We have located links that may give you full text access.
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Cardiopulmonary exercise testing is more accurate than ECG-stress testing in diagnosing myocardial ischemia in subjects with chest pain.
International Journal of Cardiology 2014 June 16
BACKGROUND: Cardiopulmonary exercise stress testing (CPET) is used to grade the severity of heart failure and to assess its prognosis. However it is unknown whether CPET may improve diagnostic accuracy of standard ECG stress testing to identify or exclude obstructive coronary artery disease (O-CAD) in patients with chest pain.
METHODS: We prospectively studied 1265 consecutive subjects (55 ± 8 years, 156 women) who were evaluated with ECG stress testing (ET) for chest pain. No one had a documented O-CAD. All patients performed an incremental CPET with ECG recordings on an electronically braked cycle ergometer.
RESULTS: Of 1265 patients, 73 had a positive CPET and 1192 had a negative CPET. Seventy-three patients with a positive CPET and 71 patients with a negative CPET agreed to undergo nuclear SPECT imaging and coronary angiography. Follow-up lasted 48 ± 7 months. As compared with ET, sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV were all improved significantly (ET: 48%, 55%, 33%, 95%; CPET: 88%, 98%, 73%, 99%, respectively, P<0.001). Patients with both peak VO2>91% of predicted VO2 max and absence of VO2-related signs of myocardial ischemia had no evidence of O-CAD in 100% of cases. Cardiac events occurred in 32 patients with a positive CPET and 8 patients with a negative CPET (log rank 18.2, P<0.0001).
CONCLUSIONS: In patients with chest pain, CPET showed a better diagnostic and predictive accuracy than traditional ET to detect/exclude myocardial ischemia. Its use should be encouraged among physicians as a first line diagnostic tool in clinical practice.
METHODS: We prospectively studied 1265 consecutive subjects (55 ± 8 years, 156 women) who were evaluated with ECG stress testing (ET) for chest pain. No one had a documented O-CAD. All patients performed an incremental CPET with ECG recordings on an electronically braked cycle ergometer.
RESULTS: Of 1265 patients, 73 had a positive CPET and 1192 had a negative CPET. Seventy-three patients with a positive CPET and 71 patients with a negative CPET agreed to undergo nuclear SPECT imaging and coronary angiography. Follow-up lasted 48 ± 7 months. As compared with ET, sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV were all improved significantly (ET: 48%, 55%, 33%, 95%; CPET: 88%, 98%, 73%, 99%, respectively, P<0.001). Patients with both peak VO2>91% of predicted VO2 max and absence of VO2-related signs of myocardial ischemia had no evidence of O-CAD in 100% of cases. Cardiac events occurred in 32 patients with a positive CPET and 8 patients with a negative CPET (log rank 18.2, P<0.0001).
CONCLUSIONS: In patients with chest pain, CPET showed a better diagnostic and predictive accuracy than traditional ET to detect/exclude myocardial ischemia. Its use should be encouraged among physicians as a first line diagnostic tool in clinical practice.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app