BACKGROUND: The value of exercise-induced ST-segment depression for the prognostic evaluation of patients with 1 mm of ST depression or greater on the resting electrocardiogram is controversial. METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients who underwent exercise myocardial perfusion single photon emission computed tomography (MPS) and had resting ST depression of 1 mm or greater with a nondiagnostic exercise electrocardiographic response (n = 1122) were followed up for 3.4 +/- 2.3 years. Those with paced rhythm, pre-excitation, left bundle branch block, or myocardial revascularization within the first 60 days after MPS were excluded. Additional exercise-induced ST-segment depression was considered significant if > or = 2 mm MPS was scored semiquantitatively by use of a 20-segment model of the left ventricle; the percentage of myocardium involved with stress defects (% myo) was derived by normalizing to the maximal possible score of 80. Hard events were defined as nonfatal myocardial infarction or cardiac death. A Cox analysis was used to determine independent predictors of hard events among clinical, exercise, and nuclear variables. Hard event rates increased as a function of % myo for either patients with exercise-induced ST depression (1.4%/y for normal MPS vs 4.1%/y for % myo >10%, P < .03) or those without it (0.7%/y for normal MPS vs 3.0%/y for % myo >10%, P = .0001). Age, diabetes mellitus, shortness of breath as the presenting symptom, and % myo were independent predictors of hard events. Exercise-induced ST depression was predictive of hard events only when it was 3 mm or greater. The presence and extent of perfusion defects, reflected in the % myo, had incremental prognostic value over clinical variables and also over all degrees of exercise-induced ST depression. CONCLUSIONS: Although MPS effectively risk-stratifies patients with resting ST depression of 1 mm or greater, the prognostic value of exercise-induced ST depression is limited in these patients, with a small added risk when severe (> or = 3 mm).
BACKGROUND: The value of exercise-induced ST-segment depression for the prognostic evaluation of patients with 1 mm of ST depression or greater on the resting electrocardiogram is controversial. METHODS AND RESULTS:Patients who underwent exercise myocardial perfusion single photon emission computed tomography (MPS) and had resting ST depression of 1 mm or greater with a nondiagnostic exercise electrocardiographic response (n = 1122) were followed up for 3.4 +/- 2.3 years. Those with paced rhythm, pre-excitation, left bundle branch block, or myocardial revascularization within the first 60 days after MPS were excluded. Additional exercise-induced ST-segment depression was considered significant if > or = 2 mm MPS was scored semiquantitatively by use of a 20-segment model of the left ventricle; the percentage of myocardium involved with stress defects (% myo) was derived by normalizing to the maximal possible score of 80. Hard events were defined as nonfatal myocardial infarction or cardiac death. A Cox analysis was used to determine independent predictors of hard events among clinical, exercise, and nuclear variables. Hard event rates increased as a function of % myo for either patients with exercise-induced ST depression (1.4%/y for normal MPS vs 4.1%/y for % myo >10%, P < .03) or those without it (0.7%/y for normal MPS vs 3.0%/y for % myo >10%, P = .0001). Age, diabetes mellitus, shortness of breath as the presenting symptom, and % myo were independent predictors of hard events. Exercise-induced ST depression was predictive of hard events only when it was 3 mm or greater. The presence and extent of perfusion defects, reflected in the % myo, had incremental prognostic value over clinical variables and also over all degrees of exercise-induced ST depression. CONCLUSIONS: Although MPS effectively risk-stratifies patients with resting ST depression of 1 mm or greater, the prognostic value of exercise-induced ST depression is limited in these patients, with a small added risk when severe (> or = 3 mm).
Authors: R Hachamovitch; D S Berman; L J Shaw; H Kiat; I Cohen; J A Cabico; J Friedman; G A Diamond Journal: Circulation Date: 1998-02-17 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: D S Berman; R Hachamovitch; H Kiat; I Cohen; J A Cabico; F P Wang; J D Friedman; G Germano; K Van Train; G A Diamond Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 1995-09 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: D S Berman; H Kiat; J D Friedman; F P Wang; K van Train; L Matzer; J Maddahi; G Germano Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 1993-11-01 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: D B Mark; L Shaw; F E Harrell; M A Hlatky; K L Lee; J R Bengtson; C B McCants; R M Califf; D B Pryor Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 1991-09-19 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: R Parker Ward; Mouaz H Al-Mallah; Gabriel B Grossman; Christopher L Hansen; Robert C Hendel; Todd C Kerwin; Benjamin D McCallister; Rupa Mehta; Donna M Polk; Peter L Tilkemeier; Aseem Vashist; Kim Allan Williams; David G Wolinsky; Edward P Ficaro Journal: J Nucl Cardiol Date: 2007 Nov-Dec Impact factor: 5.952
Authors: Stefano Muzzarelli; Matthias Emil Pfisterer; Jan Müller-Brand; Michael Johannes Zellweger Journal: Int J Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2010-04-22 Impact factor: 2.357