Advertisement

Comparison of stress echocardiography and other stress-imaging techniques for the diagnosis of coronary artery disease

Is there a “test of choice”?
  • Thomas H. Marwick
Part of the Developments in Cardiovascular Medicine book series (DICM, volume 247)

Abstract

Both nuclear cardiology techniques and magnetic resonance imaging may be used to diagnose coronary artery disease by the examination of myocardial function and perfusion. These techniques have a major difference in evidence base. Despite the favorable record of the nuclear techniques, these methods have disadvantages with respect to cost (of imaging equipment, isotopes and disposables), patient convenience (particularly with thallium imaging) and availability. The use of magnetic resonance imaging for the assessment of coronary disease is still under evaluation, and while promising, seems unlikely to be come a routine evaluation in most parts of the world. While the dominant issue in the selection of one or the other technique must be accuracy, cost and availability are important considerations which do not currently favor magnetic resonance imaging.

Keywords

Coronary Artery Disease Single Photon Emission Compute Tomography Myocardial Perfusion Myocardial Perfusion Imaging Left Ventricular Hypertrophy 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Borer JS, Kent KM, Bacharach SL et al. Sensitivity, specificity and predictive accuracy of radionuclide cineangiography during exercise in patients with coronary artery disease. Comparison with exercise electrocardiography. Circulation 1979;60:572–80.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Gibbons RJ, Lee KL, Cobb FR, Coleman RE, Jones RH. Ejection fraction response to exercise in patients with chest pain, coronary artery disease and normal resting ventricular function. Circulation 1982;66:643–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Parker DA, Thrall JH, Froelich JW. Radionuclide ventriculography: Methods. In: Gerson MC, ed. Cardiac Nuclear Medicine. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1987.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Manyari, D. E. and Kostuk, W. J. Left and right ventricular function at rest and during bicycle exercise in the supine and sitting positions in normal subjects and patients with coronary artery disease. Am J Cardiol 51, 36–42. 1983.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Sharir T, Germano G, Kavanagh PB et al. Incremental Prognostic Value of Post-Stress Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction and Volume by Gated Myocardial Perfusion Single Photon Emission Computed Tomography. Circulation 1999;100:1035–42.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Currie PJ, Kelly MJ, Pitt A. Comparison of supine and erect bicycle exercise electrocardiography in coronary heart disease: accentuation of exercise-induced ischemic ST depression by supine posture. Am J Cardiol 1983;52:1167–73.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Jones, R. H., McEwan, P., Newman, G. E., and et al. Accuracy of diagnosis of coronary artery disease by radionuclide measurement of left ventricular function during rest and exercise. Circulation 1981;64:586–601.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Maddahi J, Rodrigues E, Berman DS, Kiat H. State of the art myocardial perfusion imaging. In: Verani MS, ed. Nuclear Cardiology: State of the art. Philadelphia: W.B.Saunders Company, 1994:199–222.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kiat H, Berman DS, Maddahi J, De Yang L, Van Train K, Rozanski A. Late reversibility of tomographic myocardial thallium-201 defects: an accurate marker of myocardial viability. J Am Coll Cardiol 1988;12:1456–63.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Dilsizian V, Rocco TP, Freedman NM, et al. Enhanced detection of ischemic but viable myocardium by the reinjection of thallium after stress-redistribution imaging. N Engl J Med 1990;323:141–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gould KL, Westcott kJ, Albro PC, Hamilton GW. Noninvasive assessment of coronary stenoses by myocardial imaging during pharmacologic coronary vasodilatation. II. Clinical methodology and feasibility. Am J Cardiol 1978;41:279–87.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Iskandrian AS, Heo J, Kong B, Lyons E. Effect of exercise level on the ability of thallium-201 tomographic imaging in detecting coronary artery disease: analysis of 461 patients. J Am Coll Cardiol 1989;14:1477–86.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kotler TS, Diamond GA. Exercise thallium-201 scintigraphy in the diagnosis and prognosis of coronary artery disease. Ann Intern Med 1990;113:684–702.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Fintel DJ, Links JM, Brinker JA, et al. Improved diagnostic performance of exercise thallium-201 single photon emission computed tomography over planar imaging in the diagnosis of coronary artery disease: a receiver operating characteristic analysis. J Am Coll Cardiol 1989;13:600–12.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Garcia EV, DePuey EG, Sonnemaker RE et al. Quantification of the reversibility of stress-induced thallium-201 myocardial perfusion defects: a multicenter trial using bull’s-eye polar maps and standard normal limits. J Nucl Med 1990;31:1761–5.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Klein JL, Garcia EV, DePuey EG et al. Reversibility bull’s-eye: a new polar bull’s-eye map to quantify reversibility of stress-induced SPECT thallium-201 myocardial perfusion defects. J Nucl Med 1990;31:1240–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Van Train KF, Maddahi J, Berman DS, Kiat H, Areeda J, Prigent F. Quantitative analysis of tomographic stress thallium-201 myocardial scintigrams: a multicenter trial. J Nucl Med 1990;31:1168–79.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Roger VL, Pellikka PA, Bell MR, Chow CW, Bailey KR, Seward JB. Sex and test verification bias. Impact on the diagnostic value of exercise echocardiography. Circulation 1997;95:405–10.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    DePuey EG, III. How to detect and avoid myocardial perfusion SPECT artifacts. J Nucl Med 1994;35:699–702.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Hendel RC, Corbett JR, Cullom SJ, DePuey EG, Garcia EV, Bateman TM. The value and practice of attenuation correction for myocardial perfusion SPECT imaging: a joint position statement from the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology and the Society of Nuclear Medicine. J Nucl Cardiol 2002;9:135–43.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Chua T, Kiat H, Germano G et al. Gated technetium-99m sestamibi for simultaneous assessment of stress myocardial perfusion, postexercise regional ventricular function and myocardial viability. Correlation with echocardiography and rest thallium-201 scintigraphy. J Am Coll Cardiol 1994;23:1107–14.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    DePuey EG, Nichols K, Dobrinsky C. Left ventricular ejection fraction assessed from gated technetium-99m-sestamibi SPECT. J Nucl Med 1993;34:1871–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Faber TL, Cooke CD, Folks RD et al. Left ventricular function and perfusion from gated SPECT perfusion images: an integrated method. J Nucl Med 1999;40:650–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Lebowitz E, Greene MW, Fairchild R et al. Thallium-201 for medical use. J Nucl Med 1975;16:151–5.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Kettunen R, Huikuri HV, Heikkila J, Takkunen JT. Usefulness of technetium99m-MIBI and thallium-201 in tomographic imaging combined with high-dose dipyridamole and handgrip exercise for detecting coronary artery disease. Am J Cardiol 1991;68:575–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Marwick TH, Go RT, Maclntyre WJ, Saha GB, Underwood DA. Myocardial perfusion imaging with positron emission tomography and single photon emission computed tomography: frequency and causes of disparate results. Eur Heart J 1991;12:1064–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Go RT, Marwick TH, Maclntyre WJ, Saha GB, Neumann DR, Underwood DA. A prospective comparison of rubidium-82 PET and thallium-201 SPECT myocardial perfusion imaging utilizing a single dipyridamole stress in the diagnosis of coronary artery disease. J Nucl Med 1990;31:1899–905.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Stewart RE, Schwaiger M, Molina E et al. Comparison of rubidium-82 positron emission tomography and thallium-201 SPECT imaging for detection of coronary artery disease. Am J Cardiol 1991;67:1303–10.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Knuuti MJ, Saraste M, Nuutila P et al. Myocardial viability: fluorine-18deoxyglucose positron emission tomography in prediction of wall motion recovery after revascularization. Am Heart J 1994;127:785–96.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Borras-Perez X, Carreras-Costa F, Pons-Liado G. Basics of cardiac magnetic resonance and normal views. In: Pons-Liado G, Carreras F, Borras X, Subirana M, Jiminez-Borreguero LJ, eds. Atlas of practical cardiac applications of MRI. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2001.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Pennell DJ, Underwood SR. The cardiovascular effects of dobutamine assessed by magnetic resonance imaging. Postgraduate Medical Journal 1991;67 Suppl 1:S1–8; discussion S8.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    van Rugge FP, van der Wall EE, de Roos A, Bruschke AV. Dobutamine stress magnetic resonance imaging for detection of coronary artery disease. J Am Coll Cardiol 1993;22:431–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    van Rugge FP, van der Wall EE, Spanjersberg SJ et al. Magnetic resonance imaging during dobutamine stress for detection and localization of coronary artery disease. Quantitative wall motion analysis using a modification of the centerline method. Circulation 1994;90:127–38.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Dendale PA, Franken PR, Waldman GJ, De Moor DG, Tombeur DA, Block PF. Low-dosage dobutamine magnetic resonance imaging as an alternative to echocardiography in the detection of viable myocardium after acute infarction. Am Heart J 1995;130:134–40.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Baer FM, Theissen P, Crnac J et al. Head to head comparison of dobutaminetransoesophageal echocardiography and dobutamine-magnetic resonance imaging for the prediction of left ventricular functional recovery in patients with chronic coronary artery disease. Eur Heart J 2000;21:981–91.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Baer FM, Voth E, LaRosee K et al. Comparison of dobutamine transesophageal echocardiography and dobutamine magnetic resonanceimaging for detection of residual myocardial viability. Am J Cardiol 1996;78:415–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    de Roos A, Kunz P, Lamb H et al. Magnetic resonance imaging of ischemic heart disease: why cardiac magnetic resonance imaging will play a significant role in the management of patients with coronary artery disease. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1999;23 Suppl 1:S135–S141.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Pennell DJ, Underwood SR, Ell PJ, Swanton RH, Walker JM, Longmore DB. Dipyridamole magnetic resonance imaging: a comparison with thallium-201 emission tomography. Br Heart J 1990;64:362–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Kim RJ, Fieno DS, Parrish TB et al. Relationship of MRI delayed contrast enhancement to irreversible injury, infarct age, and contractile function. Circulation 1999;100:1992–2002.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Kim RJ, Wu E, Rafael A et al. The Use of Contrast-Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging to Identify Reversible Myocardial Dysfunction. N Engl J Med 2000;343:1445–53.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Kim RJ, Judd RM, Chen EL, Fieno DS, Parrish TB, Lima JA. Relationship of elevated 23Na magnetic resonance image intensity to infarct size after acute reperfused myocardial infarction. Circulation 1999;100:185–92.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Simonetti OP, Kim RJ, Fieno DS et al. An Improved MR Imaging Technique for the Visualization of Myocardial Infarction. Radiology 2001;218:215–23.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Van Reet RE, Quinones MA, Poliner LR et al. Comparison of two-dimensional echocardiography with gated radionuclide ventriculography in the evaluation of global and regional left ventricular function in acute myocardial infarction. J Am Coll Cardiol 1984;3:243–52.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Limacher MC, Quinones MA, Poliner LR, Nelson JG, Winters WL, Jr. Detection of coronary artery disease with exercise two-dimensional echocardiography. Description of a clinically applicable method and comparison with radionuclide ventriculography. Circulation 1983;67:1211–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Visser CA, van der Wieken RL, Kan G, Lie KI, Busemann-Sokele E, Durrer D. Comparison of two-dimensional echocardiography with radionuclide angiography during dynamic exercise for the detection of coronary artery disease. Am Heart J 1983;106:528–34.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Crawford MH, Petru MA, Amon KW, Sorensen SG, Vance WS. Comparative value of 2-dimensional echocardiography and radionuclide angiography for quantitating changes in left ventricular performance during exercise limited by angina pectoris. Am J Cardiol 1984;53:42–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Austin EH, Cobb FR, Coleman RE, Jones RH. Prospective evaluation of radionuclide angiocardiography for the diagnosis of coronary artery disease. Am J Cardiol 1982;50:1212–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Gibbons RJ, Lee KL, Cobb F, Jones RH. Ejection fraction response to exercise in patients with chest pain and normal coronary arteriograms. Circulation 1981;64:952–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Picano E, Parodi O, Lattanzi F et al. Assessment of anatomic and physiological severity of single-vessel coronary artery lesions by dipyridamole echocardiography. Comparison with positron emission tomography and quantitative arteriography. Circulation 1994;89:753–61.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Fragasso G, Lu C, Dabrowski P, Pagnotta P, Sheiban I, Chierchia SL. Comparison of stress/rest myocardial perfusion tomography, dipyridamole and dobutamine stress echocardiography for the detection of coronary disease in hypertensive patients with chest pain and positive exercise test. J Am Coll Cardiol 1999; 34:441–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Lattanzi F, Picano E, Bolognese L et al. Inhibition of dipyridamole-induced ischemia by antianginal therapy in humans. Correlation with exercise electrocardiography. Circulation 1991; 83:1256–62.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Maurer G, Nanda NC. Two dimensional echocardiographic evaluation of exercise-induced left and right ventricular asynergy: correlation with thallium scanning. Am J Cardiol 1981;48:720–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Quinones MA, Verani MS, Haichin RM, Mahmarian JJ, Suarez J, Zoghbi WA. Exercise echocardiography versus 201T1 single-photon emission computed tomography in evaluation of coronary artery disease. Analysis of 292 patients. Circulation 1992;85:1026–31.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Pozzoli MM, Fioretti PM, Salustri A, Reijs AEM, Roelandt JRTC. Exercise echocardiography and technetium 99m MIBI single photon emission computed tomography in the detection of coronary artery disease. Am J Cardiol 1991;67:350–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Galanti G, Sciagra R, Comeglio M et al. Diagnostic accuracy of peak exercise echocardiography in coronary artery disease: Comparison with thallium-201 myocardial scintigraphy. Am Heart J 1991;122:1609–16.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Salustri A, Pozzoli MM, Hermans W et al. Relationship between exercise echocardiography and perfusion single-photon emission computed tomography in patients with single-vessel coronary artery disease. Am Heart J 1992;124:75–83.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Hecht HS, DeBord L, Shaw R et al. Supine bicycle stress echocardiography versus tomographic thallium-201 exercise imaging for the detection of coronary artery disease. J Am Soc Echo 1993;6:177–85.Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Marwick T, D’Hondt AM, Baudhuin T, Willemart B, Wijns W, Detry JM. Optimal use of dobutamine stress for the detection and evaluation of coronary artery disease: combination with echocardiography or scintigraphy, or both? J Am Coll Cardiol 1993;22:159–67.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Forster T, McNeill AJ, Salustri A, Reijs AE, el-Said ES, Roelandt JR. Simultaneous dobutamine stress echocardiography and technetium- 99m isonitrile single-photon emission computed tomography in patients with suspected coronary artery disease. J Am Coll Cardiol 1993;21:1591–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Gunalp B, Dokumaci B, Uyan C et al. Value of dobutamine technetium-99msestamibi SPECT and echocardiography in the detection of coronary artery disease compared with coronary angiography. J Nucl Med 1993;34:889–94.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Takeuchi M, Araki M, Nakashiqia Y, Kuroiwa A. Comparison of dobutamine stress echocardiography and stress thallium-201 single-photon emission computed tomography for detecting coronary artery disease. J Am Soc Echo 1993;6:593–602.Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    Senior R, Sridhara BS, Anagnostou E, Handler C, Raftery EB, Lahiri A. Synergistic value of simultaneous stress dobutamine sestamibi single-photonemission computerized tomography and echocardiography in the detection of coronary artery disease. Am Heart J 1994;128:713–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Ho FM, Huang PJ, Liau CS et al. Dobutamine stress echocardiography compared with dipyridamole thallium- 201 single-photon emission computed tomography in detecting coronary artery disease. Eur Heart J 1995;16:570–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Huang PJ, Ho YL, Wu CC et al. Simultaneous dobutamine stress echocardiography and thallium-201 perfusion imaging for the detection of coronary artery disease. Cardiology 1997;88:556–62.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Santoro GM, Sciagra R, Buonamici P et al. Head-to-head comparison of exercise stress testing, pharmacologic stress echocardiography, and perfusion tomography as first-line examination for chest pain in patients without history of coronary artery disease. J Nucl Cardiol 1998;5:19–27.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    San Roman JA, Rollan MJ, Vilacosta I et al. Echocardiography and MIBISPECT scintigraphy during dobutamine infusion in the diagnosis of coronary disease. Rev Esp Cardiol 1995;48:606–14.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Smart SC, Bhatia A, Hellman R et al. Dobutamine-atropine stress echocardiography and dipyridamole sestamibi scintigraphy for the detection of coronary artery disease: limitations and concordance. J Am Coll Cardiol 2000;36:1265–73.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Perin EC, Moore W, Blume M, Hernandez G, Dhekne R, DeCastro CM. Comparison of dipyridamole-echocardiography with dipyridamole-thallium scintigraphy for the diagnosis of myocardial ischemia. Clinical Nuclear Medicine 1991;16:417–20.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Simonetti I, Rezai K, Rossen JD et al. Physiological assessment of sensitivity of noninvasive testing for coronary artery disease. Circulation 1991;83:1I143–11I49.Google Scholar
  70. 70.
    Fleischmann KE, Hunink MG, Kuntz KM, Douglas PS. Exercise echocardiography or exercise SPECT imaging? A meta-analysis of diagnostic test performance. JAMA 1998;280:913–20.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Simek CL, Watson DD, Smith WH, Vinson E, Kaul S. Dipyridamole thallium-201 imaging versus dobutamine echocardiography for the evaluation of coronary artery disease in patients unable to exercise. Am J Cardiol 1993;72:1257–62.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Labowitz AJ, Pearson AC, Chaitman BR. Doppler and two-dimensional echocardiographic assessment of left ventricular function before and after intravenous dipyridamole stress testing for detection of coronary artery disease. Am J Cardiol 1988;62:1180–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Nguyen T, Heo J, Ogilby JD, Iskandrian AS. Single photon emission computed tomography with thallium-201 during adenosine-induced coronary hyperemia: correlation with coronary arteriography, exercise thallium imaging and two-dimensional echocardiography. J Am Coll Cardiol 1990;16:1375–83.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Amanullah AM, Bevegard S, Lindvall K, Aasa M. Assessment of left ventricular wall motion in angina pectoris by two-dimensional echocardiography and myocardial perfusion by technetium-99m sestamibi tomography during adenosine-induced coronary vasodilation and comparison with coronary angiography. Am J Cardiol 1993;72:983–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Marwick T, Willemart B, D’Hondt AM, Baudhuin T, Wijns W, Detry JM. Selection of the optimal nonexercise stress for the evaluation of ischemic regional myocardial dysfunction and malperfusion. Comparison of dobutamine and adenosine using echocardiography and 99mTc-MIBI single photon emission computed tomography. Circulation 1993;87:345–54.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Marwick TH, Nemec JJ, Stewart WJ, Salcedo EE. Diagnosis of coronary artery disease using exercise echocardiography and positron emission tomography: comparison and analysis of discrepant results. J Am Soc Echo 1992;5:231–8.Google Scholar
  77. 77.
    Liu P, Keiss MC, et al. The persistent defect on exercise thallium imaging and its fate after myocardial revascularization: does it represent scar or ischemia? Am Heart J 1985;110:996–1002.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. 78.
    Kerber RE, Marcus ML, Ehrhardt J, Wilson R, Abbout FM. Correlation between echocardiographically demonstrated deyskinesis and regional myocardial perfusion. Circulation 1975;52:1097–104.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. 79.
    Stolzenberg J, Kaminsky J. Overlying breast as cause of false-positive thallium scans. Clin Nucl Med 1978;3:229.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. 80.
    Hansen CL, Crabbe D, Rubin S. Lower diagnostic accuracy of thallium-201 SPECT myocardial perfusion imaging in women: An effect of smaller chamber size. J Am Coll Cardiol 1996;28:1214–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. 81.
    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;83:660–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. 82.
    Geleijnse ML, Vigna C, Kasprzak JD et al. Usefulness and limitations of dobutamine-atropine stress echocardiography for the diagnosis of coronary artery disease in patients with left bundle branch block. A multicentre study. Eur Heart J 2000;21:1666–73.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. 83.
    DePuey EG, Guertler-Krawczynska E, Robbins WL. Thallium-201 SPECT in coronary disease patients with left bundle branch block. J Nucl Med 1988;29:1479–85.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  84. 84.
    O’Keefe JH, Jr., Bateman TM, Barnhart CS. Adenosine thallium-201 is superior to exercise thallium-201 for detecting coronary artery disease in patients with left bundle branch block. J Am Coll Cardiol 1993;21:1332–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. 85.
    Mairesse GH, Marwick TH, Arnese M et al. Improved identification of coronary artery disease in patients with left bundle branch block by use of dobutamine stress echocardiography and comparison with myocardial perfusion tomography. Am J Cardiol 1995;76:321–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. 86.
    Haluska B, Case C, Short L, Anderson J, Marwick TH. Effect of power Doppler and digital subtraction techniques on the comparison of myocardial contrast echocardiography with SPECT. Heart 2001;85:549–55.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. 87.
    Smart SC, Knickelbine T, Malik F, Sagar KB. Dobutamine-atropine stress echocardiography for the detection of coronary artery disease in patients with left ventricular hypertrophy. Importance of chamber size and systolic wall stress. Circulation 2000;101:258–63.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. 88.
    DePuey EG, Guertler-Krawczynska E, Perkins JV, Robbins WL, Whelchel JD, Clements SD. Alterations in myocardial thallium-201 distribution in patients with chronic systemic hypertension undergoing single photon emission computed tomography. Am J Cardiol 1988;62:234–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. 89.
    Houghton TL, Frank MJ, Carr AA, VonDohlen TW, Prisant LM. Relations among impaired coronary flow reserve, left ventricular hypertrophy, and thallium perfusion defects in hypertensive patients without obstructive coronary artery disease. J Am Coll Cardiol 1990;15:43–51.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. 90.
    Mueller T, Marcus M, Kerber R, Young Y, Barnes R, Abboud F. Effect of renal hypertension and left ventricular hypertrophy on the coronary circulation in dogs. Circ Res 1978;42:543–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. 91.
    O’Keefe DD, Hoffman JIE, Cheitlin R, O’Neill MJ, Allard JR, Shapkin E. Coronary blood flow in experimental canine left ventricular hypertrophy. Circ Res 1978;43:43–51.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. 92.
    Malik AB, Abe T, O’Kane H, Geha AS. Cardiac function, coronary flow, and oxygen consumption in stable left ventricular hypertrophy. Am J Physiol 1973;225:186–91.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  93. 93.
    Goldstein RA, Haynie M. Limited myocardial perfusion reserve in patients with left ventricular hypertrophy. J Nucl Med 1990;31:225–8.Google Scholar
  94. 94.
    Marwick TH, Cook SA, Lafont A, Underwood DA, Salcedo EE. Influence of left ventricular mass on the diagnostic accuracy of myocardial perfusion imaging using positron emission tomography with dipyridamole stress. J Nucl Med 1991;32:2221–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  95. 95.
    Nagel E, Lehmkuhl HB, Bocksch W et al. Noninvasive diagnosis of ischemia-induced wall motion abnormalities with the use of high-dose dobutamine stress MRI: comparison with dobutamine stress echocardiography. Circulation 1999;99:763–70.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. 96.
    Soman P, Bokor D, Lahiri A. Why cardiac magnetic resonance imaging will not make it. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1999;23 Suppl 1:S143–S149.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Thomas H. Marwick
    • 1
  1. 1.University of QueenslandBrisbaneAustralia

Personalised recommendations