Prospective evaluation of a new protocol for the provisional use of perfusion imaging with exercise stress testing.

Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging

Division of Cardiology (Henry Low Heart Center), Hartford Hospital, South Building 2nd Floor, Hartford, CT, 06102, USA,

Published: February 2015

Purpose: Previous literature suggests that myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI) adds little to the prognosis of patients who exercise >10 metabolic equivalents (METs) during stress testing. With this in mind, we prospectively tested a provisional injection protocol in emergency department (ED) patients presenting for the evaluation of chest pain in which a patient would not receive an injection of radioisotope if adequate exercise was achieved without symptoms and a negative ECG response.

Methods: All patients who presented to the ED over a 5-year period who were referred for stress testing as part of their ED evaluation were included. Patients considered for a provisional protocol were: exercise stress, age <65 years, no known coronary artery disease, and an interpretable rest ECG. Criteria for not injecting included a maximal predicted heart rate ≥85%, ≥10 METs of exercise, no anginal symptoms during stress, and no ECG changes. Groups were compared based on stress test results, all-cause and cardiac mortality, follow-up cardiac testing, subsequent revascularization, and cost.

Results: A total of 965 patients were eligible with 192 undergoing exercise-only and 773 having perfusion imaging. After 41.6 ± 19.6 months of follow-up, all-cause mortality was similar in the exercise-only versus the exercise plus imaging group (2.6% vs. 2.1%, p = 0.59). There were no cardiac deaths in the exercise-only group. At 1 year there was no difference in the number of repeat functional stress tests (1.6% vs. 2.1%, p = 0.43), fewer angiograms (0% vs. 4.0%, p = 0.002), and a significantly lower cost ($65 ± $332 vs $506 ± $1,991, p = 0.002; values are in US dollars) in the exercise-only group. The radiation exposure in the exercise plus imaging group was 8.4 ± 2.1 mSv.

Conclusions: A provisional injection protocol has a very low mortality, few follow-up diagnostic tests, and lower cost compared to standard imaging protocols. If adopted it would decrease radiation exposure, save time and decrease health-care costs without jeopardizing prognosis.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00259-014-2864-xDOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

stress testing
12
perfusion imaging
8
exercise stress
8
prospective evaluation
4
evaluation protocol
4
protocol provisional
4
provisional perfusion
4
exercise
4
imaging exercise
4
stress
4

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!