Stress Testing and Non-Invasive Coronary Angiography in Patients with Suspected Coronary Artery Disease: Time for a New Paradigm

Armin Arbab‐Zadeh

Heart International · 2012 · 71 citations · 52 references

DOIFull text

Open access

Concepts

TL;DR

Diagnosis and management of coronary artery disease pose major challenges, traditionally requiring invasive catheterization, but stress testing has been used as a gatekeeper while non‑invasive CT angiography has emerged with strong diagnostic accuracy. The article examines whether stress testing remains a sensible initial strategy given its modest agreement with catheterization and the rise of CT coronary angiography. The authors review the clinical utility, limitations, and hazards of stress testing versus CT coronary angiography. The review concludes that stress testing should be reconsidered as the first imaging modality, with implications for clinical practice.

Abstract

Diagnosis and management of coronary artery disease represents major challenges to our health care system, affecting millions of patients each year. Until recently, the diagnosis of coronary artery disease was possible only through cardiac catheterization and invasive coronary angiography. To avoid the risks of an invasive procedure, stress testing is often employed for an initial assessment of patients with suspected coronary artery disease, serving as a gatekeeper for cardiac catheterization. With the emergence of non-invasive coronary angiography, the question arises if such a strategy is still sensible, particularly, in view of only a modest agreement between stress testing results and the presence of coronary artery disease established by cardiac catheterization. Much data in support of the diagnostic accuracy and prognostic value of non-invasive coronary angiography by computed tomography have emerged within the last few years. These data challenge the role of stress testing as the initial imaging modality in patients with suspected coronary artery disease. This article reviews the clinical utility, limitations, as well as the hazards of stress testing compared with non-invasive coronary artery imaging by computed tomography. Finally, the implications of this review are discussed in relation to clinical practice.

References

52