Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Utility of Imaging in Risk Stratification of Chest Pain in Women

  • Women’s Health (M Wood, Section Editor)
  • Published:
Current Treatment Options in Cardiovascular Medicine Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Opinion statement

Recent decades have seen a growing recognition that the understanding of sex differences in cardiovascular disease (CVD) is vital to optimal diagnosis and management, particularly of women (Mosca et al. Circulation 124:2145-54, 2011). There is simultaneously an increasing appreciation of the multifactorial nature of ischemic heart disease (IHD) in many patients, in whom disease may extend beyond the epicardial coronaries. While obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD) remains underdiagnosed in women and still represents a major burden of disease, women also present with nonobstructive CAD more commonly than men (Patel et al. N Engl J Med 362:886-95, 2010). Indeed, microvascular dysfunction, coronary artery vasospasm, and coronary dissections contribute to a larger proportion of IHD in women than men (Bairey Merz et al. J Am Coll Cardiol 47:S21-9, 2006). Here, we review the symptom presentation of women with IHD and the noninvasive modalities used to risk stratify women with suspected IHD.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References and Recommended Reading

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance •• Of major importance

  1. Mehta LS, Beckie TM, DeVon HA, Grines CL, Krumholz HM, Johnson MN, et al. Acute myocardial infarction in women: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association. Circulation. 2016;133(9):916–47.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Shaw LJ, Bugiardini R, Merz CN. Women and ischemic heart disease: evolving knowledge. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2009;54(17):1561–75.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Bucholz EM, Butala NM, Rathore SS, Dreyer RP, Lansky AJ, Krumholz HM. Sex differences in long-term mortality after myocardial infarction: a systematic review. Circulation. 2014;130(9):757–67.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Johansen ME, Hefner JL, Foraker RE. Antiplatelet and statin use in US patients with coronary artery disease categorized by race/ethnicity and gender, 2003 to 2012. Am J Cardiol. 2015;115(11):1507–12.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Bairey Merz CN, Shaw LJ, Reis SE, Bittner V, Kelsey SF, Olson M, et al. Insights from the NHLBI-Sponsored Women’s Ischemia Syndrome Evaluation (WISE) Study: Part II: gender differences in presentation, diagnosis, and outcome with regard to gender-based pathophysiology of atherosclerosis and macrovascular and microvascular coronary disease. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2006;47(3 Suppl):S21–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Gulati M, Shaw LJ, Bairey Merz CN. Myocardial ischemia in women: lessons from the NHLBI WISE study. Clin Cardiol. 2012;35(3):141–8.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Stahli BE, Gebhard C, Yonekawa K, Gebhard CE, Altwegg LA, von Eckardstein A, et al. Gender-related differences in patients presenting with suspected acute coronary syndromes: clinical presentation. Biomark Diag Cardiol. 2015;132(3):189–98.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Shehab A, Al-Dabbagh B, AlHabib KF, Alsheikh-Ali AA, Almahmeed W, Sulaiman K, et al. Gender disparities in the presentation, management and outcomes of acute coronary syndrome patients: data from the 2nd Gulf Registry of Acute Coronary Events (Gulf RACE-2). PLoS One. 2013;8(2):e55508.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Roger VL, Farkouh ME, Weston SA, Reeder GS, Jacobsen SJ, Zinsmeister AR, et al. Sex differences in evaluation and outcome of unstable angina. JAMA. 2000;283(5):646–52.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Khan NA, Daskalopoulou SS, Karp I, Eisenberg MJ, Pelletier R, Tsadok MA, et al. Sex differences in acute coronary syndrome symptom presentation in young patients. JAMA Intern Med. 2013;173(20):1863–71.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. D’Onofrio G, Safdar B, Lichtman JH, Strait KM, Dreyer RP, Geda M, et al. Sex differences in reperfusion in young patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction: results from the VIRGO study. Circulation. 2015;131(15):1324–32.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. • Hemal K, Pagidipati NJ, Coles A, Dolor RJ, Mark DB, Pellikka PA, et al. Sex Differences in Demographics, Risk Factors, Presentation, and Noninvasive Testing in Stable Outpatients With Suspected Coronary Artery Disease: Insights From the PROMISE Trial. JACC Cardiovascular imaging. 2016;9(4):337–346. This posthoc exploratory analysis of the PROMISE trial examined differences in demographics, presentation, noninvasive test selection, and test results by sex.

  13. Gevaert SA, De Bacquer D, Evrard P, Convens C, Dubois P, Boland J, et al. Gender, TIMI risk score and in-hospital mortality in STEMI patients undergoing primary PCI: results from the Belgian STEMI registry. EuroIntervention. 2014;9(9):1095–101.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. de Miguel-Balsa E, Latour-Perez J, Baeza-Roman A, Amoros-Verdu C, Fernandez-Lozano JA. GRACE Score Validation in predicting hospital mortality: analysis of the role of sex. J Women’s Health. 2002:2017.

  15. Mannisto T, Mendola P, Vaarasmaki M, Jarvelin MR, Hartikainen AL, Pouta A, et al. Elevated blood pressure in pregnancy and subsequent chronic disease risk. Circulation. 2013;127(6):681–90.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Tanz LJ, Stuart JJ, Williams PL, Rimm EB, Missmer SA, Rexrode KM, et al. Preterm delivery and maternal cardiovascular disease in young and middle-aged adult women. Circulation. 2017;135(6):578–89.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. •• Mieres JH, Gulati M, Bairey Merz N, Berman DS, Gerber TC, Hayes SN, et al. Role of noninvasive testing in the clinical evaluation of women with suspected ischemic heart disease: a consensus statement from the American Heart Association. Circulation. 2014;130(4):350–79. The AHA Consensus Statement provides recommendations for the use of noninavasive testing of women with suspected ischemic heart disease.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Wood P, Mc GM, Magidson O, Whittaker W. The effort test in angina pectoris. Br Heart J. 1950;12(4):363–71.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Mattingly TW. The postexercise electrocardiogram. Its value in the diagnosis and prognosis of coronary arterial disease. Am J Cardiol. 1962;9:395–409.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Nguyen PK, Nag D, Wu JC. Sex differences in the diagnostic evaluation of coronary artery disease. J Nucl Cardiol Off Publ Am Soc Nucl Cardiol. 2011;18(1):144–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Kwok Y, Kim C, Grady D, Segal M, Redberg R. Meta-analysis of exercise testing to detect coronary artery disease in women. Am J Cardiol. 1999;83(5):660–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Higgins JP, Higgins JA. Electrocardiographic exercise stress testing: an update beyond the ST segment. Int J Cardiol. 2007;116(3):285–99.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Astrand I. Exercise electrocardiograms recorded twice with an 8-year interval in a group of 204 women and men 48–63 years old. Acta Medica Scandinavica. 1965;178:27–39.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Grzybowski A, Puchalski W, Zieba B, Gruchala M, Fijalkowski M, Storoniak K, et al. How to improve noninvasive coronary artery disease diagnostics in premenopausal women? The influence of menstrual cycle on ST depression, left ventricle contractility, and chest pain observed during exercise echocardiography in women with angina and normal coronary angiogram. Am Heart J. 2008;156(5):964.e1-.e5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Morise AP, Beto R. The specificity of exercise electrocardiography in women grouped by estrogen status. Int J Cardiol. 1997;60(1):55–65.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Cumming GR, Dufresne C, Kich L, Samm J. Exercise electrocardiogram patterns in normal women. Br Heart J. 1973;35(10):1055–61.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. Shaw LJ, Mieres JH, Hendel RH, Boden WE, Gulati M, Veledar E, et al. Comparative effectiveness of exercise electrocardiography with or without myocardial perfusion single photon emission computed tomography in women with suspected coronary artery disease: results from the What Is the Optimal Method for Ischemia Evaluation in Women (WOMEN) trial. Circulation. 2011;124(11):1239–49.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Gulati M, Arnsdorf MF, Shaw LJ, Pandey DK, Thisted RA, Lauderdale DS, et al. Prognostic value of the duke treadmill score in asymptomatic women. Am J Cardiol. 2005;96(3):369–75.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Pratt CM, Francis MJ, Divine GW, Young JB. Exercise testing in women with chest pain. Are there additional exercise characteristics that predict true positive test results? Chest. 1989;95(1):139–44.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Gulati M, Pandey DK, Arnsdorf MF, Lauderdale DS, Thisted RA, Wicklund RH, et al. Exercise capacity and the risk of death in women: the St James Women Take Heart Project. Circulation. 2003;108(13):1554–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. • Gulati M, Black HR, Shaw LJ, Arnsdorf MF, Merz CN, Lauer MS, et al. The prognostic value of a nomogram for exercise capacity in women. N Engl J Med. 2005;353(5):468–75. This retrospective cohort study of asymptomatic women who underwent exercise stress testing in the St. James Heart Study established a nomogram for the percent predicted exercise capacity based on sex and age.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Gulati M, Shaw LJ, Thisted RA, Black HR, Bairey Merz CN, Arnsdorf MF. Heart rate response to exercise stress testing in asymptomatic women: the St. James Women Take Heart Project. Circulation. 2010;122(2):130–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Vivekananthan DP, Blackstone EH, Pothier CE, Lauer MS. Heart rate recovery after exercise is a predictor of mortality, independent of the angiographic severity of coronary disease. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2003;42(5):831–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Sanmarco ME, Pontius S, Selvester RH. Abnormal blood pressure response and marked ischemic ST-segment depression as predictors of severe coronary artery disease. Circulation. 1980;61(3):572–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Allison TG, Cordeiro MA, Miller TD, Daida H, Squires RW, Gau GT. Prognostic significance of exercise-induced systemic hypertension in healthy subjects. Am J Cardiol. 1999;83(3):371–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Lauer MS, Pashkow FJ, Harvey SA, Marwick TH, Thomas JD. Angiographic and prognostic implications of an exaggerated exercise systolic blood pressure response and rest systolic blood pressure in adults undergoing evaluation for suspected coronary artery disease. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1995;26(7):1630–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Bokhari S, Shahzad A, Bergmann SR. Superiority of exercise myocardial perfusion imaging compared with the exercise ECG in the diagnosis of coronary artery disease. Coron Artery Dis. 2008;19(6):399–404.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Pellikka PA, Nagueh SF, Elhendy AA, Kuehl CA, Sawada SG. American Society of Echocardiography recommendations for performance, interpretation, and application of stress echocardiography. J Am Soc Echocardiograph Off Publ Am Soc Echocardiograph. 2007;20(9):1021–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Arruda-Olson AM, Juracan EM, Mahoney DW, McCully RB, Roger VL, Pellikka PA. Prognostic value of exercise echocardiography in 5,798 patients: is there a gender difference? J Am Coll Cardiol. 2002;39(4):625–31.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Fleischmann KE, Hunink MG, Kuntz KM, Douglas PS. Exercise echocardiography or exercise SPECT imaging? A meta-analysis of diagnostic test performance. JAMA. 1998;280(10):913–20.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Dolor RJ, Patel MR, Melloni C, Chatterjee R, McBroom AJ, Musty MD, et al. AHRQ Comparative Effectiveness Reviews. Noninvasive Technologies for the Diagnosis of Coronary Artery Disease in Women. Rockville: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US); 2012.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Metz LD, Beattie M, Hom R, Redberg RF, Grady D, Fleischmann KE. The prognostic value of normal exercise myocardial perfusion imaging and exercise echocardiography: a meta-analysis. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2007;49(2):227–37.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Aggeli C, Polytarchou K, Felekos I, Zisimos K, Venieri E, Verveniotis A, et al. The impact of gender on the prognostic value of dobutamine stress myocardial contrast echocardiography. Hellenic J Cardiol = Hellenike Kardiologike Epitheorese. 2017; doi:10.1016/j.hjc.2017.04.004.

  44. •• Mieres JH, Shaw LJ, Hendel RC, Miller DD, Bonow RO, Berman DS, et al. American Society of Nuclear Cardiology consensus statement: task force on women and coronary artery disease—the role of myocardial perfusion imaging in the clinical evaluation of coronary artery disease in women [correction]. J Nucl Cardiol Off Publ Am Soc Nucl Cardiol. 2003;10(1):95–101. The ASNC Consesus statement summarizes recommendations for the use of perfusion imaging in the evaluation of coronary disease in women.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Mieres JH, Shaw LJ, Arai A, Budoff MJ, Flamm SD, Hundley WG, et al. Role of noninvasive testing in the clinical evaluation of women with suspected coronary artery disease: consensus statement from the Cardiac Imaging Committee, Council on Clinical Cardiology, and the Cardiovascular Imaging and Intervention Committee, Council on Cardiovascular Radiology and Intervention, American Heart Association. Circulation. 2005;111(5):682–96.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Shaw LJ, Hage FG, Berman DS, Hachamovitch R, Iskandrian A. Prognosis in the era of comparative effectiveness research: where is nuclear cardiology now and where should it be? J Nucl Cardiol Off Publ Am Soc Nucl Cardiol. 2012;19(5):1026–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Gargiulo P, Petretta M, Bruzzese D, Cuocolo A, Prastaro M, D’Amore C, et al. Myocardial perfusion scintigraphy and echocardiography for detecting coronary artery disease in hypertensive patients: a meta-analysis. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2011;38(11):2040–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Esteves FP, Travin MI. The role of nuclear cardiology in the diagnosis and risk stratification of women with ischemic heart disease. Semin Nucl Med. 2014;44(6):423–38.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Cerci MS, Cerci JJ, Cerci RJ, Pereira Neto CC, Trindade E, Delbeke D, et al. Myocardial perfusion imaging is a strong predictor of death in women. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 2011;4(8):880–8.

  50. McSweeney JC, Rosenfeld AG, Abel WM, Braun LT, Burke LE, Daugherty SL, et al. Preventing and experiencing ischemic heart disease as a woman: state of the science: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association. Circulation. 2016;133(13):1302–31.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  51. Shaw LJ, Iskandrian AE. Prognostic value of gated myocardial perfusion SPECT. J Nucl Cardiol Off Publ Am Soc Nucl Cardiol. 2004;11(2):171–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Jaarsma C, Leiner T, Bekkers SC, Crijns HJ, Wildberger JE, Nagel E, et al. Diagnostic performance of noninvasive myocardial perfusion imaging using single-photon emission computed tomography, cardiac magnetic resonance, and positron emission tomography imaging for the detection of obstructive coronary artery disease: a meta-analysis. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2012;59(19):1719–28.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. • Kay J, Dorbala S, Goyal A, Fazel R, Di Carli MF, Einstein AJ, et al. Influence of sex on risk stratification with stress myocardial perfusion Rb-82 positron emission tomography: results from the PET (positron emission tomography) Prognosis Multicenter Registry. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2013;62(20):1866–76. This prospective multicenter registry study evaluated sex differences in the prognostic value of stress Rb-82 PET.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Einstein AJ. Effects of radiation exposure from cardiac imaging: how good are the data? J Am Coll Cardiol. 2012;59(6):553–65.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  55. Schelbert HR. Positron emission tomography measurements of myocardial blood flow: assessing coronary circulatory function and clinical implications. Heart. 2012;98(7):592–600.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Beller GA. Noninvasive quantification of myocardial blood flow and coronary flow reserve. J Nucl Cardiol Off Publ Am Soc Nucl Cardiol. 2010;17(4):544.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Taqueti VR, Shaw LJ, Cook NR, Murthy VL, Shah NR, Foster CR, et al. Excess cardiovascular risk in women relative to men referred for coronary angiography is associated with severely impaired coronary flow reserve, not obstructive disease. Circulation. 2017;135(6):566–77.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Murthy VL, Naya M, Taqueti VR, Foster CR, Gaber M, Hainer J, et al. Effects of sex on coronary microvascular dysfunction and cardiac outcomes. Circulation. 2014;129(24):2518–27.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  59. Van Tosh A, Supino PG, Nichols KJ, Garza D, Horowitz SF, Reichek N. Prognosis of a normal positron emission tomography 82Rb myocardial perfusion imaging study in women with no history of coronary disease. Cardiology. 2010;117(4):301–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Merkle N, Wohrle J, Nusser T, Grebe O, Spiess J, Torzewski J, et al. Diagnostic performance of magnetic resonance first pass perfusion imaging is equally potent in female compared to male patients with coronary artery disease. Clin Res Cardiol Off J German Cardiac Soc. 2010;99(1):21–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Greenwood JP, Motwani M, Maredia N, Brown JM, Everett CC, Nixon J, et al. Comparison of cardiovascular magnetic resonance and single-photon emission computed tomography in women with suspected coronary artery disease from the Clinical Evaluation of Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Coronary Heart Disease (CE-MARC) Trial. Circulation. 2014;129(10):1129–38.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Panting JR, Gatehouse PD, Yang GZ, Grothues F, Firmin DN, Collins P, et al. Abnormal subendocardial perfusion in cardiac syndrome X detected by cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging. N Engl J Med. 2002;346(25):1948–53.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Vermeltfoort IA, Bondarenko O, Raijmakers PG, Odekerken DA, Kuijper AF, Zwijnenburg A, et al. Is subendocardial ischaemia present in patients with chest pain and normal coronary angiograms? A cardiovascular MR study. Eur Heart J. 2007;28(13):1554–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Korosoglou G, Elhmidi Y, Steen H, Schellberg D, Riedle N, Ahrens J, et al. Prognostic value of high-dose dobutamine stress magnetic resonance imaging in 1,493 consecutive patients: assessment of myocardial wall motion and perfusion. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2010;56(15):1225–34.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Wallace EL, Morgan TM, Walsh TF, Dall’Armellina E, Ntim W, Hamilton CA, et al. Dobutamine cardiac magnetic resonance results predict cardiac prognosis in women with known or suspected ischemic heart disease. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2009;2(3):299–307.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  66. Coelho-Filho OR, Seabra LF, Mongeon FP, Abdullah SM, Francis SA, Blankstein R, et al. Stress myocardial perfusion imaging by CMR provides strong prognostic value to cardiac events regardless of patient’s sex. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2011;4(8):850–61.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  67. Jahnke C, Furundzija V, Gebker R, Manka R, Frick M, Schnackenburg B, et al. Gender-based prognostic value of pharmacological cardiac magnetic resonance stress testing: head-to-head comparison of adenosine perfusion and dobutamine wall motion imaging. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2012;28(5):1087–98.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. Hoffmann U, Truong QA, Schoenfeld DA, Chou ET, Woodard PK, Nagurney JT, et al. Coronary CT angiography versus standard evaluation in acute chest pain. N Engl J Med. 2012;367(4):299–308.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  69. • Min JK, Dunning A, Lin FY, Achenbach S, Al-Mallah M, Budoff MJ, et al. Age- and sex-related differences in all-cause mortality risk based on coronary computed tomography angiography findings results from the International Multicenter CONFIRM (Coronary CT Angiography Evaluation for Clinical Outcomes: An International Multicenter Registry) of 23,854 patients without known coronary artery disease. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2011;58(8):849–60. This single center cohort study evaluated the prognostic value of CCTA by sex and age.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. Hausleiter J, Meyer T, Hermann F, et al. Estimated radiation dose associated with cardiac CT angiography. JAMA. 2009;301(5):500–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  71. Lin FY, Shaw LJ, Dunning AM, Labounty TM, Choi JH, Weinsaft JW, et al. Mortality risk in symptomatic patients with nonobstructive coronary artery disease: a prospective 2-center study of 2583 patients undergoing 64-detector row coronary computed tomographic angiography. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2011;58(5):510–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  72. Shaw LJ, Min JK, Narula J, Lin F, Bairey-Merz CN, Callister TQ, et al. Sex differences in mortality associated with computed tomographic angiographic measurements of obstructive and nonobstructive coronary artery disease: an exploratory analysis. Circulat Cardiovasc Imaging. 2010;3(4):473–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  73. • Pagidipati NJ, Hemal K, Coles A, Mark DB, Dolor RJ, Pellikka PA, et al. Sex differences in functional and CT angiography testing in patients with suspected coronary artery disease. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2016;67(22):2607–16. An additional analysis of the PROMISE trial examining differences in functional testing versus CCTA by sex.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  74. Lubbers M, Coenen A, Bruning T, Galema T, Akkerhuis J, Krenning B, et al. Sex differences in the performance of cardiac computed tomography compared with functional testing in evaluating stable chest pain: subanalysis of the multicenter, randomized CRESCENT Trial (Calcium Imaging and Selective CT Angiography in Comparison to Functional Testing for Suspected Coronary Artery Disease). Circ Cardiovasc Imaging. 2017;10(2):e005295.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  75. Tweet MS, Gulati R, Williamson EE, Vrtiska TJ, Hayes SN. Multimodality imaging for spontaneous coronary artery dissection in women. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2016;9(4):436–50.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  76. Mosca L, Barrett-Connor E, Wenger NK. Sex/gender differences in cardiovascular disease prevention: what a difference a decade makes. Circulation. 2011;124(19):2145–54.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  77. Patel MR, Peterson ED, Dai D, Brennan JM, Redberg RF, Anderson HV, et al. Low diagnostic yield of elective coronary angiography. N Engl J Med. 2010;362(10):886–95.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Massachusetts General Hospital, 55 Fruit Street, Boston, MA, USA

    Emily S. Lau MD & Amy Sarma MD

Authors
  1. Emily S. Lau MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Amy Sarma MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Emily S. Lau MD.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.

Additional information

This article is part of the Topical Collection on Women’s Health

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Lau, E.S., Sarma, A. Utility of Imaging in Risk Stratification of Chest Pain in Women. Curr Treat Options Cardio Med 19, 72 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11936-017-0568-9

Download citation

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11936-017-0568-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation