Safety, feasibility, and prognostic implications of pharmacologic stress echocardiography in 1482 patients evaluated in an ambulatory setting.

BACKGROUND: The outpatient prognostic assessment of coronary artery disease (CAD) by exercise electrocardiography has limitations, including the feasibility of the test and its low positive predictive value in several clinical conditions. In the current study we investigated the safety, feasibility, and prognostic value of pharmacologic stress echocardiography in a large cohort of ambulatory patients. METHODS: The study group was made of 1482 ambulatory patients (969 men, aged 60 +/- 10 years) who underwent stress echocardiography with either dipyridamole (n = 846) or dobutamine (n = 636) for evaluation of suspected or known stable CAD. The pretest likelihood of CAD was intermediate (<70%) in 709 patients and high (> or =70%) in 773 patients. RESULTS: There was no complication during the dipyridamole test, whereas 2 ischemia-dependent, sustained ventricular tachycardias occurred during the dobutamine test. Limiting side effects were observed in 2% of dipyridamole and in 3% of dobutamine stresses. The echocardiogram was positive in 459 patients. During a mean follow-up of 28 +/- 24 months, 58 patients died, 33 had a nonfatal myocardial infarction, and 158 underwent early (< or =3 months) and 64 late (>3 months) revascularization. Multivariate predictors of hard events (death, infarction) were positive echocardiographic results (hazard ratio [HR] 2.9) and resting wall motion score index (WMSI) (HR 2.3). In considering major events (death, infarction, late revascularization) as end points, positive echocardiographic result (HR 4.3), scar (HR 2.2), and resting WMSI (HR 1.7) were independent prognostic predictors. The 5-year survival rates for the ischemic and nonischemic groups were, respectively, 80% and 91% (HR 3.6, 95% confidence interval [CI] 3.8-8.4; P <.0001) considering hard cardiac events and 65% and 88% (HR 2.6, 95% CI 2.1-5.9; P <.0001) considering major events. Multivariate predictors of major events were positive echocardiographic results (HR 8.2) and male sex (HR 2.5) for the intermediate-risk group and positive echocardiographic results (HR 2.9), resting WMSI (HR 1.8), and prior Q-wave myocardial infarction (HR 1.8) for the high-risk group. CONCLUSIONS: Pharmacologic stress echocardiography is safe, highly feasible, and effective in prognostic assessment of ambulatory patients when both a general population and groups selected on the basis of pretest likelihood of CAD are analyzed. It represents a valid complementary tool to exercise electrocardiography for prognostic purposes in outpatients.

The atropine factor in pharmacologic stress echocardiography. Echo Persantine (EPIC) and Echo Dobutamine International Cooperative (EDIC) Study Groups.

OBJECTIVES: This study sought to compare, head to head, the two most popular pharmacologic stress echocardiographic tests--dipyridamole and dobutamine--with state of the art protocols in a large multicenter prospective study. BACKGROUND: In the continuing quest for ideal diagnostic accuracy, pharmacologic stress echocardiography has quickly moved over the years from low to high dose regimens and is currently performed with atropine coadministration. METHODS: Dobutamine (up to 40 microgram/kg body weight per min) plus atropine (up to 1 mg over 4 h) and dipyridamole (up to 0.84 mg/kg per min over 10 h) plus atropine (up to 1 mg over 4 h) stress echocardiography was performed on different days, in random order and within 1 week in 360 patients with chest pain syndrome. Thirteen different echocardiographic laboratories, all fulfilling quality control criteria for stress echocardiographic reading, contributed to the study. RESULTS: No major complications occurred during either test. The test was interrupted before achievement of predetermined end points for limiting side effects in 37 dobutamine-atropine and 7 dipyridamole-atropine stress echocardiographic studies (feasibility 90% vs. 98%, p < 0.01). Diagnostic accuracy was assessed in a subset of 110 patients with no obvious rest dyssynergy (akinesia or dyskinesia) who underwent coronary angiography independently of test results and within 1 week of testing. Significant coronary artery disease (> or = 50% diameter reduction in at least one major coronary vessel by quantitative coronary angiography) was found in 92 patients. Sensitivity for detection of coronary artery disease was 84% (77 of 92) for dobutamine-atropine and 82% (75 of 92) for dipyridamole-atropine stress echocardiography (p = NS), with a specificity of 89% (16 of 18) for dobutamine-atropine and 94% (17 of 18) for dipyridamole-atropine stress echocardiography (p = NS). A significant correlation was present between peak wall motion score index during dipyridamole-atropine and dobutamine-atropine stress echocardiography (r = 0.83, p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Dobutamine-atropine and dipyridamole-atropine stress echocardiography are safe and feasible, although submaximal studies are more frequent with dobutamine. The two stresses have comparable accuracy in the detection of angiographically assessed coronary artery disease, although dobutamine is marginally more sensitive and dipyridamole marginally more specific. Stratification of the ischemic response in the space domain is also comparable with the two stresses.