Accuracy and Prognostic Value of Physiologist-Led Stress Echocardiography for Coronary Disease.

BackgroundWe demonstrated that physiologist-led stress echocardiography (PLSE) is feasible for coronary artery disease (CAD) assessment. We sought to extend our work by assessing its accuracy and prognostic value.MethodsRetrospective study of 898 subjects undergoing PLSE (n=393) or cardiologist-led stress echocardiography (CLSE) (n=505) for CAD assessment using exercise or dobutamine. For accuracy assessment, the primary outcome was the ability of stress echocardiography to identify significant CAD on invasive coronary angiography (ICA). Incidence of 24-month non-fatal MI, total and cardiac mortality, revascularisation and combined major adverse cardiac events (MACE) were assessed.ResultsDemographics, comorbidities, CAD predictors, CAD pre-test probability and cardiac medications were matched between the PLSE and CLSE groups. PLSE had high sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive value and accuracy (85%, 74%, 69%, 88%, 78% respectively). PLSE accuracy measures were similar and non-inferior to CLSE. There was a similar incidence of individual and combined outcomes in PLSE and CLSE subjects. Negative stress echocardiography conferred a comparably low incidence of non-fatal MI (PLSE 1.4% vs. CLSE 0.9%, p=0.464), cardiac mortality (0.6% vs. 0.0%, p=0.277) and MACE (6.8% vs. 3.1%, p=0.404).ConclusionThis is the first study of the accuracy compared with gold standard of ICA, and prognostic value of PLSE CAD assessment. PLSE demonstrates high and non-inferior accuracy compared with CLSE for CAD assessment. Negative PLSE and CLSE confer a similarly very low incidence of cardiac outcomes, confirming for the first time the important prognostic value of PLSE.