Comparison of peak and postexercise treadmill echocardiography with the use of continuous harmonic imaging acquisition

Abstract

Objectives We sought to compare the feasibility and accuracy of peak and postexercise treadmill echocardiography with the use of continuous harmonic imaging capture. Background Previous work has demonstrated the superiority of peak exercise echocardiography (EE) as compared with post-EE for the diagnosis of coronary artery disease (CAD). However, most of these studies used fundamental imaging and view-per-view acquisition systems. Technical advantages in stress echocardiography include harmonic imaging and continuous imaging capture. Methods The study group included 650 patients (423 men; 60 ± 12 years) who were submitted to peak and postexercise treadmill echocardiography. Results Postexercise images were acquired within 55 seconds after exercise (28 ± 10). The number of segments visualized in each view were similar at peak and post-EE except for the parasternal short-axis view, which was better qualified at postexercise. For analysis of diagnostic capability we included 312 patients: 195 were included on the basis of having had an EE and a coronary angiography, whereas 117 patients with pretest probability of CAD < 10% who had atypical chest pain or were asymptomatic were also included and considered as having no CAD. CAD (≥50% stenosis) was confirmed in 159 patients. Positive EE was defined as ischemia or necrosis. Sensitivity for CAD was higher with peak imaging (92% vs 77%, P < .001), with similar specificity (78% vs 87%, P = not significant) and accuracy (85% vs 82%, P = not significant). Conclusion Peak treadmill EE is technically feasible and has higher sensitivity for CAD than posttreadmill EE. Therefore, in the clinical setting, peak EE should be performed for diagnostic purposes.