SUMY STATE UNIVERSITY, SUMY, UKRAINE.
AMOSOV NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF CARDIOVASCULAR SURGERY OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF MEDICAL SCIENCES OF UKRAINE, KYIV, UKRAINE.
Wiad Lek. 2020;73(11):2447-2456.
The aim of the work was to evaluate STE feasibility as DSE visualization method and its accuracy compared to coronary angiography (CAG) in the patients with moderate-tohigh coronary arteries disease (CAD) risk.
Materials and methods: We prospectively examined 140 pts (84 (60.0%) men) with suspected CAD in order to verify diagnosis and evaluate myocardial viability and coronary reserve.
Results: Mean LV EF was 54.4±15.8%. All pts had normal BP and HR during the test. There were no significant hemodynamics alterations during the test. There were no significant complications during DSE - 15 (12.9%) cases of different relatively low-grade supraventricular and ventricular arrhythmia, mainly transitory without interventions. There were 116 (82.9%) positive DSE results, of which 2 (1.72%) were false-positive. In 2 (8.3%) pts with negative DSE results CAG revealed 1-vessel insignificant (50 - 70%) lesions with developed collaterals (false-negative results). According to DSE and CAG results, 96 (82.3%) pts underwent revascularization interventions - 86 (89.6%) PCI's and (10.4%) CABG surgeries. Sensitivity and specificity of DSE with STE for primary CAD diagnosis according to "golden standard" CAG results were 98.3% and 91.7%, respectively, with identical positive and negative predictive value and very high method overall accuracy (AUC = 0.98) and OR = 627.0 (p<0.0001). Sensitivity and specificity of DSE with STE for defining indications for intervention and revascularization were 97.9% and 91.7%, respectively, with high overall accuracy (AUC = 0.95; OR = 564.0, p<0.0001). Combined quantification of ΔGLS and ΔWMSI for primary CAD diagnosis showed significantly lower sensitivity 86.2% (р=0.0002) and specificity 80.4% (р=0.0064) with significantly lower integral method accuracy (AUC 0.83, р<0.0001).
Conclusions: DSE with STE as a visualization method is a safe and optimal method for ischemia diagnosis and myocardial viability and coronary reserve evaluation in the pts with CAD suspicion. Given the lower ΔGLS and ΔWMSI accuracy compared to integral DSE with STE result evaluation, as well as frequent GLS growth in significant amount of patients with definite positive test result, authors recommend evaluating integral test result rather than strain value.
本研究旨在评估STE 作为 DSE 可视化方法的可行性及其在中高危冠状动脉疾病(CAD)患者中的准确性,与冠状动脉造影(CAG)相比。
我们前瞻性地检查了 140 例疑似 CAD 的患者(84 例(60.0%)为男性),以验证诊断并评估心肌存活和冠状动脉储备。
结果:左心室射血分数平均为 54.4±15.8%。所有患者在试验过程中血压和心率正常。试验过程中无明显血流动力学改变。DSE 无明显并发症-15 例(12.9%)不同程度的轻度室上性和室性心律失常,主要为一过性,无需干预。116 例(82.9%)DSE 结果阳性,其中 2 例(1.72%)为假阳性。在 2 例(8.3%)DSE 结果阴性的患者中,CAG 显示 1 支血管(50-70%)狭窄伴侧支循环形成(假阴性结果)。根据 DSE 和 CAG 结果,96 例(82.3%)患者接受了血运重建干预-86 例(89.6%)行 PCI 和(10.4%)CABG 手术。根据“金标准”CAG 结果,STE 结合 DSE 对原发性 CAD 诊断的敏感性和特异性分别为 98.3%和 91.7%,阳性和阴性预测值相同,方法总体准确性非常高(AUC=0.98),OR=627.0(p<0.0001)。STE 结合 DSE 对确定介入和血运重建适应证的敏感性和特异性分别为 97.9%和 91.7%,总体准确性较高(AUC=0.95;OR=564.0,p<0.0001)。对原发性 CAD 诊断的 ΔGLS 和 ΔWMSI 联合定量分析显示,敏感性显著降低(86.2%,p=0.0002),特异性显著降低(80.4%,p=0.0064),整体方法准确性显著降低(AUC 0.83,p<0.0001)。
STE 作为可视化方法,在怀疑 CAD 的患者中是一种安全且最佳的缺血诊断、心肌存活和冠状动脉储备评估方法。与整体 DSE 结合 STE 结果评估相比,由于 ΔGLS 和 ΔWMSI 的准确性较低,以及在明确阳性试验结果的患者中经常出现 GLS 大量增长,作者建议评估整体试验结果而不是应变值。