Why the study?
The modern paradigm in stable CAD limits revascularization to select high-risk patients, questioning conventional wisdom about stress testing.
What is the current role, diagnostic accuracy, and prognostic value of exercise stress echocardiography in patients with stable coronary artery disease?
What is the current role, diagnostic accuracy, and prognostic value of exercise stress echocardiography in patients with stable coronary artery disease?
Exercise stress echocardiography remains a highly relevant, safe, and cost-effective diagnostic and prognostic tool for stable coronary artery disease.
Supports retention of exercise stress echocardiography in stable CAD algorithms; leaves open direct comparisons with newer modalities.
The modern conceptual revolution in managing patients with stable coronary artery disease (CAD), based on improvement in preventive and pharmacological therapy, advocates coronary artery revascularization only for smaller group of patients with refractory angina, poor left ventricular systolic function, or high-risk coronary anatomy. Therefore, our conventional wisdom about stress testing must be questioned within this new and revolutionary paradigm. Exercise stress echocardiography (ESE) is still a well-known technique for assessing known or suspected stable CAD, it is safe, accessible, and well-tolerated, and there is an widespread evidence base. ESE has been remarkably resilient throughout years of innovation in noninvasive cardiology. Its value is not to be determined over the short portion of diagnostic accuracy but mainly through its prognostic value evident in a wide range of patient subsets. It is coming very close to the modern profile of a leading test that should include, in addition to an essential accettable diagnostic and prognostic accuracy, qualities of low cost, no radiation exposure, and minor environmental traces. In this review, we will discuss advantages, diagnostic accuracy, prognostic value in general and special populations, cost-effectiveness, and changes in referral patterns of ESE in the modern era.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Barbieri et al. (2022) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: