Key result
Adding speckle-tracking to myocardial contrast stress-echocardiography fails to improve ischemia detection over contrast stress-echo alone.
Why the study?
The additional value of myocardial deformation analysis in assessing hemodynamic significance of coronary stenoses during myocardial contrast stress-echocardiography was unclear.
Does combining speckle-tracking echocardiography with myocardial contrast stress echocardiography improve diagnostic accuracy for transient myocardial ischemia in patients with coronary artery stenoses >50%?
Cross-Sectional (n=50)
Does combining speckle-tracking echocardiography with myocardial contrast stress echocardiography improve diagnostic accuracy for transient myocardial ischemia in patients with coronary artery stenoses >50%?
Absolute Event Rate: 78% vs 83.7%
Combining speckle-tracking with myocardial contrast stress echocardiography does not significantly improve the overall detection of transient myocardial ischemia compared to contrast stress echo alone, though it may slightly increase sensitivity for borderline stenoses.
Does not support adding speckle-tracking to contrast stress echo for ischemia detection; leaves open value in borderline stenoses.
No abstract yet. The journal hasn't published one we can show.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Atabaeva et al. (2021) conducted a cross-sectional in Coronary artery stenosis >50% (n=50). Speckle-tracking echocardiography combined with myocardial contrast stress-echocardiography vs. Myocardial contrast stress-echocardiography alone was evaluated on Accuracy for detecting transient myocardial ischemia. Combining speckle-tracking with myocardial contrast stress-echocardiography did not significantly improve ischemia detection over contrast stress-echocardiography alone (accuracy 78% vs 83.7%).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: