Achieving an Exercise Workload of ≥10 Metabolic Equivalents Predicts a Very Low Risk of Inducible Ischemia Does Myocardial Perfusion Imaging Have a Role?

Objectives We sought to identify prospectively the prevalence of significant ischemia (>= 10% of the left ventricle [LV]) on exercise single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) imaging relative to workload achieved in consecutive patients referred for myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI). Background High exercise capacity is a strong predictor of a good prognosis, and the role of MPI in patients achieving high workloads is questionable. Methods Prospective analysis was performed on 1,056 consecutive patients who underwent quantitative exercise gated (99m)Tc-SPECT MPI, of whom 974 attained >= 85% of their maximum age-predicted heart rate. These patients were further divided on the basis of attained exercise workload (<7, 7 to 9, or >= 10 metabolic equivalents [METs]) and were compared for exercise test and imaging outcomes, particularly the prevalence of >= 10% LV ischemia. Individuals reaching >= 10 METs but <85% maximum age-predicted heart rate were also assessed. Results Of these 974 subjects, 473 (48.6%) achieved >= 10 METs. This subgroup had a very low prevalence of significant ischemia (2 of 473, 0.4%). Those attaining <7 METs had an 18-fold higher prevalence (7.1%, p < 0.001). Of the 430 patients reaching >= 10 METs without exercise ST-segment depression, none had >= 10% LV ischemia. In contrast, the prevalence of >= 10% LV ischemia was highest in the patients achieving <10 METs with ST-segment depression (14 of 70, 19.4%). Conclusions In this referral cohort of patients with an intermediate-to-high clinical risk of coronary artery disease, achieving >= 10 METs with no ischemic ST-segment depression was associated with a 0% prevalence of significant ischemia. Elimination of MPI in such patients, who represented 31% (430 of 1,396) of all patients undergoing exercise SPECT in this laboratory, could provide substantial cost-savings. (J Am Coll Cardiol 2009; 54: 538-45) (C) 2009 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation