Real-time myocardial perfusion imaging for pharmacologic stress testing: added value to single photon emission computed tomography.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about the incremental value of real-time myocardial contrast echocardiography (MCE) as an adjunct to pharmacologic stress testing. This study was performed to evaluate the diagnostic value of MCE to detect abnormal myocardial perfusion by technetium Tc 99m sestamibi-single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) and anatomically significant coronary artery disease (CAD) by angiography. METHODS: Myocardial contrast echocardiography was performed at rest and during vasodilator stress in consecutive patients (N = 120) undergoing SPECT imaging for known or suspected CAD. Myocardial opacification, wall motion, and tracer uptake were visually analyzed in 12 myocardial segments by 2 pairs of blinded observers. Concordance between the 2 methods was assessed using the kappa statistic. RESULTS: Of 1356 segments, 1025 (76%) were interpretable by MCE, wall motion, and SPECT. Sensitivity of wall motion was 75%, specificity 83%, and accuracy 81% for detecting abnormal myocardial perfusion by SPECT (kappa = 0.53). Myocardial contrast echocardiography and wall motion together yielded significantly higher sensitivity (85% vs 74%, P < .05), specificity of 83%, and accuracy of 85% (kappa = 0.64) for the detection of abnormal myocardial perfusion. In 89 patients who underwent coronary angiography, MCE and wall motion together yielded higher sensitivity (83% vs 64%, P < .05) and accuracy (77% vs 68%, P < .05) but similar specificity (72%) compared with SPECT for the detection of high-grade, stenotic (> or = 75%) coronary lesions. CONCLUSION: Assessment of myocardial perfusion adds value to conventional stress echocardiography by increasing its sensitivity for the detection of functionally abnormal myocardial perfusion. Myocardial contrast echocardiography and wall motion together provide higher sensitivity and accuracy for detection of CAD compared with SPECT.

Real-time myocardial contrast echocardiography for pharmacologic stress testing: is quantitative estimation of myocardial blood flow reserve necessary?

BACKGROUND: Little is known about the diagnostic accuracy of quantitative real-time myocardial contrast echocardiography (MCE) as an adjunct to stress testing. This study was performed to evaluate the agreement between MCE and technetium 99m-sestamibi single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) for detection of perfusion defects and to investigate whether quantitative assessment of myocardial perfusion can increase the diagnostic value of MCE. METHODS: MCE was performed at rest and during peak adenosine stress in 50 unselected patients undergoing SPECT imaging. Concordance between the 2 methods was assessed using kappa statistics. MCE images were analyzed quantitatively, measuring peak intensity (A) and maximal rise of signal intensity (beta). Myocardial blood flow reserve was estimated by calculating the ratios of A(adenosine)/A(baseline) (A reserve), beta(adenosine)/beta(baseline) (beta reserve), and A x beta(adenosine)/A x beta(baseline) (A x beta reserve). RESULTS: Visual analysis of MCE agreed well with SPECT (kappa = 0.67) with sensitivity of 64%, specificity of 97%, and overall accuracy of 87%. Quantitative analysis showed that peak signal intensity A significantly increased under adenosine stress in SPECT-normal segments (2.6 +/- 1.9 vs 3.0 +/- 1.6 dB, P <.0001), tendencially decreased in reversible (3.0 +/- 2.0 vs 2.4 +/- 1.2 dB, P =.07) and remained unchanged in fixed (0.9 +/- 0.9 vs 0.8 +/- 0.9 dB) defects. beta Increased markedly under adenosine in normal segments (0.4 +/- 0.4 vs 1.4 +/- 1.3, P <.0001) but not in segments with reversible or fixed defects. Receiver operating characteristic showed that beta reserve and A x beta reserve, but not A reserve, are sensitive parameters for detecting perfusion defects with areas under the curve of 0.84, 0.85, and 0.61, respectively. Cut-off values of 1.9 and 2.3, respectively, for beta and A x beta reserve yielded sensitivity rates of 79% and 80%, specificity rates of 75% and 78%, and overall accuracy rates of 76% and 79%, respectively. CONCLUSION: Quantitative estimation of myocardial blood flow reserve by MCE parameters corresponds to the evaluation of myocardial perfusion by nuclear imaging and can increase the sensitivity but not the overall accuracy of contrast echocardiography.