Why the study?
This study aimed to examine the association between SPECT stress testing and elective ICA in terms of diagnostic value in patients suspected of CAD at a centre in Saudi Arabia.
Does SPECT stress test accurately diagnose significant coronary artery disease compared to invasive coronary angiography in patients with suspected stable angina?
Does SPECT stress test accurately diagnose significant coronary artery disease compared to invasive coronary angiography in patients with suspected stable angina?
In a Saudi population with suspected stable angina, SPECT myocardial perfusion imaging demonstrated high sensitivity but low specificity and overall reliability compared to invasive coronary angiography.
SPECT's low specificity and reliability caution against standalone CAD diagnosis in stable angina; leaves open its role versus ICA pending prospective validation.
Background Invasive coronary angiography (ICA) is the gold standard procedure for the diagnosis of coronary artery disease (CAD). ICA allows for clear visualization of the coronary arterial blood flow. Single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) is currently in widespread use to non-invasively evaluate patients known or suspected of coronary artery disease (CAD). This study aimed to examine the association between (SPECT) stress test and elective ICA in terms of diagnostic value in patients suspected of coronary artery disease at the King Faisal Cardiac Center (KFCC), Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. Methods This study is a retrospective diagnostic validation study using a consecutive sampling technique to select the study sample at KFCC. The study included all patients who presented with chest pain that were investigated with either exercise or pharmacologic myocardial perfusion SPECT study followed by elective ICA within six months from January 2015 to January 2020. Results A total of 207 patients met the inclusion criteria, where 43% (n = 90) of patients were females and 57% (n = 117) were males; 68% (n = 141) of the patients had both test results concordant (both SPECT and ICA results were in agreement). In 32% of the patients (n = 66), there was a discordant result (discrepant result between SPECT and ICA). SPECT had a sensitivity of 92.4% and a specificity of 26.3%. SPECT had a negative predictive value of 0.68 and a positive predictive value of 0.66 compared to ICA. There was a low degree of reliability between SPECT and ICA. Conclusion Reliability between the SPECT and ICA in exclusion of significant CAD is high. The rate of false-positive tests was high while the accuracy of SPECT in detecting CAD in patients with diabetes and hypertension was high. The overall reliability of SPECT to ICA in the Saudi population was low.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Alqarni et al. (2021) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 4 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: