Literature DB >> 21071002

Improved near-term coronary artery disease risk classification with gated stress myocardial perfusion SPECT.

Leslee J Shaw1, Peter W F Wilson, Rory Hachamovitch, Robert C Hendel, Salvador Borges-Neto, Daniel S Berman.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: We compared analytical approaches to estimate the added value of myocardial perfusion single-photon emission computed tomography (MPS) variables in estimating coronary artery disease (CAD) outcomes.
BACKGROUND: Stress MPS markers of regional ischemia are strong estimators of prognosis. Evidence published to date has not compared analytical methods to establish the added value of stress MPS and to define a clinically meaningful approach to detect improve classification of risk.
METHODS: A total of 4,575 patients were consecutively and prospectively enrolled in the Myoview Prognosis Registry. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards model were employed to estimate CAD death or myocardial infarction (MI). Risk reclassification methods were also calculated.
RESULTS: In risk-adjusted models (including age, sex, presenting symptoms, stress type, CAD history, and risk factors), stress MPS ischemia, rest and post-stress left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) (all p < 0.0001) were all significant estimators of CAD death or MI. In this multivariable model, 34% of the model chi-square was contributed by MPS ischemia. In receiver-operating characteristic curve analysis, the area under the curve increased from 0.61 to 0.66 when rest and post-stress LVEF were combined with pre-test CAD likelihood (p < 0.0001), increasing to 0.69 for MPS ischemia (p < 0.0001). The net reclassification improvement (NRI) by adding the Duke Treadmill Score (DTS) to a model including pre-test CAD likelihood was 0.112. The cost per NRI was $57 for the exercise test as compared with an office visit for risk stratification purposes. Further, the NRI by adding MPS ischemia to a model with the DTS and pre-test CAD likelihood was 0.358. The cost per NRI was $615 for the stress MPS as compared with an exercise test.
CONCLUSIONS: Stress-induced ischemia is independently predictive of near-term CAD outcomes. Analytical approaches that establish the reclassification of events provide a unique approach and may serve as a quality imaging metric for estimation of improved health outcomes for stress MPS as well as for comparison to other imaging modalities.
Copyright © 2010 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 21071002     DOI: 10.1016/j.jcmg.2010.09.008

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  JACC Cardiovasc Imaging        ISSN: 1876-7591


  18 in total

Review 1.  Prognosis in the era of comparative effectiveness research: where is nuclear cardiology now and where should it be?

Authors:  Leslee J Shaw; Fadi G Hage; Daniel S Berman; Rory Hachamovitch; Ami Iskandrian
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  2012-10       Impact factor: 5.952

2.  Evaluating imaging and computer-aided detection and diagnosis devices at the FDA.

Authors:  Brandon D Gallas; Heang-Ping Chan; Carl J D'Orsi; Lori E Dodd; Maryellen L Giger; David Gur; Elizabeth A Krupinski; Charles E Metz; Kyle J Myers; Nancy A Obuchowski; Berkman Sahiner; Alicia Y Toledano; Margarita L Zuley
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2012-02-03       Impact factor: 3.173

3.  The benefits of advanced risk reclassification.

Authors:  Parham Eshtehardi; Ijeoma Isiadinso; Leslee J Shaw
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  2015-09-22       Impact factor: 5.952

4.  Prognostic significance of calcified plaque among symptomatic patients with nonobstructive coronary artery disease.

Authors:  Sana Shah; Naveen Bellam; Jonathon Leipsic; Daniel S Berman; Arshed Quyyumi; Jörg Hausleiter; Stephan Achenbach; Mouaz Al-Mallah; Matthew J Budoff; Fillippo Cademartiri; Tracy Q Callister; Hyuk-Jae Chang; Benjamin J W Chow; Ricardo C Cury; Augustin J Delago; Allison L Dunning; Gudrun M Feuchtner; Martin Hadamitzky; Ronald P Karlsberg; Philipp A Kaufmann; Fay Y Lin; Kavitha M Chinnaiyan; Erica Maffei; Gilbert L Raff; Todd C Villines; Millie J Gomez; James K Min; Leslee J Shaw
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  2014-03-29       Impact factor: 5.952

5.  The new era of risk reclassification in cardiovascular imaging.

Authors:  Leslee J Shaw
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  2011-08       Impact factor: 5.952

6.  Cardiovascular risk assessment models: Have we found the perfect solution yet?

Authors:  Aiden Abidov; Omar Chehab
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  2019-02-21       Impact factor: 5.952

7.  Prognosis in the era of comparative effectiveness research.

Authors:  Mario Petretta; Alberto Cuocolo
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  2013-04       Impact factor: 5.952

Review 8.  Prediction models for risk classification in cardiovascular disease.

Authors:  Mario Petretta; Alberto Cuocolo
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2012-10-03       Impact factor: 9.236

Review 9.  Assessing clinical impact of myocardial perfusion studies: ischemia or other prognostic indicators?

Authors:  Todd D Miller; John Wells Askew; Joerg Herrmann
Journal:  Curr Cardiol Rep       Date:  2014-04       Impact factor: 2.931

Review 10.  Assessing the prognostic implications of myocardial perfusion studies: identification of patients at risk vs patients who may benefit from intervention?

Authors:  Paul Cremer; Rory Hachamovitch
Journal:  Curr Cardiol Rep       Date:  2014-04       Impact factor: 2.931

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.