Key result
Rest 2D speckle tracking echocardiography detects significant CAD with ~91% sensitivity vs. coronary angiography.
Why the study?
The clinical value of rest 2D speckle tracking echocardiography for detecting significant coronary artery disease in suspected patients was uncertain and controversial.
Cross-Sectional (n=216)
Single-blind
No
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
AIMS: To detect the significance of coronary artery disease in the patients, who are suspected, was assumed to be one of the advantages of 2D STE, as a novel non-invasive imaging modality with acceptable accuracy. METHODS: In this study, 216 patients who were suspected to have coronary artery disease and candidate for coronary angiography, underwent rest two-dimensional speckle tracking echocardiography (2D STE) and negative global systolic longitudinal strain was evaluated. RESULTS: Negative global systolic left ventricular longitudinal strain under 18% in rest 2D-STE was significantly prevalent in patients with significant CAD in coronary angiography (P value<0.0001).Our results revealed sensitivity of 91.1%, specificity of 63.0%, positive predictive value of 80.4%, negative predictive value of 81.0% and accuracy of 80.5% for rest 2D-STE in detection of significant CAD. CONCLUSION: Here in we showed that rest Two-dimensional speckle tracking echocardiography could be a sensitive but nonspecific imaging modality to determine significant coronary artery disease. Future studies with large size will reveal more detailed findings.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Mahjoob et al. (2018) conducted a cross-sectional in Suspected coronary artery disease (n=216). Rest two-dimensional speckle tracking echocardiography (2D STE) vs. Coronary angiography was evaluated on Detection of significant coronary artery disease (≥50% stenosis) using negative global systolic left ventricular longitudinal strain <18% (Sensitivity 91.1%, Specificity 63.0%, p=<0.0001). Rest 2D speckle tracking echocardiography demonstrated a sensitivity of 91.1% and a specificity of 63.0% for detecting significant coronary artery disease compared to coronary angiography.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: