Cardiac imaging in the evaluation of patients presenting to the emergency department with chest pain

Abstract

Despite the utility and benefits that each imaging modality has to offer, it is easy to see why there is still no perfect choice for a noninvasive cardiac imaging modality to assist in the management of chest pain patients. All of the current imaging techniques have their own significant strengths and weaknesses when compared with other modalities. SPECT and echocardiography are wellestablished technologies that can directly assess the presence of myocardial ischemia and its functional consequence on RF; newer and more expensive techniques such as MDCT and CMR can directly assess coronary anatomy and have just started to be evaluated in the acute chest pain setting. There are no studies that directly compare these technologies, and more data are clearly needed before the question of whether anatomic imaging versus perfusion/function imaging is the better approach can be answered. Other comparisons such as relative safety, availability, logistics, and cost-effectiveness between the various technologies are also lacking.