alexa
Reach Us +44-7460312890
Different Clinical Profile of Patients Undergoing Coronary Arteriography after Stress SPECT or Stress Echocardiography | OMICS International | Abstract
ISSN: 2329-9517

Journal of Cardiovascular Diseases & Diagnosis
Open Access

Our Group organises 3000+ Global Conferenceseries Events every year across USA, Europe & Asia with support from 1000 more scientific Societies and Publishes 700+ Open Access Journals which contains over 50000 eminent personalities, reputed scientists as editorial board members.

Open Access Journals gaining more Readers and Citations
700 Journals and 15,000,000 Readers Each Journal is getting 25,000+ Readers

This Readership is 10 times more when compared to other Subscription Journals (Source: Google Analytics)

Research Article

Different Clinical Profile of Patients Undergoing Coronary Arteriography after Stress SPECT or Stress Echocardiography

Alessia Gimelli1*, Giuseppe Rossi2 , Patrizia Landi2 and Daniele Rovai2
1 Fondazione Toscana G. Monasterio, Pisa, Italy
2 CNR, Institute of Clinical Physiology, Pisa, Italy
Corresponding Author : Alessia Gimelli
Fondazione Toscana-CNR Gabriele Monasterio, V
ia Moruzzi, 156124 Pisa, Italy
Tel: +390503152135
Fax: +390503152166
E-mail: [email protected]
Received August 16, 2013; Accepted August 30, 2013; Published September 7, 2013
Citation: Gimelli A, Rossi G, Landi P, Rovai D (2013) Different Clinical Profile of Patients Undergoing Coronary Arteriography after Stress SPECT or Stress Echocardiography. J Cardiovasc Dis Diagn 1:125. doi: 10.4172/2329-9517.1000125
Copyright: © 2013 Gimelli A, et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Related article at
DownloadPubmed DownloadScholar Google

Abstract

Purpose: Stress SPECT and stress echocardiography show similar diagnostic accuracy in patients with known or suspected coronary artery disease. The choice of which imaging modality is the most suitable may depend on several factors, including local facilities and expertise, cost containment, biological risk related to the use of radiations, and the feasibility of stress echocardiography. We hypothesized that some of the above factors could shape the characteristics of patients undergoing one or the other imaging modality. Thus, we sought to investigate whether patients referred to coronary arteriography after stress SPECT or stress echocardiography differ in terms of clinical and risk profile.

Methods: We retrospectively analysed 1712 patients who had undergone stress SPECT (821 patients, 48%) or stress echocardiography (891 patients, 52%), followed by coronary arteriography (median, three days).

Results: Patients studied by stress SPECT did not differ from stress echo patients as to age and extent of coronary stenoses, but were less frequently female (P=0.0021), more frequently had severe obesity (P= 0.0102), a previous myocardial infarction (P=0.0009), or severe left ventricular dysfunction (P<0.0001). During follow-up (median, 7 years), stress SPECT patients had a worst survival rate free from cardiac death and non-fatal infarction (81.4%) than stress-echo patients (85.6%, P=0.015).

Conclusion: In our centre, stress SPECT is more commonly performed in higher risk patients than stress echocardiography.

Keywords

Recommended Conferences
Share This Page
Top