Diana M Lopez1, Sanjay Divakaran2, Ankur Gupta3, Navkaranbir S Bajaj3, Michael T Osborne4, Wunan Zhou3, Jon Hainer3, Courtney F Bibbo3, Hicham Skali5, Sharmila Dorbala3, Viviany R Taqueti3, Ron Blankstein6, Marcelo F Di Carli7. 1. Cardiovascular Imaging Program, Departments of Medicine and Radiology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA; Cardiovascular Division, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA. Electronic address: https://twitter.com/DMLopez5. 2. Cardiovascular Imaging Program, Departments of Medicine and Radiology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA; Cardiovascular Division, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA. Electronic address: https://twitter.com/SanjayDivakaran. 3. Cardiovascular Imaging Program, Departments of Medicine and Radiology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA. 4. Cardiovascular Imaging Research Center, Departments of Medicine and Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA. 5. Cardiovascular Imaging Program, Departments of Medicine and Radiology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA; Cardiovascular Division, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA. 6. Cardiovascular Imaging Program, Departments of Medicine and Radiology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA; Cardiovascular Division, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA. Electronic address: https://twitter.com/RonBlankstein. 7. Cardiovascular Imaging Program, Departments of Medicine and Radiology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA; Cardiovascular Division, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA. Electronic address: mdicarli@bwh.harvard.edu.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The authors aimed to study the sensitivity and specificity of exercise treadmill testing (ETT) in the diagnosis of coronary microvascular disease (CMD), as well as the prognostic implications of ETT results in patients with CMD. BACKGROUND: ETT is validated to evaluate for flow-limiting coronary artery disease (CAD), however, little is known about its use for evaluating CMD. METHODS: We retrospectively studied 249 consecutive patients between 2006 and 2016 who underwent ETT and positron emission tomography within 12 months. Patients with obstructive CAD or left ventricular systolic dysfunction were excluded. CMD was defined as a coronary flow reserve <2. Patients were followed for the occurrence of a first major adverse event (composite of death or hospitalization for myocardial infarction or heart failure). RESULTS: The sensitivity and specificity of a positive ETT to detect CMD were 34.7% (95% CI: 25.4%-45.0%) and 64.9% (95% CI: 56.7%-72.5%), respectively. The specificity of a positive ETT to detect CMD increased to 86.8% (95% CI: 80.3%-91.7%) when only classifying studies with ischemic electrocardiogram changes that lasted at least 1 minute into recovery as positive, although at a cost of lower sensitivity (15.3%; 95% CI: 8.8%-24.0%). Over a median follow-up of 6.9 years (IQR: 5.1-8.2 years), 30 (12.1%) patients met the composite endpoint, including 13 (13.3%) with CMD (n = 98). In patients with CMD, ETT result was not associated with the composite endpoint (P = 0.076). CONCLUSIONS: Our data suggest limited sensitivity of ETT to detect CMD. However, a positive ETT with ischemic changes that persist at least 1 minute into recovery in the absence of obstructive CAD should raise suspicion for the presence of CMD given a high specificity. Further study is needed with larger patient sample sizes to assess the association between ETT results and outcomes in patients with CMD.
OBJECTIVES: The authors aimed to study the sensitivity and specificity of exercise treadmill testing (ETT) in the diagnosis of coronary microvascular disease (CMD), as well as the prognostic implications of ETT results in patients with CMD. BACKGROUND: ETT is validated to evaluate for flow-limiting coronary artery disease (CAD), however, little is known about its use for evaluating CMD. METHODS: We retrospectively studied 249 consecutive patients between 2006 and 2016 who underwent ETT and positron emission tomography within 12 months. Patients with obstructive CAD or left ventricular systolic dysfunction were excluded. CMD was defined as a coronary flow reserve <2. Patients were followed for the occurrence of a first major adverse event (composite of death or hospitalization for myocardial infarction or heart failure). RESULTS: The sensitivity and specificity of a positive ETT to detect CMD were 34.7% (95% CI: 25.4%-45.0%) and 64.9% (95% CI: 56.7%-72.5%), respectively. The specificity of a positive ETT to detect CMD increased to 86.8% (95% CI: 80.3%-91.7%) when only classifying studies with ischemic electrocardiogram changes that lasted at least 1 minute into recovery as positive, although at a cost of lower sensitivity (15.3%; 95% CI: 8.8%-24.0%). Over a median follow-up of 6.9 years (IQR: 5.1-8.2 years), 30 (12.1%) patients met the composite endpoint, including 13 (13.3%) with CMD (n = 98). In patients with CMD, ETT result was not associated with the composite endpoint (P = 0.076). CONCLUSIONS: Our data suggest limited sensitivity of ETT to detect CMD. However, a positive ETT with ischemic changes that persist at least 1 minute into recovery in the absence of obstructive CAD should raise suspicion for the presence of CMD given a high specificity. Further study is needed with larger patient sample sizes to assess the association between ETT results and outcomes in patients with CMD.
Authors: K Lance Gould; Nils P Johnson; Timothy M Bateman; Rob S Beanlands; Frank M Bengel; Robert Bober; Paolo G Camici; Manuel D Cerqueira; Benjamin J W Chow; Marcelo F Di Carli; Sharmila Dorbala; Henry Gewirtz; Robert J Gropler; Philipp A Kaufmann; Paul Knaapen; Juhani Knuuti; Michael E Merhige; K Peter Rentrop; Terrence D Ruddy; Heinrich R Schelbert; Thomas H Schindler; Markus Schwaiger; Stefano Sdringola; John Vitarello; Kim A Williams; Donald Gordon; Vasken Dilsizian; Jagat Narula Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2013-08-28 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Melissa A Daubert; Joseph Sivak; Allison Dunning; Pamela S Douglas; Brian Coyne; Tracy Y Wang; Daniel B Mark; Eric J Velazquez Journal: JAMA Intern Med Date: 2020-04-01 Impact factor: 21.873
Authors: Kristian Thygesen; Joseph S Alpert; Allan S Jaffe; Bernard R Chaitman; Jeroen J Bax; David A Morrow; Harvey D White Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2018-08-25 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Daria Frestad Bechsgaard; Jens Dahlgaard Hove; Hannah Elena Suhrs; Kira Bang Bové; Persia Shahriari; Ida Gustafsson; Eva Prescott Journal: Int J Cardiol Date: 2019-07-17 Impact factor: 4.164
Authors: Venkatesh L Murthy; Masanao Naya; Viviany R Taqueti; Courtney R Foster; Mariya Gaber; Jon Hainer; Sharmila Dorbala; Ron Blankstein; Ornella Rimoldi; Paolo G Camici; Marcelo F Di Carli Journal: Circulation Date: 2014-04-30 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Nishant R Shah; Michael K Cheezum; Vikas Veeranna; Stephen J Horgan; Viviany R Taqueti; Venkatesh L Murthy; Courtney Foster; Jon Hainer; Karla M Daniels; Jose Rivero; Amil M Shah; Peter H Stone; David A Morrow; Michael L Steigner; Sharmila Dorbala; Ron Blankstein; Marcelo F Di Carli Journal: J Am Heart Assoc Date: 2017-05-04 Impact factor: 5.501
Authors: Harmony R Reynolds; C Noel Bairey Merz; Colin Berry; Rohit Samuel; Jacqueline Saw; Nathaniel R Smilowitz; Ana Carolina do A H de Souza; Robert Sykes; Viviany R Taqueti; Janet Wei Journal: Circ Res Date: 2022-02-17 Impact factor: 17.367