Key result
Stress echocardiography offers higher sensitivity and specificity than standard exercise stress testing and is comparable to nuclear perfusion imaging for the noninvasive evaluation of CAD.
Stress echocardiography improves upon the diagnostic accuracy of standard exercise stress testing for CAD evaluation.
May support stress echocardiography preference for CAD evaluation; leaves open need for prospective outcome trials.
Exercise stress testing remains one of the most widely used techniques in assessing functional capacity and in confirming a diagnosis of CAD. Its sensitivity and specificity are approximately 63% and 74%, respectively. The technique is safe when administered and supervised by qualified personnel who are trained to recognize contraindications and other reasons for termination of the test. More recently, echocardiography has been combined with exercise stress testing. It is a well-tolerated and valuable procedure for noninvasive evaluation of CAD. The sensitivity and specificity of stress echocardiography are higher than those of exercise stress testing and comparable to those of nuclear perfusion imaging. Continuing improvements in digital image analysis, cost, and the availability of contrast agents promise to make noninvasive stress testing even more useful in the years to come. Newer contrast and concomitant perfusion agents are on the horizon and may prove to be a reality in the echocardiographic laboratories of the future.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Tak et al. (2004) conducted a review in Coronary Artery Disease (CAD). Stress echocardiography vs. Exercise stress testing was evaluated on Sensitivity and specificity for CAD diagnosis. Stress echocardiography offers higher sensitivity and specificity than standard exercise stress testing and is comparable to nuclear perfusion imaging for the noninvasive evaluation of CAD.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: