Initial Invasive or Conservative Strategy for Stable Coronary Disease.

BACKGROUND: Among patients with stable coronary disease and moderate or severe ischemia, whether clinical outcomes are better in those who receive an invasive intervention plus medical therapy than in those who receive medical therapy alone is uncertain. METHODS: We randomly assigned 5179 patients with moderate or severe ischemia to an initial invasive strategy (angiography and revascularization when feasible) and medical therapy or to an initial conservative strategy of medical therapy alone and angiography if medical therapy failed. The primary outcome was a composite of death from cardiovascular causes, myocardial infarction, or hospitalization for unstable angina, heart failure, or resuscitated cardiac arrest. A key secondary outcome was death from cardiovascular causes or myocardial infarction. RESULTS: Over a median of 3.2 years, 318 primary outcome events occurred in the invasive-strategy group and 352 occurred in the conservative-strategy group. At 6 months, the cumulative event rate was 5.3% in the invasive-strategy group and 3.4% in the conservative-strategy group (difference, 1.9 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.8 to 3.0); at 5 years, the cumulative event rate was 16.4% and 18.2%, respectively (difference, -1.8 percentage points; 95% CI, -4.7 to 1.0). Results were similar with respect to the key secondary outcome. The incidence of the primary outcome was sensitive to the definition of myocardial infarction; a secondary analysis yielded more procedural myocardial infarctions of uncertain clinical importance. There were 145 deaths in the invasive-strategy group and 144 deaths in the conservative-strategy group (hazard ratio, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.83 to 1.32). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with stable coronary disease and moderate or severe ischemia, we did not find evidence that an initial invasive strategy, as compared with an initial conservative strategy, reduced the risk of ischemic cardiovascular events or death from any cause over a median of 3.2 years. The trial findings were sensitive to the definition of myocardial infarction that was used. (Funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute and others; ISCHEMIA ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01471522.).

Effects of initial invasive vs. initial conservative treatment strategies on recurrent and total cardiovascular events in the ISCHEMIA trial.

AIMS: The International Study of Comparative Health Effectiveness with Medical and Invasive Approaches (ISCHEMIA) trial prespecified an analysis to determine whether accounting for recurrent cardiovascular events in addition to first events modified understanding of the treatment effects. METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients with stable coronary artery disease (CAD) and moderate or severe ischaemia on stress testing were randomized to either initial invasive (INV) or initial conservative (CON) management. The primary outcome was a composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction (MI), and hospitalization for unstable angina, heart failure, or cardiac arrest. The Ghosh-Lin method was used to estimate mean cumulative incidence of total events with death as a competing risk. The 5179 ISCHEMIA patients experienced 670 index events (318 INV, 352 CON) and 203 recurrent events (102 INV, 101 CON). A single primary event was observed in 9.8% of INV and 10.8% of CON patients while ≥2 primary events were observed in 2.5% and 2.8%, respectively. Patients with recurrent events were older; had more frequent hypertension, diabetes, prior MI, or cerebrovascular disease; and had more multivessel CAD. The average number of primary endpoint events per 100 patients over 4 years was 18.2 in INV [95% confidence interval (CI) 15.8-20.9] and 19.7 in CON (95% CI 17.5-22.2), difference -1.5 (95% CI -5.0 to 2.0, P = 0.398). Comparable results were obtained when all-cause death was substituted for cardiovascular death and when stroke was added as an event. CONCLUSIONS: In stable CAD patients with moderate or severe myocardial ischaemia enrolled in ISCHEMIA, an initial INV treatment strategy did not prevent either net recurrent events or net total events more effectively than an initial CON strategy. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISCHEMIA ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01471522, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01471522.

Natural History of Patients With Ischemia and No Obstructive Coronary Artery Disease: The CIAO-ISCHEMIA Study.

BACKGROUND: Ischemia with no obstructive coronary artery disease (INOCA) is common and has an adverse prognosis. We set out to describe the natural history of symptoms and ischemia in INOCA. METHODS: CIAO-ISCHEMIA (Changes in Ischemia and Angina over One Year in ISCHEMIA Trial Screen Failures With INOCA) was an international cohort study conducted from 2014 to 2019 involving angina assessments (Seattle Angina Questionnaire) and stress echocardiograms 1 year apart. This was an ancillary study that included patients with a history of angina who were not randomly assigned in the ISCHEMIA trial. Stress-induced wall motion abnormalities were determined by an echocardiographic core laboratory blinded to symptoms, coronary artery disease status, and test timing. Medical therapy was at the discretion of treating physicians. The primary outcome was the correlation between the changes in the Seattle Angina Questionnaire angina frequency score and changes in echocardiographic ischemia. We also analyzed predictors of 1-year changes in both angina and ischemia, and we compared CIAO participants with ISCHEMIA participants with obstructive coronary artery disease who had stress echocardiography before enrollment, as CIAO participants did. RESULTS: INOCA participants in CIAO were more often female (66% of 208 versus 26% of 865 ISCHEMIA participants with obstructive coronary artery disease, P<0.001), but the magnitude of ischemia was similar (median 4 ischemic segments [interquartile range, 3-5] both groups). Ischemia and angina were not significantly correlated at enrollment in CIAO (P=0.46) or ISCHEMIA stress echocardiography participants (P=0.35). At 1 year, the stress echocardiogram was normal in half of CIAO participants, and 23% had moderate or severe ischemia (≥3 ischemic segments). Angina improved in 43% and worsened in 14%. Change in ischemia over 1 year was not significantly correlated with change in angina (ρ=0.029). CONCLUSIONS: Improvement in ischemia and angina were common in INOCA but not correlated. Our INOCA cohort had a degree of inducible wall motion abnormalities similar to concurrently enrolled ISCHEMIA participants with obstructive coronary artery disease. Our results highlight the complex nature of INOCA pathophysiology and the multifactorial nature of angina. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT02347215.

Outcomes of Participants With Diabetes in the ISCHEMIA Trials.

BACKGROUND: Among patients with diabetes and chronic coronary disease, it is unclear if invasive management improves outcomes when added to medical therapy. METHODS: The ISCHEMIA (International Study of Comparative Health Effectiveness with Medical and Invasive Approaches) trials (ie, ISCHEMIA and ISCHEMIA-Chronic Kidney Disease) randomized chronic coronary disease patients to an invasive (medical therapy + angiography and revascularization if feasible) or a conservative approach (medical therapy alone with revascularization if medical therapy failed). Cohorts were combined after no trial-specific effects were observed. Diabetes was defined by history, hemoglobin A1c ≥6.5%, or use of glucose-lowering medication. The primary outcome was all-cause death or myocardial infarction (MI). Heterogeneity of effect of invasive management on death or MI was evaluated using a Bayesian approach to protect against random high or low estimates of treatment effect for patients with versus without diabetes and for diabetes subgroups of clinical (female sex and insulin use) and anatomic features (coronary artery disease severity or left ventricular function). RESULTS: Of 5900 participants with complete baseline data, the median age was 64 years (interquartile range, 57-70), 24% were female, and the median estimated glomerular filtration was 80 mL·min-1·1.73-2 (interquartile range, 64-95). Among the 2553 (43%) of participants with diabetes, the median percent hemoglobin A1c was 7% (interquartile range, 7-8), and 30% were insulin-treated. Participants with diabetes had a 49% increased hazard of death or MI (hazard ratio, 1.49 [95% CI, 1.31-1.70]; P<0.001). At median 3.1-year follow-up the adjusted event-free survival was 0.54 (95% bootstrapped CI, 0.48-0.60) and 0.66 (95% bootstrapped CI, 0.61-0.71) for patients with diabetes versus without diabetes, respectively, with a 12% (95% bootstrapped CI, 4%-20%) absolute decrease in event-free survival among participants with diabetes. Female and male patients with insulin-treated diabetes had an adjusted event-free survival of 0.52 (95% bootstrapped CI, 0.42-0.56) and 0.49 (95% bootstrapped CI, 0.42-0.56), respectively. There was no difference in death or MI between strategies for patients with diabetes versus without diabetes, or for clinical (female sex or insulin use) or anatomic features (coronary artery disease severity or left ventricular function) of patients with diabetes. CONCLUSIONS: Despite higher risk for death or MI, chronic coronary disease patients with diabetes did not derive incremental benefit from routine invasive management compared with initial medical therapy alone. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT01471522.

Causes of cardiovascular and noncardiovascular death in the ISCHEMIA trial.

BACKGROUND: The International Study of Comparative Health Effectiveness with Medical and Invasive Approaches trial demonstrated no overall difference in the composite primary endpoint and the secondary endpoints of cardiovascular (CV) death/myocardial infarction or all-cause mortality between an initial invasive or conservative strategy among participants with chronic coronary disease and moderate or severe myocardial ischemia. Detailed cause-specific death analyses have not been reported. METHODS: We compared overall and cause-specific death rates by treatment group using Cox models with adjustment for pre-specified baseline covariates. Cause of death was adjudicated by an independent Clinical Events Committee as CV, non-CV, and undetermined. We evaluated the association of risk factors and treatment strategy with cause of death. RESULTS: Four-year cumulative incidence rates for CV death were similar between invasive and conservative strategies (2.6% vs 3.0%; hazard ratio [HR] 0.98; 95% CI [0.70-1.38]), but non-CV death rates were higher in the invasive strategy (3.3% vs 2.1%; HR 1.45 [1.00-2.09]). Overall, 13% of deaths were attributed to undetermined causes (38/289). Fewer undetermined deaths (0.6% vs 1.3%; HR 0.48 [0.24-0.95]) and more malignancy deaths (2.0% vs 0.8%; HR 2.11 [1.23-3.60]) occurred in the invasive strategy than in the conservative strategy. CONCLUSIONS: In International Study of Comparative Health Effectiveness with Medical and Invasive Approaches, all-cause and CV death rates were similar between treatment strategies. The observation of fewer undetermined deaths and more malignancy deaths in the invasive strategy remains unexplained. These findings should be interpreted with caution in the context of prior studies and the overall trial results.

Peak treadmill exercise echocardiography for ischemia detection.

Of the stress echocardiographic methods, exercise should be the first choice for patients able to exercise, according to guidelines. Among ExE modalities, treadmill ExE with acquisition of images at peak exercise has several advantages, including high sensitivity and prognostic value. Overall, sensitivity of ExE is around 80%-85%, although figures for peak imaging on the treadmill are 85%-90%. Despite it, guidelines do not mention this method.

Exercise testing in COVID-19 era: Clinical profile, results and feasibility wearing a facemask.

BACKGROUND: No data are available about whether Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic have led to changes in clinical profiles or results of exercise testing once the usual activity was reassumed, as well as if wearing a facemask has any impact on the tests. The aim of this study is to evaluate differences in the patients referred to exercise stress testing in the context of COVID-19 pandemic and analyse the feasibility and results of these tests wearing a facemask. METHODS: We included all patients referred for an exercise test from 1 June to 30 September 2020 and compared them with the patients attended within the same period in 2019 before and after propensity score matching. All patients referred in 2020 wore a facemask. RESULTS: A total of 854 patients were included: 398 in the 2020 group and 456 in 2019. No significant differences in baseline characteristics of the patients were observed, with the exception of dyspnoea, which was nearly twice as high in 2020 as compared with 2019. Regarding the results of the tests, no differences were observed, with almost 80% of maximal tests, similar functional capacity and over a 20% of positive exercise tests in both groups. These results remained after propensity score matching. CONCLUSION: COVID-19 pandemic has not changed the clinical profile of patients referred to exercise testing. In addition, performing exercise testing wearing a facemask is feasible, with no influence in functional capacity and clinical results.

Excessive blood pressure increase with exercise and risk of all-cause mortality and cardiac events.

BACKGROUND: The association of an excessive blood pressure increase with exercise (EBPIE) on cardiovascular outcomes remains controversial. We sought to assess its impact on the risk of all-cause mortality and major cardiac events in patients with known or suspected coronary artery disease (CAD) referred for stress testing. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Exercise echocardiography was performed in 10 047 patients with known or suspected CAD. An EBPIE was defined as an increase in systolic blood pressure with exercise ≥ 80 mmHg. The endpoints were all-cause mortality and major cardiac events (MACE), including cardiac death or nonfatal myocardial infarction (MI). RESULTS: Overall, 573 patients exhibited an EBPIE during the tests. Over a mean follow-up of 4·8 years, there were 1950 deaths (including 725 cardiac deaths), 1477 MI and 1900 MACE. The cumulative 10-year rates of all-cause mortality, cardiac death, nonfatal MI and MACE were 32·9%, 13·1%, 26·9% and 33% in patients who did not develop an EBPIE vs. 18·9%, 4·7%, 17·5% and 20·7% in those experiencing an EBPIE, respectively (P < 0·001 for all comparisons). In Cox regression analyses, an EBPIE remained predictive of all-cause mortality (hazard ratio [HR] 0·73, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0·59-0·91, P = 0·004), cardiac death (HR 0·67, 95% CI 0·46-0·98, P = 0·04), MI (HR 0·67, 95% CI 0·52-0·86, P = 0·002) and MACE (HR 0·69, 95% CI 0·56-0·86, P = 0·001). CONCLUSIONS: An EBPIE was associated with a significantly lower risk of mortality and MACE in patients with known or suspected CAD referred for stress testing.

Exercise left ventricular ejection fraction predicts events in right bundle branch block.

OBJECTIVE: Interpretation of the electrocardiogram (ECG) during exercise is not easy in patients with right bundle branch block (RBBB). Also, the value of exercise echocardiography (ExE) for predicting outcome in them has not been addressed. We sought to assess its prognostic value in patients with RBBB and known/suspected coronary disease. DESIGN: Retrospective analysis of data on 703 patients with RBBB who were submitted to a clinically-indicated ExE. The end points were overall mortality and combined myocardial infarction and cardiovascular mortality. RESULTS: During follow-up (4.1 ± 4.5 years) there were 130 deaths and 108 combined events. Independent predictors of combined events were history of coronary artery disease (hazard ratio [HR] = 2.37, 95% Confidence Interval [CI] = 1.24-4.52, p = 0.009) resting wall motion score index (HR = 2.14, 95% CI = 1.12-4.10, p = 0.02), metabolic equivalents (HR = 0.89, 95% CI = 0.93-0.97, p = 0.007), Δ in double product with exercise (HR = 0.96, 95% CI = 0.92-1.00, p = 0.036) and Δ in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) with exercise (HR = 0.97, 95% CI = 0.94-0.99, p = 0.01). Neither positive clinical nor ECG exercise testing was predictive. Combined event rates were 3.3% in patients with ΔLVEF > 5%, 4.7% in those with ΔLVEF between 1-5% and 8.2% in those with no increase (Δ < 1%). CONCLUSIONS: A decrease in LVEF during exercise is predictive of serious events in patients with RBBB.

A clinical score to obviate the need for cardiac stress testing in patients with acute chest pain and negative troponins.

INTRODUCTION: Although cardiac stress testing may help establish the safety of early discharge in patients with suspected acute coronary syndromes and negative troponins, more cost-effective strategies are necessary. We aimed to develop a clinical prediction rule to safely obviate the need for cardiac stress testing in this setting. METHODS: A decision rule was derived in a prospective cohort of 3001 patients with acute chest pain and negative troponins, and validated in a set of 1473 subjects. The primary end point was a composite of positive cardiac stress testing (in the absence of a subsequent negative coronary angiogram), positive coronary angiography, or any major coronary events within 3 months. RESULTS: A score chart was built based on 7 variables: male sex (+2), age (+1 per decade from the fifth decade), diabetes mellitus (+2), hypercholesterolemia (+1), prior coronary revascularization (+2), type of chest pain (typical angina, +5; non-specific chest pain, -3), and non-diagnostic repolarization abnormalities (+2). In the validation set, the model showed good discrimination (c statistic = 0.84; 95% confidence interval, 0.82-0.87) and calibration (Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test, P= .34). If stress tests were avoided in patients in the validation sample with a sum score of 0 or lower, the number of referrals would be reduced by 23.4%, yielding a negative predictive value of 98.8% (95% confidence interval, 97.0%-99.7%). CONCLUSION: This novel prediction rule based on a combination of readily available clinical characteristics may be a valuable tool to decide whether stress testing can be reliably avoided in patients with acute chest pain and negative troponins.

The clinical use of stress echocardiography in chronic coronary syndromes and beyond coronary artery disease: a clinical consensus statement from the European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging of the ESC.

Since the 2009 publication of the stress echocardiography expert consensus of the European Association of Echocardiography, and after the 2016 advice of the American Society of Echocardiography-European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging for applications beyond coronary artery disease, new information has become available regarding stress echo. Until recently, the assessment of regional wall motion abnormality was the only universally practiced step of stress echo. In the state-of-the-art ABCDE protocol, regional wall motion abnormality remains the main step A, but at the same time, regional perfusion using ultrasound-contrast agents may be assessed. Diastolic function and pulmonary B-lines are assessed in step B; left ventricular contractile and preload reserve with volumetric echocardiography in step C; Doppler-based coronary flow velocity reserve in the left anterior descending coronary artery in step D; and ECG-based heart rate reserve in non-imaging step E. These five biomarkers converge, conceptually and methodologically, in the ABCDE protocol allowing comprehensive risk stratification of the vulnerable patient with chronic coronary syndromes. The present document summarizes current practice guidelines recommendations and training requirements and harmonizes the clinical guidelines of the European Society of Cardiology in many diverse cardiac conditions, from chronic coronary syndromes to valvular heart disease. The continuous refinement of imaging technology and the diffusion of ultrasound-contrast agents improve image quality, feasibility, and reader accuracy in assessing wall motion and perfusion, left ventricular volumes, and coronary flow velocity. Carotid imaging detects pre-obstructive atherosclerosis and improves risk prediction similarly to coronary atherosclerosis. The revolutionary impact of artificial intelligence on echocardiographic image acquisition and analysis makes stress echo more operator-independent and objective. Stress echo has unique features of low cost, versatility, and universal availability. It does not need ionizing radiation exposure and has near-zero carbon dioxide emissions. Stress echo is a convenient and sustainable choice for functional testing within and beyond coronary artery disease.

Global Longitudinal Strain as Predictor of Inducible Ischemia in No Obstructive Coronary Artery Disease in the CIAO-ISCHEMIA Study.

BACKGROUND: Global longitudinal strain (GLS) is a sensitive marker for identifying subclinical myocardial dysfunction in obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD). Little is known about the relationship between GLS and ischemia in patients with myocardial ischemia and no obstructive CAD (INOCA). OBJECTIVES: To investigate the relationship between resting GLS and ischemia on stress echocardiography (SE) in patients with INOCA. METHODS: Left ventricular GLS was calculated offline on resting SE images at enrollment (n = 144) and 1-year follow-up (n = 120) in the CIAO-ISCHEMIA (Changes in Ischemia and Angina over One year in International Study of Comparative Health Effectiveness with Medical and Invasive Approaches trial screen failures with no obstructive CAD on computed tomography [CT] angiography) study, which enrolled participants with moderate or severe ischemia by local SE interpretation (≥3 segments with new or worsening wall motion abnormality and no obstructive (<50% stenosis) on coronary computed tomography angiography. RESULTS: Global longitudinal strain values were normal in 83.3% at enrollment and 94.2% at follow-up. Global longitudinal strain values were not associated with a positive SE at enrollment (GLS = -21.5% positive SE vs GLS = -19.9% negative SE, P = .443) or follow-up (GLS = -23.2% positive SE vs GLS = -23.1% negative SE, P = .859). Significant change in GLS was not associated with positive SE in follow-up (P = .401). Regional strain was not associated with colocalizing ischemia at enrollment or follow-up. Changes in GLS and number of ischemic segments from enrollment to follow-up showed a modest but not clinically meaningful correlation (ß = 0.41; 95% CI, 0.16, 0.67; P = .002). CONCLUSIONS: In this cohort of INOCA patients, resting GLS values were largely normal and did not associate with the presence, severity, or location of stress-induced ischemia. These findings may suggest the absence of subclinical myocardial dysfunction detectable by echocardiographic strain analysis at rest in INOCA.

Changes in echocardiographic parameters over time in paradoxical low-flow low-gradient aortic stenosis.

AIMS: To assess the progression of the disease and evolution of the main echocardiographic variables for quantifying AS in patients with severe low-flow low-gradient (LFLG) AS compared to other severe AS subtypes. METHODS AND RESULTS: Longitudinal, observational, multicenter study including consecutive asymptomatic patients with severe AS (aortic valve area, AVA < 1.0 cm²) and normal left ventricle ejection fraction (LVEF ≥ 50%). Patients were classified according to baseline echocardiography into: HG (high gradient; mean gradient ≥ 40 mmHg), NFLG (normal-flow low-gradient; mean gradient < 40 mmHg, indexed systolic volume (SVi) > 35mL/m2), or LFLG (mean gradient < 40 mmHg, SVi ≤ 35 mL/m²). AS progression was analyzed by comparing patients' baseline measurements and their last follow-up measurements or those taken prior to aortic valve replacement (AVR). Of the 903 included patients, 401 (44.4%) were HG, 405 (44.9%) NFLG, and 97 (10.7%) LFLG. Progression of the mean gradient in a linear mixed regression model was greater in low-gradient groups: LFLG vs. HG (regression coefficient 0.124, P = 0.005) and NFLG vs. HG (regression coefficient 0.068, P = 0.018). No differences were observed between the LFLG and NFLG groups (regression coefficient 0.056, P = 0.195). However, AVA reduction was slower in the LFLG group compared to the NFLG (P < 0.001). During follow-up, in conservatively-managed patients, 19.1% (n = 9) of LFLG patients evolved to having NFLG AS and 44.7% (n = 21) to having HG AS. In patients undergoing AVR, 58.0% (n = 29) of LFLG baseline patients received AVR with a HG AS. CONCLUSION: LFLG AS shows an intermediate AVA and gradient progression compared to NFLG and HG AS. The majority of patients initially classified as having LFLG AS changed over time to having other severe forms of AS, and most of them received AVR with a HG AS.

Rest and Stress Left Atrial Dysfunction in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation.

BACKGROUND: Left atrial (LA) myopathy with paroxysmal and permanent atrial fibrillation (AF) is frequent in chronic coronary syndromes (CCS) but sometimes occult at rest and elicited by stress. AIM: This study sought to assess LA volume and function at rest and during stress across the spectrum of AF. METHODS: In a prospective, multicenter, observational study design, we enrolled 3042 patients [age = 64 ± 12; 63.8% male] with known or suspected CCS: 2749 were in sinus rhythm (SR, Group 1); 191 in SR with a history of paroxysmal AF (Group 2); and 102 were in permanent AF (Group 3). All patients underwent stress echocardiography (SE). We measured left atrial volume index (LAVI) in all patients and LA Strain reservoir phase (LASr) in a subset of 486 patients. RESULTS: LAVI increased from Group 1 to 3, both at rest (Group 1 = 27.6 ± 12.2, Group 2 = 31.6 ± 12.9, Group 3 = 43.3 ± 19.7 mL/m2, p < 0.001) and at peak stress (Group 1 = 26.2 ± 12.0, Group 2 = 31.2 ± 12.2, Group 3 = 43.9 ± 19.4 mL/m2, p < 0.001). LASr progressively decreased from Group 1 to 3, both at rest (Group 1 = 26.0 ± 8.5%, Group 2 = 23.2 ± 11.2%, Group 3 = 8.5 ± 6.5%, p < 0.001) and at peak stress (Group 1 = 26.9 ± 10.1, Group 2 = 23.8 ± 11.0 Group 3 = 10.7 ± 8.1%, p < 0.001). Stress B-lines (≥2) were more frequent in AF (Group 1 = 29.7% vs. Group 2 = 35.5% vs. Group 3 = 57.4%, p < 0.001). Inducible ischemia was less frequent in SR (Group 1 = 16.1% vs. Group 2 = 24.7% vs. Group 3 = 24.5%, p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In CCS, rest and stress LA dilation and reservoir dysfunction are often present in paroxysmal and, more so, in permanent AF and are associated with more frequent inducible ischemia and pulmonary congestion during stress.

Impact of electrocardiographic interpretability on outcome in patients referred for stress testing.

BACKGROUND: There is limited insight into the association of electrocardiographic interpretability with outcome in patients referred for stress testing. METHODS: Exercise echocardiography was performed in 8226 patients with known or suspected coronary artery disease. Electrocardiograms were considered uninterpretable in the presence of left bundle-branch block (LBBB), left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) with strain, repolarization abnormalities because of digitalis therapy, ventricular paced rhythm, preexcitation or ST depression ≥ 0.1 mV because of other causes. End points were all-cause mortality, cardiac death and hard cardiac events (i.e. cardiac death or nonfatal myocardial infarction). RESULTS: A total of 2450 patients had uninterpretable electrocardiograms. During a follow-up period of 4.1 ± 3.5 years, there were 1011 deaths (of which 478 were cardiac deaths) and 1069 patients experienced a hard cardiac event. The 5-year rates of death, cardiac death and hard cardiac events were, respectively, 18.7%, 10.9% and 18.8% in patients with uninterpretable ECGs, compared with 9.5%, 4.1% and 10.9% in those with interpretable ECGs (P < 0.001). After covariate adjustment, lack of ECG interpretability remained an independent predictor of all-cause mortality (hazard ratio [HR] 1.25, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.08-1.44, P = 0.002), cardiac death (HR 1.63, 95% CI 1.32-2.01, P < 0.001) and hard cardiac events (HR 1.28, 95% CI 1.11-1.47, P < 0.001). When the specific ECG abnormalities were included as covariates, LBBB, LVH and digitalis therapy remained predictors of cardiac death; LBBB and LVH were predictors of hard cardiac events, and LVH remained predictive of all-cause mortality. CONCLUSION: Uninterpretable ECGs portend a worse prognosis in patients referred for stress testing.

Additive prognostic and diagnostic value of diastolic exercise parameters in patients referred for exercise echocardiography.

AIMS: Exercise echocardiography (ExE) may evaluate left ventricular (LV) systolic and diastolic function. We aimed to assess the value of diastolic parameters at exercise [early LV inflow velocity to early tissue Doppler annulus velocity (E/e')] in patients with normal or abnormal resting diastolic function (DF) referred for a clinically indicated ExE. METHODS AND RESULTS: LV systolic and DF according to ASE/EACVI guidelines and mitral regurgitation (MR) were evaluated at rest in 772 patients (age 67 ± 12 years) with preserved LV ejection fraction (LVEF ≥ 50%). We assessed regional/global LV systolic function at peak exercise, while MR and E/e' where evaluated in the immediate post-exercise period. Abnormal ExE was defined as ischaemia or fixed wall motion abnormalities, and raised E/e' values as >15 at rest and at exercise (e' at the septal level). Patients were grouped as complaining or not of dyspnoea. Events were overall mortality, myocardial infarction, admission for unstable angina or cardiac failure, and coronary revascularization. DF was abnormal at rest in 221 patients (29%) and indeterminate in 77 (10%), with similar percentages in patients with and without dyspnoea. Exercise E/e' >15 was found in 37% of patients with abnormal DF, 21% with indeterminate DF, and 6% with normal DF (P < 0.001). Patients with abnormal ExE had more often abnormal resting DF (39% vs. 25%, P = 0.001) and exercise E/e' >15 (25% vs. 13%, P < 0.001) than those with normal ExE. During a median follow-up of 1.68 years, there were 132 events. Independent predictors included peak exercise LVEF [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.93, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.91-0.94, P < 0.001], and exercise E/e' (HR= 1.04, 95% CI = 1.01-1.07, P = 0.01). Neither resting E/e' values nor resting abnormal DF by ASE/EACVI guidelines, were independent predictors. Annualized event-rates were 43.2% in patients with (+) ExE plus (+) exercise E/e', 23.8% in those with (+) ExE and (-) exercise E/e', 7.9% in (-) ExE and (+) exercise E/e', and 3.6% with both variables normal. CONCLUSIONS: The results of diastolic dysfunction at rest and at exercise were similar between patients with or without dyspnoea referred for ExE, but they were associated with abnormal ExE. Exercise E/e' reclassified 21% of patients with indeterminate DF and further predicted outcome on top of ExE results.

Left atrial volume changes during exercise stress echocardiography in heart failure and hypertrophic cardiomyopathy.

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to assess feasibility and functional correlates of left atrial volume index (LAVI) changes during exercise stress echocardiography (ESE). METHODS: ESE on a bike or treadmill was performed in 363 patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF, n = 173), reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF, n = 59), or hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM, n = 131). The LAVI stress-rest increase ≥6.8 ml/m2 was defined as dilation. RESULTS: LAVI measurements were feasible in 100%. LAVI did not change in HFrEF being at rest 32 (25-45) vs at stress 36 (24-54) ml/m2, P = NS and in HCM at rest 35 (26-48) vs at stress 38 (28-48) ml/m2, P = NS, whereas it decreased in HFpEF from 30 (24-40) to 29 (21-37) ml/m2 at stress, P = 0.007. LA dilation occurred in 107 (30%) patients (27% with treadmill vs 33% with bike ESE, P = NS): 26 with HFpEF (15%), 26 with HFrEF (44%), and 55 with HCM (42%) with P < 0.001 for HFrEF and HCM vs HFpEF. A multivariate analysis revealed as the predictors for LAVI dilation E/e' > 14 at rest with odds ratio (OR) 4.4, LVEF <50% with OR 2.9, and LAVI at rest <35 ml/m2 with OR 2.7. CONCLUSION: The LAVI assessment during ESE was highly feasible and dilation equally frequent with a treadmill or bike. LA dilation was three-fold more frequent in HCM and HFrEF and could be predicted by increased resting E/e' and impaired EF as well as smaller baseline LAVI.

Pulmonary congestion during Exercise stress Echocardiography in Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy.

BACKGROUND: B-lines detected by lung ultrasound (LUS) during exercise stress echocardiography (ESE), indicating pulmonary congestion, have not been systematically evaluated in patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM). AIM: To assess the clinical, anatomical and functional correlates of pulmonary congestion elicited by exercise in HCM. METHODS: We enrolled 128 HCM patients (age 52 ± 15 years, 72 males) consecutively referred for ESE (treadmill in 46, bicycle in 82 patients) in 10 quality-controlled centers from 7 countries (Belgium, Brazil, Bulgaria, Hungary, Italy, Serbia, Spain). ESE assessment at rest and peak stress included: mitral regurgitation (MR, score from 0 to 3); E/e'; systolic pulmonary arterial pressure (SPAP) and end-diastolic volume (EDV). Change from rest to stress was calculated for each variable. Reduced preload reserve was defined by a decrease in EDV during exercise. B-lines at rest and at peak exercise were assessed by lung ultrasound with the 4-site simplified scan. B-lines positivity was considered if the sum of detected B-lines was ≥ 2. RESULTS: LUS was feasible in all subjects. B-lines were present in 13 patients at rest and in 38 during stress (10 vs 30%, p < 0.0001). When compared to patients without stress B-lines (n = 90), patients with B-lines (n = 38) had higher resting E/e' (14 ± 6 vs. 11 ± 4, p = 0.016) and SPAP (33 ± 10 vs. 27 ± 7 mm Hg p = 0.002). At peak exercise, patients with B-lines had higher peak E/e' (17 ± 6 vs. 13 ± 5 p = 0.003) and stress SPAP (55 ± 18 vs. 40 ± 12 mm Hg p < 0.0001), reduced preload reserve (68 vs. 30%, p = 0.001) and an increase in MR (42 vs. 17%, p = 0.013) compared to patients without congestion. Among baseline parameters, the number of B-lines and SPAP were the only independent predictors of exercise pulmonary congestion. CONCLUSIONS: Two-thirds of HCM patients who develop pulmonary congestion on exercise had no evidence of B-lines at rest. Diastolic impairment and mitral regurgitation were key determinants of pulmonary congestion during ESE. These findings underscore the importance of evaluating hemodynamic stability by physiological stress in HCM, particularly in the presence of unexplained symptoms and functional limitation.