Department of Internal Medicine, American University of Beirut, Lebanon.
Department of Internal Medicine, American University of Beirut, Lebanon.
Int J Cardiol. 2010 Nov 19;145(2):349-350. doi: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2009.12.017. Epub 2010 Jan 13.
Exercise myocardial perfusion imaging (E-MPI) and exercise echocardiography (E-Echo) are thought to be compatible for the non-invasive evaluation of patients with suspected coronary artery disease (CAD). The interaction of gender and clinical risk profile in the referral of patients to either of these two imaging modalities has not been well studied.
This was a prospective study of 922 consecutive patients who were referred for either E-MPI (331 patients) or E-Echo (591 patients) at the American University of Beirut Medical Center in the year of 2008. Men undergoing E-MPI had a higher risk profile than those undergoing E-Echo. They were older (58±12 years versus 55±12 years, p=0.002) and had a higher prevalence of multiple (>2) CAD risk factors (55% versus 37%, p<0.001) as well as a higher prevalence of prior PCI (22% versus 15%, p=0.017) or CABG (12% versus 7%, p=0.016). Furthermore, they achieved lower METS in their exercise (9.4±2.0 versus 10.4±2.3, p<0.001) and had a higher incidence of ischemia and on their scans (16% versus 9.1%, p=0.008). In contrast, women undergoing E-MPI had a similar profile to those undergoing E-Echo in terms of prevalence of risk factors, prior history of coronary events and the prevalence of ischemia or impaired ejection fraction on their scans.
There is an important interaction between gender and clinical risk profile in patients undergoing E-MPI versus E-Echo. In men, E-MPI seems to be the preferred test for the higher risk profile patients, whereas in women the two tests are interchangeable.
运动心肌灌注成像(E-MPI)和运动超声心动图(E-Echo)被认为可用于无创评估疑似冠心病(CAD)患者。但对于这两种影像学检查手段,性别与临床风险特征在患者转诊中的相互作用尚未得到充分研究。
这是一项前瞻性研究,纳入了 2008 年在贝鲁特美国大学医学中心接受 E-MPI(331 例)或 E-Echo(591 例)检查的 922 例连续患者。接受 E-MPI 的男性患者比接受 E-Echo 的男性患者具有更高的风险特征。他们年龄更大(58±12 岁 vs. 55±12 岁,p=0.002),且具有更高的多重(>2 个)CAD 风险因素(55% vs. 37%,p<0.001)和更高的 PCI(22% vs. 15%,p=0.017)或 CABG(12% vs. 7%,p=0.016)病史。此外,他们在运动试验中达到的 METS 更低(9.4±2.0 vs. 10.4±2.3,p<0.001),且扫描时发生缺血的比例更高(16% vs. 9.1%,p=0.008)。相比之下,接受 E-MPI 的女性患者在风险因素、先前的冠心病事件史以及扫描时缺血或射血分数受损的发生率方面与接受 E-Echo 的女性患者相似。
在接受 E-MPI 与 E-Echo 的患者中,性别与临床风险特征之间存在重要的相互作用。在男性中,E-MPI 似乎更适用于高风险特征患者,而在女性中,两种检查可相互替代。