Do stress ECG and echocardiography predict systemic endothelial dysfunction and epicardial artery stenosis in patients with chest pain?
Stress echocardiography wall motion abnormalities accurately predict epicardial coronary stenosis, whereas stress ECG ST-segment depression reflects systemic endothelial dysfunction rather than epicardial stenosis.
BACKGROUND: In the stress imaging era, ECG positivity is regarded as a frequent source of false-positive responses. However, it is known that normal coronary arteries frequently coexist with abnormal endothelial function in patients with chest pain. AIM: To evaluate the anatomical coronary epicardial, and functional systemic endothelial determinants of wall motion and electrocardiographic responses during stress testing. METHOD: Sixty-eight in-hospital patients with chest pain syndrome, no previous myocardial infarction, and off nitrate therapy at the time of testing underwent, on different days, in random order and within 1 month: (1) stress ECG echo testing (with dipyridamole in 43, dobutamine in 3, and exercise in 22 patients); (2) coronary angiography; (3) endothelium-dependent, flow-mediated dilation of the brachial artery during reactive hyperaemia using high-resolution ultrasound. Criteria of positivity were: ST segment depression >0.1mm in the stress ECG; regional dysfunction >2 segments demonstrated by stress-echo; diameter reduction >50% on coronary angiography; and <5% flow-mediated dilation as revealed by endothelial function. RESULTS: Significant coronary artery disease was present in 39 patients, and was predicted on multivariate analysis by stress-induced wall motion abnormalities (OR=108.8; 95% CI=8.5-1,389.4, P=0.0003), but not by either ST segment depression (P=0.13; OR=0.47; 95% CI=0.7-1.3) or reduced flow-mediated dilation (P=0.81; OR=0.87; 95% CI=0.27-2.8). Abnormal flow-mediated dilation was present in 53 patients (78%), and was predicted by stress-induced ST segment depression (P=0.023; OR=6.2; 95% CI=1.3-30.5), but not by either stress echo positivity (P=0.66; OR=0.77; 95% CI=0.23 to 2.5) or angiographically assessed coronary artery disease. There was no correlation between flow-mediated dilation and extent of coronary artery disease as assessed by the angiographic Duke score (from 0=normal to 100=most severe disease): r=-0.13, P=0.91. CONCLUSION: Epicardial coronary artery anatomy affects wall motion abnormalities, and systemic endothelial dysfunction affects ST segment depression during stress. However, echocardiographic positivity is unrelated to endothelial dysfunction, and electrocardiographic positivity is an inaccurate predictor of coronary stenosis. An integration of ECG and functional markers is warranted in the stress testing lab.
Attila Pálinkás (2002) studied this question.