Key result
Myocardial contrast echocardiography detects significant coronary stenosis in ESRD with ~94% sensitivity and NPV.
Why the study?
This study evaluated myocardial contrast echocardiography for perfusion assessment compared with coronary angiography in patients with end-stage renal disease.
Does myocardial contrast echocardiography accurately detect or rule out significant coronary artery stenosis compared with coronary angiography in patients with end-stage renal disease?
Cross-Sectional (n=39)
Does myocardial contrast echocardiography accurately detect or rule out significant coronary artery stenosis compared with coronary angiography in patients with end-stage renal disease?
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Myocardial contrast echocardiography demonstrates high sensitivity and negative predictive value (94% each) for ruling out significant coronary artery stenosis in patients with end-stage renal disease.
BACKGROUND: 39 end-stage renal disease (ESRD) patients undergoing elective coronary angiography (CA) were studied. METHOD: Myocardial contrast echocardiography (MCE) for the perfusion assessment was done prior to CA. The left ventricle was divided into three regions supplied by left anterior descending (LAD) circumflex (Cx) and right coronary artery (RCA). Comparison between MCE and CA was performed on two levels: presence of any perfusion defect by any significant coronary artery stenosis (CAS) in a particular patient, any perfusion defect-by-vessel analysis. RESULTS: Significant coronary artery disease was revealed on CA in 18 (46%) patients. 28 (72%) of the patients had perfusion defects on MCE. The sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values (PPV, NPV) of MCE for the presence of any significant CAS in a given patient were 94, 76, 77 and 94% respectively. The best agreement between the presence of the perfusion defect on MCE and CAS was found for RCA: sensitivity 89%, specificity 87%, PPV 67%, NPV 96%, the worst for LAD: 71, 71, 53 and 91% respectively. CONCLUSION: Our preliminary results indicate that MCE is of a good accuracy for ruling out the presence of a significant CAS in patients with ESRD. Diagnostic performance of MCE seems to be different in respect of analyzed region of the left ventricle.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sobkowicz et al. (2008) conducted a cross-sectional in End-stage renal disease (n=39). Myocardial contrast echocardiography (MCE) for perfusion assessment vs. Coronary angiography (CA) was evaluated on Diagnostic accuracy of MCE for presence of any significant coronary artery stenosis (CAS). Myocardial contrast echocardiography detected significant coronary artery stenosis in ESRD patients with 94% sensitivity, 76% specificity, 77% PPV, and 94% NPV.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: