Safety of contrast in stress echocardiography in stable patients and in patients with suspected acute coronary syndrome but negative 12-hour troponin.

Limited studies are available demonstrating the safety of contrast agents in patients undergoing stress echocardiography and none in patients with suspected acute coronary syndrome (ACS). Therefore, we sought to assess the safety profile of contrast agents in patients with stable chest pain and in those with suspected ACS (nondiagnostic electrocardiogram and negative initial 12-hour cardiac troponin test results). During a 4-year period, 3,704 patients underwent stress echocardiography (exercise or dobutamine), of whom, 929 (25%) had suspected ACS. Contrast agents (SonoVue 46%, Luminity 54%) were used in 1,150 patients (31%). No patients died with or without contrast administration. No nonfatal acute myocardial infarction occurred in patients administered contrast agents compared with 3 cases of acute myocardial infarction in the noncontrast group (p = 0.24). Two cases of sustained ventricular tachycardia developed, one in each group (p = 0.98). Compared with those who did not receive contrast, patients in both the stable chest pain and the suspected ACS groups had a greater burden of cardiovascular risk factors. The left ventricular function at rest was significantly worse in the patients who received contrast than in those who did not in the suspected ACS group. Also, a greater ischemic burden was present in those receiving contrast than in those not receiving it in both the stable chest pain and the suspected ACS groups. In conclusion, despite the presence of greater risk features compared with patients undergoing unenhanced stress echocardiography, the administration of ultrasound contrast agents (SonoVue and Luminity) in those with stable chest pain and those with suspected ACS was not associated with excess adverse events.

The role of cardiovascular imaging techniques in the assessment of patients with acute chest pain.

Chest pain is the most common presenting symptom of coronary artery disease. The assessment and appropriate management of patients with acute chest pain and non-diagnostic electrocardiograms (ECGs) remain a continuing clinical problem, with major logistic and financial implications for health-care providers. Cardiovascular imaging is at the forefront of health care, experiencing rapid changes over the recent years, particularly with the use of advanced medical technologies. Imaging techniques like acute rest myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI), echocardiography, electron beam computed tomography (CT), cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and multi-detector CT (MDCT) have been used recently in the evaluation and triage of patients with chest pain in addition to the conventional investigations such as ECGs and cardiac biomarkers in the chest pain units. The annual potential cost savings, by incorporating the routine use of acute rest MPI in patients with low-to-moderate risk and non-diagnostic ECGs are substantial. The high negative predictive value of a normal resting MPI in patients with chest pain for myocardial infarction and future cardiac events is well established. Echocardiography is also considered to be useful but the technique is operator dependent and at present there is insufficient data to support its use. Cardiac MRI is expensive and time consuming and there is insufficient diagnostic and prognostic data to make it suitable for chest pain patients at present. There has been increasing interest in MDCT recently, especially with the advent of 64-slice CT but the sensitivity and specificity in chest pain patients are no better than MPI so far.