This meta-analysis evaluated the optimal noninvasive strategy for cardiac risk assessment
of patients >65 years of age with known or suspected coronary artery disease using
the available literature. Patients >65 years of age constitute a growing proportion
of the population and have higher cardiovascular morbidity and mortality, but an optimal
strategy to predict the risk of cardiac events in this group is unknown. A systematic
search of MEDLINE was performed for cohort studies of ≥100 patients >65 years old
with ≥12 months of follow-up that reported cardiac death and/or nonfatal myocardial
infarction after any of stress myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI), stress echocardiography,
or exercise tolerance testing (ETT) for known or suspected coronary artery disease.
Pooled annualized event rates were calculated for each technique. Summary odds ratios
(ORs) between normal and abnormal test results were calculated using a random-effects
model. Seventeen studies (MPI 7, stress echocardiography 7, ETT 3) in 13,304 patients
(mean age 75.5 years) were included. Abnormal compared to normal stress MPI (OR 11.8,
95% confidence interval [CI] 7.5 to 18.7) and stress echocardiography (OR 3.2, 95%
CI 2.6 to 3.9) accurately stratified risk in patients. However, patients with abnormal
and normal ETT results had similar cardiac event rates (OR 3.1, 95% CI 0.8 to 11.5).
In conclusion, stress imaging with MPI or stress echocardiography effectively stratified
risk in patients, whereas ETT alone did not.
To read this article in full you will need to make a payment
Purchase one-time access:
Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online accessOne-time access price info
- For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
- For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'
Subscribe:
Subscribe to American Journal of CardiologyAlready a print subscriber? Claim online access
Already an online subscriber? Sign in
Register: Create an account
Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect
References
- Heart disease and stroke statistics—2011 update: a report from the American Heart Association.Circulation. 2011; 123: e18-e209
- Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement.Ann Intern Med. 2009; 151: 264-269
- Evaluation of the quality of prognosis studies in systematic reviews.Ann Intern Med. 2006; 144: 427-437
- Meta-analysis in clinical trials.Control Clin Trials. 1986; 7: 177-188
- Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses.BMJ. 2003; 327: 557-560
- Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test.BMJ. 1997; 315: 629-634
- Prognostic value of dipyridamole thallium-201 imaging in elderly patients.J Am Coll Cardiol. 1992; 19: 1390-1398
- Prognostic significance of exercise thallium-201 testing in patients aged greater than or equal to 70 years with known or suspected coronary artery disease.Am J Cardiol. 1992; 69: 45-50
- Incremental prognostic value of myocardial perfusion 99m-technetium-sestamibi SPECT in the elderly.Int J Cardiol. 2004; 93: 137-143
- Prognostic value of stress myocardial perfusion imaging in octogenarian population.J Nucl Cardiol. 2005; 12: 671-675
- Prognostic stratification using dobutamine stress 99mTc-tetrofosmin myocardial perfusion SPECT in elderly patients unable to perform exercise testing.J Nucl Med. 2005; 46: 12-18
- Incremental prognostic value of combined perfusion and function assessment during myocardial gated SPECT in patients aged 75 years or older.J Nucl Cardiol. 2005; 12: 662-670
- Exercise single-photon emission computed tomography provides effective risk stratification of elderly men and elderly women.Circulation. 2005; 111: 1771-1776
- Long-term prediction of mortality in elderly persons by dobutamine stress echocardiography.J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2005; 60: 1333-1338
- Prognostic implications of dipyridamole or dobutamine stress echocardiography for evaluation of patients > or =65 years of age with known or suspected coronary heart disease.Am J Cardiol. 2007; 99: 1491-1495
- Stress echocardiography in elderly patients with coronary artery disease: applicability, safety and prognostic value of dobutamine and adenosine echocardiography in elderly patients.J Am Coll Cardiol. 1996; 28: 52-59
- Prognostic value of dobutamine stress echocardiography in octogenarians.Int J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2011; 27: 65-74
- Real-time dobutamine stress myocardial perfusion echocardiography predicts outcome in the elderly.Eur Heart J. 2008; 29: 377-385
- Prognostic value of exercise echocardiography in 2,632 patients > or = 65 years of age.J Am Coll Cardiol. 2001; 37: 1036-1041
- Value of exercise echocardiography for predicting mortality in elderly patients.Eur J Clin Invest. 2010; 40: 1122-1130
- Treadmill scores in elderly men.J Am Coll Cardiol. 2004; 43: 606-615
- Prognostic value of the Duke treadmill score in the elderly.J Am Coll Cardiol. 2002; 39: 1475-1481
- Prognostic value of treadmill exercise testing in elderly persons.Ann Intern Med. 2000; 132: 862-870
- The prognostic value of normal exercise myocardial perfusion imaging and exercise echocardiography: a meta-analysis.J Am Coll Cardiol. 2007; 49: 227-237
- Comparison of risk stratification with pharmacologic and exercise stress myocardial perfusion imaging: a meta-analysis.J Nucl Cardiol. 2004; 11: 551-561
- Prognostic value of gated myocardial perfusion SPECT.J Nucl Cardiol. 2004; 11: 171-185
- Prognostic implications of myocardial perfusion single-photon emission computed tomography in the elderly.Circulation. 2009; 120: 2197-2206
- Prognostic role of myocardial single photon emission computed tomography in the elderly.J Nucl Cardiol. 2010; 17: 310-315
- Outcome after normal exercise echocardiography and predictors of subsequent cardiac events: follow-up of 1,325 patients.J Am Coll Cardiol. 1998; 31: 144-149
- Exercise myocardial perfusion imaging in elderly patients.J Nucl Cardiol. 2002; 9: 573-580
- The prognostic value of exercise testing in elderly men.Am J Med. 2002; 112: 453-459
Article Info
Publication History
Published online: July 16, 2012
Accepted:
May 24,
2012
Received in revised form:
May 24,
2012
Received:
March 15,
2012
Identification
Copyright
© 2012 Elsevier Inc. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
