Literature DB >> 26358085

Differential risk reclassification improvement by exercise testing and myocardial perfusion imaging in patients with suspected and known coronary artery disease.

Angela S Koh1,2, Fei Gao3,4, C T Chin3,4, Felix Y J Keng3, Ru-San Tan3,4, Terrance S J Chua3,4.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study is to compare the incremental prognostic and net risk reclassification value of exercise testing alone vs exercise myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI) for estimating the risk of death in patients with suspected and known coronary artery disease (CAD).
METHODS: 6702 patients with suspected CAD and 2008 with known CAD had treadmill exercise MPI and were followed for 2.5 ± 0.9 years for the occurrence of all-cause death. The estimation of risk of death and net reclassification improvement (NRI) were examined in three models. Model 1: clinical variables; Model 2: model 1+Duke Treadmill Score; and Model 3: model 2+ MPI variables. Risk estimates were categorized as <1%, 1-3%, and >3% risk of death per year.
RESULTS: In patients with suspected CAD, the global Chi-square for predicting risk of death increased significantly for Model 2 compared to Model 1 (74.78 vs 63.86 to (P = .001). However, adding MPI variables in Model 3 did not further improve predictive value (Chi-square 79.38, P = .10). In patients with suspected CAD risk, reclassification improved significantly in Model 2 over Model 1 (NRI = 0.12, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.22, P = .019), but not in Model 3 (NRI = 0.0009, 95% CI -0.072 to 0.070; P = .98). In contrast, in patients with known CAD Model 2 did not yield significant improvements for predicting risk and risk reclassification compared to Model 1. However, global Chi-square of Model 3 was significantly higher than that of Model 2 (30.03 vs 6.56, P < .0001) with associated significant reclassification improvement (NRI = 0.26 95% CI 0.067 to 0.46. P = .0084).
CONCLUSION: Risk reclassification by diagnostic testing is importantly influenced by baseline characteristics of patient cohorts. In patients with suspected CAD, NRI is predominately achieved by exercise variables, whereas in patients with known CAD, greatest NRI is obtained by MPI variables.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Myocardial perfusion imaging: SPECT; diagnostic and prognostic application; exercise: stress testing

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26358085     DOI: 10.1007/s12350-015-0253-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol        ISSN: 1071-3581            Impact factor:   5.952


  13 in total

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

Authors:  Leslee J Shaw; Peter W F Wilson; Rory Hachamovitch; Robert C Hendel; Salvador Borges-Neto; Daniel S Berman
Journal:  JACC Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2010-11

Review 2.  Multivariable prognostic models: issues in developing models, evaluating assumptions and adequacy, and measuring and reducing errors.

Authors:  F E Harrell; K L Lee; D B Mark
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  1996-02-28       Impact factor: 2.373

3.  Extensions of net reclassification improvement calculations to measure usefulness of new biomarkers.

Authors:  Michael J Pencina; Ralph B D'Agostino; Ewout W Steyerberg
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2010-11-05       Impact factor: 2.373

4.  Performance of reclassification statistics in comparing risk prediction models.

Authors:  Nancy R Cook; Nina P Paynter
Journal:  Biom J       Date:  2011-02-03       Impact factor: 2.207

5.  ACC/AHA 2002 guideline update for the management of patients with chronic stable angina--summary article: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on practice guidelines (Committee on the Management of Patients With Chronic Stable Angina).

Authors:  Raymond J Gibbons; Jonathan Abrams; Kanu Chatterjee; Jennifer Daley; Prakash C Deedwania; John S Douglas; T Bruce Ferguson; Stephan D Fihn; Theodore D Fraker; Julius M Gardin; Robert A O'Rourke; Richard C Pasternak; Sankey V Williams
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2003-01-01       Impact factor: 24.094

6.  Exercise testing with myocardial perfusion imaging in patients with normal baseline electrocardiograms: cost savings with a stepwise diagnostic strategy.

Authors:  J A Mattera; S A Arain; A J Sinusas; L Finta; F J Wackers
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  1998 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 5.952

7.  Prognostic value of stress myocardial perfusion positron emission tomography: results from a multicenter observational registry.

Authors:  Sharmila Dorbala; Marcelo F Di Carli; Rob S Beanlands; Michael E Merhige; Brent A Williams; Emir Veledar; Benjamin J W Chow; James K Min; Michael J Pencina; Daniel S Berman; Leslee J Shaw
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2012-12-05       Impact factor: 24.094

8.  Achieving an exercise workload of > or = 10 metabolic equivalents predicts a very low risk of inducible ischemia: does myocardial perfusion imaging have a role?

Authors:  Jamieson M Bourque; Benjamin H Holland; Denny D Watson; George A Beller
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2009-08-04       Impact factor: 24.094

9.  Prognostic value of a treadmill exercise score in outpatients with suspected coronary artery disease.

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

10.  Exercise myocardial perfusion SPECT in patients without known coronary artery disease: incremental prognostic value and use in risk stratification.

Authors:  R Hachamovitch; D S Berman; H Kiat; I Cohen; J A Cabico; J Friedman; G A Diamond
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  1996-03-01       Impact factor: 29.690

View more
  6 in total

1.  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

2.  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

Review 3.  Review of cardiovascular imaging in the journal of nuclear cardiology in 2016: Part 2 of 2-myocardial perfusion imaging.

Authors:  Fadi G Hage; Wael A AlJaroudi
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  2017-04-06       Impact factor: 5.952

4.  Review of Cardiovascular Imaging in the Journal of Nuclear Cardiology in 2015-Part 2 of 2: Myocardial perfusion imaging.

Authors:  Fadi G Hage; Wael A AlJaroudi
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  2016-02-18       Impact factor: 5.952

5.  Non-traditional factors affecting referral for coronary angiography following SPECT myocardial perfusion imaging.

Authors:  Shreyas Gowdar; Nasir Hussain; Alan W Ahlberg; Mohammad Elsadany; Guru N Kowlgi; David Silverman; W Lane Duvall
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  2020-11-05       Impact factor: 3.872

6.  CRAX: A simple cardiovascular risk assessment tool to predict risk of acute myocardial infarction or death.

Authors:  Patrick Martineau; Piotr Slomka; Andrew Goertzen; William D Leslie
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  2018-12-10       Impact factor: 5.952

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.