4.2 Article

Outcome of patients with high-risk Duke treadmill score and normal myocardial perfusion imaging on spect

Journal

JOURNAL OF NUCLEAR CARDIOLOGY
Volume 23, Issue 6, Pages 1291-1300

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s12350-015-0156-x

Keywords

Duke treadmill score; exercise testing; mortality; myocardial perfusion imaging; outcome; prognosis

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Annual mortality rate can range from < 1% for patients with normal myocardial perfusion by SPECT to > 5% based on a high-risk Duke treadmill score (DTS). Information on the prognosis of patients with the combination of HRDTS and normal SPECT is limited and is the purpose of this study. Data from a large nuclear cardiology registry (n = 17,972 patients) were reviewed. A total of 340 had HRDTS (score aecurrency sign -11) while undergoing SPECT. Combined cardiovascular mortality and non-fatal myocardial infarction (MI) and cardiovascular mortality alone were available in 310 patients at a mean follow-up of 4.01 +/- 1.5 years. The majority of the patients had abnormal SPECT (n = 270, 71%). The abnormal SPECT patients compared to the normal were older (65.6 vs 62.8 years of age; P = .025), more likely to have abnormal left ventricular ejection fraction (26.1% vs 0%; P < .0001), known coronary artery disease (CAD, 35.9% vs 7.8%; P < .0001) and lower DTS (-14.5 vs -13.2; P = .0006), Kaplan-Meier survival analysis demonstrated a significantly lower cardiovascular mortality (5.4% vs 0%, P = .02) and combined outcome of MI and cardiovascular mortality (15% vs 4.4%, P = .009) in patients with normal versus abnormal SPECT. High-risk DTS is associated with abnormal perfusion SPECT in most patients, but nearly one-third of the patients had normal perfusion. Patients with a normal SPECT had a lower cardiovascular event rates.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available