekeeper for cardiac catheterization. With the emergence of non-invasive coronary angiography, the question arises if such a strategy is still sensible, particularly, in view of only a modest agreement between stress testing results and the presence of coronary artery disease established by cardiac catheterization. Much data in support of the diagnostic accuracy and prognostic value of non-invasive coronary angiography by computed tomography have emerged within the last few years. These data challenge the role of stress testing as the initial imaging modality in patients with suspected coronary artery disease. This article reviews the clinical utility, limitations, as well as the hazards of stress testing compared with non-invasive coronary artery imaging by computed tomography. Finally, the implications of this review are discussed in relation to clinical practice.

Keywords: CT angiography; cardiac CT; coronary artery disease.; stress testing.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV) of computed tomography angiography for detecting 50% stenosis or over by quantitative coronary angiography based on a meta-analysis of 3,674 symptomatic patients without history of coronary artery disease enrolled in 28 studies.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Annualized rates of death or myocardial infarction after computed tomography angiography according to study results based on a meta-analysis of 9,592 patients enrolled in 18 studies. CAD, coronary artery disease.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Schema for a proposed algorithm of triaging patients with suspected but without known coronary artery disease. CAD, coronary artery disease; CTA, computed tomography angiography; tx, therapy.

References

    1. Roger VL, Go AS, Lloyd-Jones DM, et al. Heart disease and stroke statistics - 2011 update: a report from the American Heart Association. Circulation. 2011;123:933–44.
    1. Berrington de Gonzalez A, Kim KP, Smith-Bindman R, McAreavey D. Myocardial perfusion scans: projected population cancer risks from current levels of use in the United States. Circulation. 2010;122:2403–10.
    1. Heidenreich PA, Trogdon JG, Khavjou OA, et al. Forecasting the future of cardiovascular disease in the United States: a policy statement from the American Heart Association. Circulation. 2011;123:933–44.
    1. Nemetz PN, Roger VL, Ransom JE, et al. Recent trends in the prevalence of coronary disease: a population-based autopsy study of nonnatural deaths. Arch Intern Med. 2008;168:264–70.
    1. Tuzcu EM, Kapadia SR, Tutar E, et al. High prevalence of coronary atherosclerosis in asymptomatic teenagers and young adults: evidence from intravascular ultrasound. Circulation. 2001;103:2705–10.
    1. Hackett D, Davies G, Maseri A. Pre-existing coronary stenoses in patients with first myocardial infarction are not necessarily severe. Eur Heart J. 1988;9:1317–23.
    1. Little WC, Constantinescu M, Applegate RJ, et al. Can coronary angiography predict the site of a subsequent myocardial infarction in patients with mild-to-moderate coronary artery disease? Circulation. 1988;78:1157–66.
    1. Master A, Oppenheimer E. A simple exercise tolerance test for circulatory efficiency with standard tables for normal individuals. Am J Med Sci. 1929;177:223–43.
    1. Gibbons RJ, Balady GJ, Beasley JW, et al. ACC/AHA guidelines for exercise testing. A report of the American College of Cardiology/American heart association task force on practice guidelines (committee on exercise testing) J Am Coll Cardiol. 1997;30:260–311.
    1. Underwood SR, Anagnostopoulos C, Cerqueira M, et al. Myocardial perfusion scintigraphy: the evidence. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2004;31:261–91.
    1. Gianrossi R, Detrano R, Mulvihill D, et al. Exercise-induced ST depression in the diagnosis of coronary artery disease. A meta-analysis. Circulation. 1989;80:87–98.
    1. Fleischmann KE, Hunink MG, Kuntz KM, Douglas PS. Exercise echocardiography or exercise SPECT imaging? A meta-analysis of diagnostic test performance. JAMA. 1998;280:913–20.
    1. Geleijnse ML, Krenning BJ, van Dalen BM, et al. Factors affecting sensitivity and specificity of diagnostic testing: dobutamine stress echocardiography. J Am Soc Echocardiogr. 2009;22:1199–208.
    1. Schwitter J, Wacker CM, van Rossum AC, et al. MR-IMPACT: Comparison of perfusion-cardiac magnetic resonance with single-photon emission computed tomography for the detection of coronary artery disease in a multicentre, multivendor, randomized trial. Eur Heart J. 2008;29:480–9.
    1. Patel MR, Peterson ED, Dai D, et al. Low diagnostic yield of elective coronary angiography. N Engl J Med. 2010;362:886–95.
    1. Navare SM, Mather JF, Shaw LJ, et al. Comparison of risk stratification with pharmacologic and exercise stress myocardial perfusion imaging: a meta-analysis. J Nucl Cardiol. 2004;11:551–61.
    1. Metz LD, Beattie M, Hom R, et al. The prognostic value of normal exercise myocardial perfusion imaging and exercise echocardiography: a meta-analysis. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2007;49:227–37.
    1. Peteiro J, Monserrrat L, Pineiro M, et al. Comparison of exercise echocardiography and the duke treadmill score for risk stratification in patients with known or suspected coronary artery disease and normal resting electrocardiogram. Am Heart J. 2006;151:1324–1324.
    1. Bangalore S, Gopinath D, Yao SS, Chaudhry FA. Risk stratification using stress echocardiography: incremental prognostic value over historic, clinical, and stress electrocardiographic variables across a wide spectrum of bayesian pretest probabilities for coronary artery disease. J Am Soc Echocardiogr. 2007;20:244–52.
    1. Gerber BL. MRI versus CT for the detection of coronary artery disease: current state and future promises. Curr Cardiol Rep. 2007;9:72–8.
    1. Schuetz GM, Zacharopoulou NM, Schlattmann P, Dewey M. Meta-analysis: Noninvasive coronary angiography using computed tomography versus magnetic resonance imaging. Ann Intern Med. 2010;152:167–77.
    1. Achenbach S, Marwan M, Ropers D, et al. Coronary computed tomography angiography with a consistent dose below 1 mSv using prospectively electrocardiogram-triggered high-pitch spiral acquisition. Eur Heart J. 2010;31:340–6.
    1. Mowatt G, Cook JA, Hillis GS, et al. 64-slice computed tomography angiography in the diagnosis and assessment of coronary artery disease: systematic review and meta-analysis. Heart. 2008;94:1386–93.
    1. Paech DC, Weston AR. A systematic review of the clinical effectiveness of 64-slice or higher computed tomography angiography as an alternative to invasive coronary angiography in the investigation of suspected coronary artery disease. BMC Cardiovasc Disord. 2011;11:32–32.
    1. von Ballmoos MW, Haring B, Juillerat P, Alkadhi H. Meta-analysis: diagnostic performance of low-radiation-dose coronary computed tomography angiography. Ann Intern Med. 2011;154:413–20.
    1. Arbab-Zadeh A, Miller J, Rochitte C, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of CT coronary angiography according to pretest probability of coronary artery disease and severity of coronary arterial calcification: the CorE-64 international, multicenter study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2012;59:379–87.
    1. Meijboom WB, Meijs MF, Schuijf JD, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of 64-slice computed tomography coronary angiography: a prospective, multicenter, multivendor study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2008;52:2135–44.
    1. Budoff MJ, Dowe D, Jollis JG, et al. Diagnostic performance of 64-multidetector row coronary computed tomographic angiography for evaluation of coronary artery stenosis in individuals without known coronary artery disease: results from the prospective multicenter ACCURACY (assessment by coronary computed tomographic angiography of individuals undergoing invasive coronary angiography) trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2008;52:1724–32.
    1. Gallagher MJ, Ross MA, Raff GL, et al. The diagnostic accuracy of 64-slice computed tomography coronary angiography compared with stress nuclear imaging in emergency department low-risk chest pain patients. Ann Emerg Med. 2007;49:125–36.
    1. Budoff MJ, Rasouli ML, Shavelle DM, et al. Cardiac CT angiography (CTA) and nuclear myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI)-a comparison in detecting significant coronary artery disease. Acad Radiol. 2007;14:252–7.
    1. Gaemperli O, Husmann L, Schepis T, et al. Coronary CT angiography and myocardial perfusion imaging to detect flow-limiting stenoses: a potential gatekeeper for coronary revascularization? Eur Heart J. 2009;30:2921–9.
    1. Schuijf JD, Wijns W, Jukema JW, et al. Relationship between noninvasive coronary angiography with multi-slice computed tomography and myocardial perfusion imaging. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2006;19(48):2508–14.
    1. Hamirani YS, Isma'eel H, Larijani V, et al. The diagnostic accuracy of 64-detector cardiac computed tomography compared with stress nuclear imaging in patients undergoing invasive cardiac catheterization. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 2010;34:645–51.
    1. Arbab-Zadeh A, Lima JAC, Lemos PA, et al. Association of myocardial ischemia as assessed by stress testing and the presence of coronary stenoses by computed tomography and conventional angiography: a sub-analysis from the CORE-64 multicenter trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2008;51:278–906.
    1. Budoff MJ, Kazerooni EA, Thomas GS, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of noninvasive 64-row computed tomographic coronary angiography (CCTA) compared with myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI): the PICTURE study, a prospective multicenter trial. Circulation. 2008;118:S935–S935.
    1. Hulten EA, Carbonaro S, Petrillo SP, et al. Prognostic value of cardiac computed tomography angiography. A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2011;57:1237–47.
    1. Bamberg F, Sommer WH, Hoffmann V, et al. Meta-analysis and systematic review of the long-term predictive value of assessment of coronary atherosclerosis by contrast-enhanced coronary computed tomography angiography. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2011;57:2426–36.
    1. Min JK, Dunning A, Lin FY, et al. Age- and sex-related differences in all-cause mortality risk based on coronary computed tomography angiography findings results from the international multicenter CONFIRM (coronary CT angiography evaluation for clinical outcomes: An international multicenter registry) of 23,854 patients without known coronary artery disease. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2011;58:849–60.
    1. Abdulla J, Asferg C, Kofoed KF. Prognostic value of absence or presence of coronary artery disease determined by 64-slice computed tomography coronary angiography A systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2011;27:413–20.
    1. Chow BJ, Wells GA, Chen L, et al. Prognostic value of 64-slice cardiac computed tomography severity of coronary artery disease, coronary atherosclerosis, and left ventricular ejection fraction. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2010;55:1017–28.
    1. van Werkhoven JM, Schuijf JD, Gaemperli O, et al. Prognostic value of multislice computed tomography and gated single-photon emission computed tomography in patients with suspected coronary artery disease. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2009;53:623–32.
    1. Shaw LJ, Berman DS, Hendel RC, et al. Prognosis by coronary computed tomographic angiography: Matched comparison with myocardial perfusion single-photon emission computed tomography. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr. 2008;2:93–101.
    1. Schlett CL, Banerji D, Siegel E, et al. Prognostic value of CT angiography for major adverse cardiac events in patients with acute chest pain from the emergency department: 2-year outcomes of the ROMI-CAT trial. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2011;4:481–91.
    1. Goldstein JA, Chinnaiyan KM, Abidov A, et al. The CT-STAT (coronary computed tomographic angiography for systematic triage of acute chest pain patients to treatment) trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2011;58:1414–22.
    1. La Grutta L, Runza G, Gentile G, et al. Prognostic outcome of routine clinical noninvasive multidetector-row computed tomography coronary angiography in patients with suspected coronary artery disease: a 2-year follow-up study. Radiol Med. 2011;116:521–31.
    1. Ostrom MP, Gopal A, Ahmadi N, et al. Mortality incidence and the severity of coronary atherosclerosis assessed by computed tomography angiography. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2008;52:1335–43.
    1. Finn AV, Nakano M, Narula J, et al. Concept of vulnerable/unstable plaque. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol. 2010;30:1282–92.
    1. Budoff MJ, Shaw LJ, Liu ST, et al. Long-term prognosis associated with coronary calcification: Observations from a registry of 25,253 patients. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2007;49:1860–70.
    1. Boden WE, O'Rourke RA, Teo KK, et al. Optimal medical therapy with or without PCI for stable coronary disease. N Engl J Med. 2007;356:1503–16.
    1. Chang SM, Nabi F, Xu J, et al. The coronary artery calcium score and stress myocardial perfusion imaging provide independent and complementary prediction of cardiac risk. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2009;54:1872–82.
    1. Papanicolaou MN, Califf RM, Hlatky MA, et al. Prognostic implications of angiographically normal and insignificantly narrowed coronary arteries. Am J Cardiol. 1986;58:1181–7.
    1. Johnson BD, Shaw LJ, Buchthal SD, et al. Prognosis in women with myocardial ischemia in the absence of obstructive coronary disease: results from the national institutes of health-national heart, lung, and blood institute-sponsored women's ischemia syndrome evaluation (WISE) Circulation. 2004;109:2993–9.
    1. Stuart RJ, Jr, Ellestad MH. National survey of exercise stress testing facilities. Chest. 1980;77:94–7.
    1. Mathias W, Jr, Arruda A, Santos FC, et al. Safety of dobutamine-atropine stress echocardiography: a prospective experience of 4,033 consecutive studies. J Am Soc Echocardiogr. 1999;12:785–91.
    1. Geleijnse ML, Fioretti PM, Roelandt JR. Methodology, feasibility, safety and diagnostic accuracy of dobutamine stress echocardiography. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1997;30:595–606.
    1. Lette J, Tatum JL, Fraser S, et al. Safety of dipyridamole testing in 73,806 patients: The multicenter dipyridamole safety study. J Nucl Cardiol. 1995;2:3–17.
    1. Einstein AJ, Moser KW, Thompson RC, et al. Radiation dose to patients from cardiac diagnostic imaging. Circulation. 2007;116:1290–305.
    1. Health risks from exposure to low levels of ionizing radiation: BEIR VII – phase 2. National Academy of Sciences; Washington DC, USA: 2006. Committee to Assess Health Risks from Exposure to Low Levels of Ionizing Radiation, National Research Council.
    1. Noto TJ, Jr, Johnson LW, Krone R, et al. Cardiac catheterization 1990: A report of the registry of the society for cardiac angiography and interventions (SCA&I) Cathet Cardiovasc Diagn. 199;24:75–83.
    1. Mortele KJ, Oliva MR, Ondategui S, et al. Universal use of nonionic iodinated contrast medium for CT: Evaluation of safety in a large urban teaching hospital. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2005;184:31–4.
    1. Mahabadi AA, Achenbach S, Burgstahler C, et al. Safety, efficacy, and indications of beta-adrenergic receptor blockade to reduce heart rate prior to coronary CT angiography. Radiology. 2010;257:614–23.
    1. Hausleiter J, Meyer T, Hermann F, et al. Estimated radiation dose associated with cardiac CT angiography. JAMA. 2009;301:500–7.
    1. Killeen RP, Cury RC, McErlean A, Dodd JD. Noncardiac findings on cardiac CT. part II: Spectrum of imaging findings. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr. 2009;3:361–71.
    1. Hoffmann U, Bamberg F, Chae CU, et al. Coronary computed tomography angiography for early triage of patients with acute chest pain: The ROMICAT (rule out myocardial infarction using computer assisted tomography) trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2009;53:1642–50.
    1. Aberle DR, Adams AM, et al. National Lung Screening Trial Research Team Reduced lung-cancer mortality with low-dose computed tomographic screening. N Engl J Med. 2011;365:395–409.
    1. Min JK, Gilmore A, Budoff MJ, et al. Cost-effectiveness of coronary CT angiography versus myocardial perfusion SPECT for evaluation of patients with chest pain and no known coronary artery disease. Radiology. 2010;254:801–8.
    1. Douglas PS, Taylor A, Bild D, et al. Outcomes research in cardiovascular imaging: Report of a workshop sponsored by the national heart, lung, and blood institute. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging. 2009;2:339–48.
    1. Hachamovitch R, Hayes SW, Friedman JD, et al. Comparison of the short-term survival benefit associated with revascularization compared with medical therapy in patients with no prior coronary artery disease undergoing stress myocardial perfusion single photon emission computed tomography. Circulation. 2003;107:2900–7.
    1. Shaw LJ, Berman DS, Maron DJ, et al. Optimal medical therapy with or without percutaneous coronary intervention to reduce ischemic burden: results from the clinical outcomes utilizing revascularization and aggressive drug evaluation (COURAGE) trial nuclear substudy. Circulation. 2008;117:1283–91.
    1. Shaw LJ, Narula J. Coronary CT angiography: An established, not emerging, basis of diagnosis and risk stratification. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2011;4:565–6.
    1. Arbab-Zadeh A, Hoe J. Quantification of coronary arterial stenoses by multidetector CT angiography in comparison with conventional angiography methods, caveats, and implications. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2011;4:191–202.

Source: PubMed

Sponsoren und Mitarbeiter

Krankheiten

Drogeninterventionen

3
Abonnieren