Open Access
Open Peer Review

This article has Open Peer Review reports available.

How does Open Peer Review work?

The diagnostic accuracy of pharmacological stress echocardiography for the assessment of coronary artery disease: a meta-analysis

Cardiovascular Ultrasound20086:30

DOI: 10.1186/1476-7120-6-30

Received: 30 May 2008

Accepted: 19 June 2008

Published: 19 June 2008

Abstract

Background

Recent American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology guidelines state that "dobutamine stress echo has substantially higher sensitivity than vasodilator stress echo for detection of coronary artery stenosis" while the European Society of Cardiology guidelines and the European Association of Echocardiography recommendations conclude that "the two tests have very similar applications". Who is right?

Aim

To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of dobutamine versus dipyridamole stress echocardiography through an evidence-based approach.

Methods

From PubMed search, we identified all papers with coronary angiographic verification and head-to-head comparison of dobutamine stress echo (40 mcg/kg/min ± atropine) versus dipyridamole stress echo performed with state-of-the art protocols (either 0.84 mg/kg in 10' plus atropine, or 0.84 mg/kg in 6' without atropine). A total of 5 papers have been found. Pooled weight meta-analysis was performed.

Results

the 5 analyzed papers recruited 435 patients, 299 with and 136 without angiographically assessed coronary artery disease (quantitatively assessed stenosis > 50%). Dipyridamole and dobutamine showed similar accuracy (87%, 95% confidence intervals, CI, 83–90, vs. 84%, CI, 80–88, p = 0.48), sensitivity (85%, CI 80–89, vs. 86%, CI 78–91, p = 0.81) and specificity (89%, CI 82–94 vs. 86%, CI 75–89, p = 0.15).

Conclusion

When state-of-the art protocols are considered, dipyridamole and dobutamine stress echo have similar accuracy, specificity and – most importantly – sensitivity for detection of CAD. European recommendations concluding that "dobutamine and vasodilators (at appropriately high doses) are equally potent ischemic stressors for inducing wall motion abnormalities in presence of a critical coronary artery stenosis" are evidence-based.

Background

Pharmacological stress echocardiography is widely used for the diagnosis of coronary artery disease [1, 2], and the two most employed pharmacological stresses are dipyridamole and dobutamine, first proposed more than 20 years ago [3, 4]. The latest 2006 European Society of Cardiology (ESC) guidelines for stable angina conclude that "the two tests have very similar applications and the choice as to which is employed depends largely on local facilities and expertise" [5]. This statement was corroborated by a meta-analysis of the published literature, included in the guidelines, and showing comparable accuracy, sensitivity and specificity of dobutamine and vasodilator stress echocardiography. However, and paradoxically, on the basis of the same existing literature, the American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology (AHA/ACC) guidelines stated that "dobutamine stress echo has higher sensitivity than vasodilator stress echo for detection of coronary artery disease" [6, 7]. The recent 2007 recommendations on stress echocardiography of the American Society of Echocardiography conclude that "although vasodilators may have advantages for assessment of myocardial perfusion, dobutamine is preferred when the test is based on assessment of regional wall motion" [8]. Who is right? The question has profound clinical relevance, since tens of millions of cardiac stress testing are performed each year [9], and the projected rises is of + 4,900% in the next decade or so [10]. In addition, pharmacological stress imaging with simultaneous assessment of perfusion and function is also at the basis of the growing application of stress-CMR imaging [11]. A source of ambiguity is represented by the presence of several different protocols of vasodilator stress echo proposed over the years, in the continuing quest of the ideal accuracy: one protocol is suitable for perfusion imaging [12, 13], another for viability detection [14], and still another one for ischemia induction [1517]. When true ischemia and regional wall motion abnormalities are the diagnostic end-point, we need high dipyridamole doses (0.84 mg/kg), either with atropine co-administration [16] or with a fast infusion rate [17]. Any sound meta-analysis should only include these state-of-the-art protocols, present in the literature since 15 years [17], in a head-to head comparison with dobutamine stress echo on consecutive populations studied in the same laboratories and with angiographic verification independent of stress results.

Methods

Study selection

We designed our search to identify all studies assessing the comparison between dipyridamole and dobutamine stress echocardiography state of the art protocols in their diagnostic accuracy. We conducted a PubMed search from 1985 through 2007 combining stress echocardiography (2777 citations) AND diagnosis (2665 citations) AND dobutamine (1659 citations) AND dipyridamole (201 citations). In a second step we excluded "prognosis" (143 citations). After limiting to human studies we identified 86 citations. There was no language restriction used. Meta-analysis, editorials, letters have been excluded. We only considered original papers addressing head to head comparison between dobutamine stress echo (40 mcg/kg/min ± atropine) and dipyridamole stress echo with state of the art protocols (0.84 mg/kg plus atropine or 0.84 mg/kg in 6 minutes without atropine). The inclusion criteria for this meta-analysis were:

(1) dipyridamole and dobutamine stress echocardiography were performed on the same population of patients, on different days and in random order;

(2) the 2 tests were performed under identical anti-ischemic therapy, if any;

(3) coronary angiography information was used as a reference standard.

Based on this, 5 articles have been selected (from Serbia, Holland, Spain, Italy and Finland) totalling 435 patients with coronary angiography for evaluation of diagnostic accuracy.

We followed the QUORUM guidelines on the reporting of meta-analysis [18]. The selection process of the relevant literature is summarized in Figure 1. Studies performed with protocols not considered today as state-of-art (such as high dose dipyridamole in 10' without atropine) have been excluded [1826]. Studies without angiographic information and with only prognostic information available were also excluded [2729]. Studies from the same group were considered only once, to avoid partial re-counting of data [29, 30] and only the latest, and largest, study was used as source study. Based on this selection criteria, 5 source studies have been selected (from Serbia, Holland, Spain. Italy and Finland) totalling 435 patients with coronary angiography for evaluation of diagnostic accuracy [3135]. A vessel was considered to have a significant obstruction ≥ 50% by quantitative or visual analysis (Table. 1). At time of the tests, 282 patients were off anti-ischemic therapy; 77 patients had history of previous myocardial infarction.
Figure 1

The flow-chart of selection of source studies for the meta-analysis.

Data extraction

The following data were extracted per source study: author, journal, year of publication, type of test, total number of patients, mean age, proportion of men, proportion of previous myocardial infarction, prevalence of significant disease, definition of significant disease, summary estimates of sensitivity and specificity. In addition to these variables, the absolute number of true-positive, false-negative, false-positive, and true-negative results were extracted per source study.

Data synthesis

The pooled weighted estimation of sensitivity, specificity and accuracy were reported in Table. 2. Calculations of sensitivity, specificity and accuracy have been performed according to standard definitions and goal of a meta-analysis, with the corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI). We also calculated the pooled values of sensitivity, specificity and accuracy weighted for sample size with fixed effect model (Comprehensive Meta-Analysis program – Biostat Englewood, NJ). Differences in sensitivity, specificity and accuracy have been compared by the odds-ratio statistics. We expressed continuous data as mean ± SD, and dichotomous variables as percentages. We considered statistically significant a P value < 0.05.

Results

Individual absolute numbers and percent values for each study are reported in Table 1. Standard dose dobutamine protocol (40 mcg/Kg/min) plus atropine was used in all 5 articles. High dose dipyridamole protocol (0.84 mg/kg in 10 minutes) with atropine was employed in 3 studies and 287 patients, and the fast accelerated protocol (0.84 mg/kg in 6 minutes) in 2 studies and 148 patients. Raw data of sensitivity (Figure 2), specificity (Figure 3), and accuracy (Figure 4) values for individual articles and in overall cumulative analysis were not significantly different. Variance-weighted pooled analysis is shown in Table 3, again showing similar values between the two tests.
Figure 2

Sensitivity values in individual studies and cumulative analysis.

Figure 3

Specificity values in individual studies and cumulative analysis.

Figure 4

Accuracy values for individual studies and cumulative analysis.

Discussion

When state-of-the art protocols are considered, dipyridamole and dobutamine stress echo have similar accuracy, and – most importantly – the same sensitivity for detection of CAD.

Comparison with previous studies

Several previous meta-analysis pooled data of dipyridamole stress echocardiography, including standard dose with high dose and high dose plus atropine [3639]. All these studies concluded that dipyridamole has a higher specificity than dobutamine, with a trend to lower sensitivity in less severe forms of single vessel disease. In the most recent and updated of these meta-analyses, Heijenbrook et al. analyzed 58 patients series with dipyridamole echo and 102 with dobutamine echo, and showed a very similar overall accuracy, with higher specificity for dipyridamole (94.6% vs. 84.1% of dobutamine) and higher sensitivity for dobutamine (81% for dobutamine and 71.9% for dipyridamole) [39]. These data can be easily reconciled with the findings of the present study, since the inclusion of old, now obsolete, vasodilator protocols, such as low dose, or high dose without atropine, decreases sensitivity without affecting specificity [26]. Our data also explain the recent findings of stress-CMR, conceptually germane but less operator-dependent than stress echo, showing that the fast high dose dipyridamole protocol is the best choice to catch "two birds with a stone", i.e. to image function and perfusion ("two birds") in one sitting with a single stress ("one stone") [40, 41]. This approach is obviously simpler than the "two birds, two stones" approach (with separate testing of perfusion with adenosine and function with dobutamine). It is however imperative that your "stone" (stress) is of sufficient weight (high cumulative dose) and thrown with sufficient speed (fast infusion rate) in order to catch the two birds.

Pathophysiological basis

It seems counterintuitive that dipyridamole is a strong coronary vasodilator which does not importantly increase myocardial oxygen demand and is also a powerful ischemic stressor. It is conventional wisdom that "as long as the oxygen demand is not increased in these segments there is no ischemia and consequently no wall motion abnormality" [42]. It can appear even more puzzling that the same active principle, given intravenously, is an effective anti-ischemic drug [43], a viability test capable to recruit contractile reserve through a direct metabolic cardioprotective effect [14], a hyperaemic stressor with limited capacity to evoke ischemia [12, 13] and – at high, fast doses – a strong ischemic stress [44]. Dipyridamole looks like a character of an Agatha Christie's novel."Perfectly", said Poirot, "The matter begins to clear up wonderfully! The murderer was a man of great strength – he was feeble – it was a woman – it was a right-handed person – he was a left-handed person. Ah, C'est rigolo, tout ça!" [45]. The results of this meta-analysis may help us to enter the second half of the Agatha Christie's novel. Dipyridamole acts through accumulation of endogenous adenosine, which is a key retaliatory metabolite [46] with a variety of anti-ischemic and cardioprotective effects [4749] – but too much of a good thing can be dangerous [50]. A low level, gradual exposure to adenosine – or even a high level exposure in absence of steal prone anatomy – can have exert a powerful anti-ischemic and cardioprotective effect, due to the "cold light" of direct cardioprotective effects independent of flow increase, mainly mediated by stimulation of high affinity A1 and A3 myocardial receptors [50]. A higher level of adenosine accumulation will induce a stronger hyperemic effect: warm coronary vasodilation that will produce a differential tanning (myocardial tracer uptake or coronary flow increase) of regions perfused by coronary stenoses of different severity. This effect is achieved with standard doses, through stimulation of A2a adenosine receptors on coronary arterioles smooth muscle cells and is convenient for hyperemic imaging [50]. At high doses, the A2a-mediated pro-ischemic effect prevails. The exposure of steal-vulnerable myocardium to excessive amount of adenosine will "burn" the myocardium, with ischemia induction which is the necessary end-point for vasodilator stress echocardiography (Figure 5). In this context, the vulnerable "phototype" is represented by the presence of a coronary anatomy with tight stenosis (necessary for vertical steal phenomena), especially with complex-type morphology (with endothelial damage reducing the epicardial dilatory effects of adenosine), and abundant coronary collateral circulation (i.e., the anatomical background enhancing horizontal-steal phenomena). The burning effects of excessive coronary arteriolar vasodilation can be effectively prevented, or attenuated, by anti-ischemic therapy with beta-blockers, nitrates, or calcium-antagonists, which exert a powerful anti-steal effect, with enhanced redistribution of hyperaemic flow towards the subendocardium [51], acting therefore as a protective "sunshade umbrella" for the steal-prone myocardium. With this conceptual framework, we can enter the second half of the Agatha Christie's novel: the same drug, in the same patient, can have different effects according to the dose employed, the infusion rate, and the underlying coronary anatomy (Fig. 5).
Figure 5

The pathophysiological effects of dipyridamole at different dose windows and as a function of the underlying coronary anatomy in the individual patient. The pro-ischemic, myocardial "burning" effects dominates at the higher doses; the cardioprotective, "cold light" effect at very low doses, and the "warming" hyperemic effect at intermediate doses.

Study limitations

We did not exclude studies based on the quality of data reported. Juni et al showed that studies should not be excluded based on composite quality scores because many quality scales are more closely related to reporting quality than to the internal validity of the studies [52]. Instead, relevant methodological aspects should be assessed individually and their influence on effect sizes explored. Therefore, we only included studies that used the same anatomic reference standards, i.e. a (visually or quantitatively assessed) coronary artery stenosis ≥ 50% and with remarkably similar methodology regarding the visual assessment of regional wall motion analysis.

Another potential confounder is the publication bias. Stern and Simes have shown that positive results are not only more likely to be published than negative results, but they also have a significant shorter time to publication [53]. However, in this particular case it is not clear what is a positive finding, since 2 stress tests were compared, and the results appear consistent across the different studies, without detectable changes related to the year of the study, the male predominance, the percentage of previous myocardial infarction, the prevalence of CAD, or the concomitance of antianginal therapy. All these factors are known to affect the stress test accuracy in absolute terms – but in this study they are averaged out, since only inter-test differences applied to the same population are considered.

We focused only on diagnostic accuracy. Other aspects of the test are at least equally important and include the prognostic value, the safety, the feasibility rate, the quality of echocardiographic imaging and the capability to recognize myocardial viability. There are extensive data in the literature that the prognostic accuracy of the 2 tests is very similar [28, 29, 54, 55], whereas the number of minor, but limiting, and major life-threatening complications is about 2 times higher with dobutamine than with dipyridamole [5658]. Submaximal studies are found in 5% patients with dipyridamole, and 10% with dobutamine. Life-threatening complications occur in 1 out of 600 patients with high dose dipyridamole and 1 in 300 with dobutamine [49, 50]. Regarding image quality degradation during stress, only 2 studies – both not included in the present metaanalysis since the high dipyridamole dose without atropine was used – addressed semi-quantitatively [23] or qualitatively [21] the issue of image degradation during stress. Sochowsky et al described that a worsening of image quality occurred significantly more frequently during dobutamine than with dipyridamole stress [23], due to tachycardia and hyperventilation. Beleslin et al compared head to head 136 patients with treadmill exercise, dobutamine and dipyridamole stress echo and concluded that "from the technical viewpoint, dipyridamole represents the primary school, dobutamine the secondary school, and exercise the University in the stress echo cursus studiorum" [21]. For recognition of myocardial viability, both tests have similar diagnostic and prognostic value [59, 60], but the wealth of data clearly favors low dose dobutamine, which is currently the only stress echo test with this class 1 indication for viability assessment in guidelines [5, 6].

Conclusion

The recent ESC [5] guidelines on stable angina and EAE recommendations on stress echocardiography [61] are evidence-based in concluding that "dobutamine and vasodilators (at appropriately high doses) are equally potent ischemic stressors for inducing wall abnormalities in presence of a critical coronary artery stenosis." The implications are far-reaching for the better understanding of pathophysiology of ischemic heart disease and the practice of cardiac stress testing.

Declarations

Authors’ Affiliations

(1)
CNR, Institute of Clinical Physiology

References

  1. Picano E: Stress echocardiography: from pathophysiological toy to diagnostic tool. Point of view. Circulation. 1992, 85: 1604-1612.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Picano E: Stress echocardiography: a historical perspective. Special article. Am J Med. 2003, 114: 126-30. 10.1016/S0002-9343(02)01427-4View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Picano E, Distante A, Masini M, Morales MA, Lattanti F, L'Abbate A: Dipyridamole echocardiography test in effort angina pectoris. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1985, 56 (7): 452-456.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  4. Berthe C, Pierard LA, Hiernaux M, Trotteur G, Lempereur P, Carlier J, Kulbertus HE: Predicting the extent and location of coronary artery disease in acute myocardial infarction by echocardiography during dobutamine infusion. Am J Cardiol. 1986, 58: 1167-72. 10.1016/0002-9149(86)90376-0View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Fox K, Garcia MA, Ardissino D, Buszman P, Camici PG, Crea F, Daly C, De Backer G, Hjemdahl P, Lopez-Sendon J, Marco J, Morais J, Pepper J, Sechtem U, Simoons M, Thygesen K, Priori SG, Blanc JJ, Budaj A, Camm J, Dean V, Deckers J, Dickstein K, Lekakis J, McGregor K, Metra M, Morais J, Osterspey A, Tamargo J, Zamorano JL, Task Force on the Management of Stable Angina Pectoris of the European Society of Cardiology; ESC Committee for Practice Guidelines (CPG): Guidelines on the management of stable angina pectoris: executive summary: the Task Force on the Management of Stable Angina Pectoris of the European Society of Cardiology. Eur Heart J. 2006, 27: 1341-81. 10.1093/eurheartj/ehl001View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Cheitlin MD, Armstrong WF, Aurigemma GP, Beller GA, Bierman FZ, Davis JL, Douglas PS, Faxon DP, Gillam LD, Kimball TR, Kussmaul WG, Pearlman AS, Philbrick JT, Rakowski H, Thys DM: ACC/AHA/ASE 2003 guideline update for the clinical application of echocardiography: Summary article. A report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (ACC/AHA/ASE Committee to Update the 1997 Guidelines on the Clinical Application of Echocardiography). J Am Coll Cardiol. 2003, 42: 954-970. 10.1016/S0735-1097(03)01065-9View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Mieres JH, Shaw LJ, Arai A, Budoff MJ, Flamm SD, Hundley WG, Marwick TH, Mosca L, Patel AR, Quinones MA, Redberg RF, Taubert KA, Taylor AJ, Thomas GS, Wenger NK, Cardiac Imaging Committee, Council on Clinical Cardiology, and the Cardiovascular Imaging and Intervention Committee, Council on Cardiovascular Radiology and Intervention, American Heart Association: 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: 682-96. 10.1161/01.CIR.0000155233.67287.60View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Pellikka PA, Nagueh SF, Elhendy AA, Kuehl CA, Sawada SG, American Society of Echocardiography. American Society of Echocardiography: Recommendations for performance, interpretation, and application of stress echocardiography. J Am Soc Echocardiogr. 2007, 20: 1021-41. 10.1016/j.echo.2007.07.003View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Gibbons RJ, Abrams J, Chatterjee K, Daley J, Deedwania PC, Douglas JS, Ferguson TB, Fihn SD, Fraker TD, Gardin JM, O'Rourke RA, Pasternak RC, Williams SV, American College of Cardiology; American Heart Association Task Force on practice guidelines (Committee on the Management of Patients With Chronic Stable Angina): ACC/AHA 2002 guideline update for the management of patients with chronic stable angina-summary article: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on practice guidelines (Committee on the Management of Patients With Chronic Stable Angina). J Am Coll Cardiol. 2003, 41: 159-68. 10.1016/S0735-1097(02)02848-6View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Gershlick AH, de Belder M, Chambers J, Hackett D, Keal R, Kelion A, Neubauer S, Pennell DJ, Rothman M, Signy M, Wilde P: Role of non-invasive imaging in the management of coronary artery disease: an assessment of likely change over the next 10 years. A report from the British Cardiovascular Society Working Group. Heart. 2007, 93: 423-31. 10.1136/hrt.2006.108779View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  11. Jahnke C, Nagel E, Gebker R, Kokocinski T, Kelle S, Manka R, Fleck E, Paetsch I: Prognostic value of cardiac magnetic resonance stress tests: adenosine stress perfusion and dobutamine stress wall motion imaging. Circulation. 2007, 115: 1769-76. 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.106.652016View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Gould KL, Lipscomb K: Effects of coronary stenosis on coronary flow reserve and resistance. Am J Cardiol. 1974, 34: 48-55. 10.1016/0002-9149(74)90092-7View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Gould KL, Westcott RJ, Abro 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. 10.1016/0002-9149(78)90166-2View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Picano E, Ostojic M, Varga A, Sicari R, Djordevic-Dikic A, Nedeljkovic I, Torres M: Combined low dose dipyridamole-dobutamine echocardiography: a new stress for myocardial viability identification by pharmacological stress echocardiography. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1996, 27: 1422-1428. 10.1016/0735-1097(95)00621-4View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Picano E, Lattanzi F, Masini M, Distante A, L'Abbate A: High dose dipyridamole echocardiography test in effort angina pectoris. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1986, 8: 848-854.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Picano E, Pingitore A, Conti U, Kozakova M, Boem A, Cabani E, Ciuti M, Distante A, L'Abbate A: Enhanced sensitivity for detection of coronary artery disease by addition of atropine to dipyridamole echocardiography. Eur Heart J. 1993, 14: 1216-1222.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Dal Porto R, Faletra F, Picano E, Pirelli S, Moreo A, Varga A: Safety, feasibility and diagnostic accuracy of accelerated high-dose stress echocardiography. Am J Cardiol. 2001, 87: 520-524. 10.1016/S0002-9149(00)01424-7View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. : CONSORT Transparent reporting of trials. QUORUM guidelines.http://www.consort-statement.org/QUORUM.pdf
  19. Martin TW, Seaworth JF, Johns JP, Pupa LE, Condos WR: Comparison of adenosine, dipyridamole, and dobutamine in stress echocardiography. Ann Intern Med. 1992, 116: 190-196.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Previtali M, Lanzarini L, Fetiveau R, Poli A, Ferrario M, Falcone C, Mussini A: Comparison of dobutamine stress echocardiography, dipyridamole stress echocardiography and exercise stress testing for diagnosis of coronary artery disease. Am J Cardiol. 1993, 72: 865-70. 10.1016/0002-9149(93)91097-2View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Beleslin BD, Ostojic M, Stepanovic J, Djordjevic-Dikic A, Stojkovic S, Nedeljkovic M, Stankovic G, Petrasinovic Z, Gojkovic L, Vasiljevic-Pokrajcic Z: Stress echocardiography in the detection of myocardial ischemia. Head-to-head comparison of exercise, dobutamine, and dipyridamole tests. Circulation. 1994, 90: 1168-76.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Gruber N, Varga A, Forster T, Varga L, Borthaiser A, Csanády M: Comparative evaluation of dipyridamole and dobutamine 2-dimensional echocardiography in ischemic heart disease. Orv Hetil. 1994, 135: 67-70.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Sochowski RA, Yvorchuk KJ, Yang Y, Rattes MF, Chan KL: Dobutamine and dipyridamole stress echocardiography in patients with a low incidence of severe coronary artery disease. J Am Soc Echocardiogr. 1995, 8: 482-7. 10.1016/S0894-7317(05)80335-9View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Dagianti A, Penco M, Agati L, Sciomer S, Dagianti A, Rosanio S, Fedele F: Stress echocardiography: comparison of exercise, dipyridamole and dobutamine in detecting and predicting the extent of coronary artery disease. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1995, 26: 18-25. 10.1016/0735-1097(95)00121-FView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Minardi G, Di Segni M, Manzara CC, Pulignano G, Chiantera A, De Santis F, Armiento G, Vajola FS, Giovannini E: Diagnostic and prognostic value of dipyridamole and dobutamine stress echocardiography in patients with Q-wave acute myocardial infarction. Am J Cardiol. 1997, 80: 847-51. 10.1016/S0002-9149(97)00534-1View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Santoro GM, Sciagrà R, Buonamici P, Consoli N, Mazzoni V, Zerauschek F, Bisi G, Fazzini PF: 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. 10.1016/S1071-3581(98)80006-8View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 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. 10.1016/S0735-1097(99)00231-4View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Schröder K, Wieckhorst A, Völler H: Comparison of the prognostic value of dipyridamole and dobutamine stress echocardiography in patients with known or suspected coronary artery disease. Am J Cardiol. 1997, 79: 1516-8. 10.1016/S0002-9149(97)00182-3View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Pingitore A, Picano E, Varga A, Gigli G, Cortigiani L, Previtali M, Minardi G, Colosso MQ, Lowenstein J, Mathias W, Landi P: Prognostic value of pharmacological stress echocardiography in patients with known or suspected coronary artery disease: a prospective, large-scale, multicenter, head-to-head comparison between dipyridamole and dobutamine test. Echo-Persantine International Cooperative (EPIC) and Echo-Dobutamine International Cooperative (EDIC) Study Groups. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1999, 34: 1769-7. 10.1016/S0735-1097(99)00423-4View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. San Román JA, Vilacosta I, Castillo JA, Rollán MJ, Peral V, Sánchez-Harguindey L, Fernández-Avilés F: Dipyridamole and dobutamine-atropine stress echocardiography in the diagnosis of coronary artery disease. Comparison with exercise stress test, analysis of agreement, and impact of antianginal treatment. Chest. 1996, 110: 1248-54. 10.1378/chest.110.5.1248View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Salustri A, Fioretti PM, McNeill AJ, Pozzoli MM, Roelandt JR: Pharmacological stress echocardiography in the diagnosis of coronary artery disease and myocardial ischemia: a comparison between dobutamine and dipyridamole. Eur Heart J. 1992, 13: 356-1362.Google Scholar
  32. Pingitore A, Picano E, Colosso MQ, Reisenhofer B, Gigli G, Lucarini AR, Petix N, Previtali M, Bigi R, Chiarandà G, Minardi G, de Alcantara M, Lowenstein J, Sclavo MG, Palmieri C, Galati A, Seveso G, Heyman J, Mathias W, Casazza F, Sicari R, Raciti M, Landi P, Marzilli M: The atropine factor in pharmacologic stress echocardiography. Echo Persantine (EPIC) and Echo Dobutamine International Cooperative (EDIC) Study Groups. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1996, 27: 1164-1170. 10.1016/0735-1097(95)00586-2View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. San Román JA, Vilacosta I, Castillo JA, Rollán MJ, Hernández M, Peral V, Garcimartín I, de la Torre MM, Fernández-Avilés F: Selection of the optimal stress test for the diagnosis of coronary artery disease. Heart. 1998, 80: 370-376.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Loimaala A, Groundstroem K, Pasanen M, Oia P, Vuori I: Comparison of bicycle, heavy isometric, dipyridamole-atropine and dobutamine stress echocardiography for diagnosis of myocardial ischemia. Am J Cardiol. 1999, 84: 1396-1400. 10.1016/S0002-9149(99)00583-4View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Nedeljkovic I, Ostojic M, Beleslin B, Djordjevic-Dikic A, Stepanovic J, Nedeljkovic M, Stojkovic S, Stankovic G, Saponjski J, Petrasinovic Z, Giga V, Mitrovic P: Comparison of exercise, dobutamine-atropine and dipyridamole-atropine stress echocardiography in detecting coronary artery disease. Cardiovasc Ultrasound. 2006, 4: 22- 10.1186/1476-7120-4-22View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  36. Picano E, Bedetti G, Varga A, Cseh E: The comparable diagnostic accuracies of dobutamine-stress and dipyridamole-stress echocardiographies: a meta-analysis. Coronary Artery Disease. 2000, 11: 151-159. 10.1097/00019501-200003000-00010View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Kim C, Kwok YS, Heagerty P, Redberg R: Pharmacologic stress testing for coronary disease diagnosis: A meta-analysis. Am Heart J. 2001, 142: 934-944. 10.1067/mhj.2001.119761View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. Noguchi Y, Nagata-Kobayashi S, Stahl JE, Wong JB: A meta-analytic comparison of echocardiographic stressors. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2005, 21: 189-207. 10.1007/s10554-004-5808-xView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. Heijenbrok-Kal MH, Fleischmann KE, Hunink MG: Stress echocardiography, stress single-photon-emission computed tomography and electron beam computed tomography for the assessment of coronary artery disease: a meta-analysis of diagnostic performance. Am Heart J. 2007, 154: 415-23. 10.1016/j.ahj.2007.04.061View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. Bodi V, Sanchis J, Lopez-Lereu MP, Nunez J, Mainar L, Monmeneu JV, Husser O, Dominguez E, Chorro FJ, Llacer A: Prognostic value of dipyridamole stress cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging in patients with known or suspected coronary artery disease. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2007, 50: 1174-9. 10.1016/j.jacc.2007.06.016View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. Pingitore A, Lombardi M, Scattini B, De Marchi D, Aquaro GD, Positano V, Picano E: Head to head comparison between perfusion and function during accelerated high-dose dipyridamole magnetic resonance stress for the detection of coronary artery disease. Am J Cardiol. 2008, 101: 8-14. 10.1016/j.amjcard.2007.07.076View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. Becher H, Chambers J, Fox K, Jones R, Leech GJ, Masani N, Monaghan M, More R, Nihoyannopoulos P, Rimington H, Senior R, Warton G, British Society of Echocardiography Policy Committee: BSE procedure guidelines for the clinical application of stress echocardiography, recommendations for performance and interpretation of stress echocardiography: a report of the British Society of Echocardiography Policy Committee. Heart. 2004, 90: vi23-30. 10.1136/hrt.2004.047985View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  43. Tommasi S, Carluccio E, Bentivoglio M, Corea L, Picano E: Low-dose dipyridamole infusion acutely increases exercise capacity in angina pectoris: a double-blind, placebo controlled crossover stress echocardiographic study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2000, 35: 83-8. 10.1016/S0735-1097(99)00534-3View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. Picano E: Dipyridamole-echocardiography test: the historical background and the physiologic basis. Eur Heart J. 1989, 10: 365-376.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. Christie A: Murder on the Orient Express. 1934, Collins Crime Club. London (UK)Google Scholar
  46. Newby AC: Adenosine and the concept of retaliatory metabolite. Trends Biochem Sci. 1984, 9: 42-44. 10.1016/0968-0004(84)90176-2View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  47. Strauer BE, Heidland UE, Heintzen MP, Schwartzkopff B: Pharmacologic myocardial protection during percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty by intracoronary application of dipyridamole: impact on hemodynamic function and left ventricular performance. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1996, 28: 1119-26. 10.1016/S0735-1097(96)00307-5View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. Marzilli M, Orsini E, Marraccini P, Testa R: Beneficial effects of intracoronary adenosine as an adjunct to primary angioplasty in acute myocardial infarction. Circulation. 2000, 101: 2154-9.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. Zughaib ME, Abd-Elfattah AS, Jeroudi MO, Sun JZ, Sekili S, Tang XL, Bolli R: Augmentation of endogenous adenosine attenuates myocardial 'stunning' independently of coronary flow or hemodynamic effects. Circulation. 1993, 88: 2359-69.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. Picano E: Dipyridamole in myocardial ischemia: Good Samaritan or Terminator?. Int J Cardiol. 2002, 83: 215-216. 10.1016/S0167-5273(02)00060-8View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  51. Lattanzi F, Picano E, Bolognese L, Piccinino C, Sarasso G, Orlandini A, L'Abbate A: Inhibition of dipyridamole-induced ischemia by antianginal therapy in humans. Correlation with exercise electrocardiography. Circulation. 1991, 83: 1256-1262.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. Jüni P, Witschi A, Bloch R, Egger M: The hazards of scoring the quality of clinical trials for meta-analysis. JAMA. 1999, 282: 1054-60. 10.1001/jama.282.11.1054View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. Stern JM, Simes RJ: Publication bias: evidence of delayed publication in a cohort study of clinical research projects. BMJ. 1997, 315: 640-5.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  54. Shaw LJ, Merz CN, Pepine CJ, Reis SE, Bittner V, Kip KE, Kelsey SF, Olson M, Johnson BD, Mankad S, Sharaf BL, Rogers WJ, Pohost GM, Sopko G, Women's Ischemia Syndrome Evaluation (WISE) Investigators: The economic burden of angina in women with suspected ischemic heart disease: results from the National Institutes of Health – National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute – sponsored Women's Ischemia Syndrome Evaluation. Circulation. 2006, 114: 894-904. 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.105.609990View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. Kertai MD, Boersma E, Sicari R, L'Italien GJ, Bax JJ, Roelandt JR, van Urk H, Poldermans D: Which stress test is superior for perioperative cardiac risk stratification in patients undergoing major vascular surgery?. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2002, 24: 222-9. 10.1053/ejvs.2002.1704View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  56. Picano E, Marini C, Pirelli S, Maffei S, Bolognese L, Chiriatti GP, Chiarella F, Orlandini A, Seveso G, Quarta Colosso M, Sclavo MG, Magaia O, Agati L, Previtali M, Lowenstein J, Torre F, Rosselli P, Ciuti M, Ostojic M, Gandolfo N, Margaria F, Giannuzzi P, Di Bello V, Lombardi M, Gigli G, Ferrara N, Santoro F, Lusa AM, Chairandà G, Papagna D, Coletta C, Boccardi L, De Cristofaro M, Papi L, Landi P, on behalf of the EPIC study group: Safety of intravenous high-dose dipyridamole echocardiography. The Echo-Persantine International Cooperative Study Group. Am J Cardiol. 1992, 70: 252-8. 10.1016/0002-9149(92)91284-BView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  57. Picano E, Mathias W, Pingitore A, Bigi R, Previtali M: Safety and tolerability of dobutamine-atropine stress echocardiography: a prospective, multicentre study. Echo Dobutamine International Cooperative Study Group. Lancet. 1994, 344: 1190-2. 10.1016/S0140-6736(94)90508-8View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  58. Varga A, Garcia MA, Picano E, International Stress Echo Complication Registry: Safety of stress echocardiography (from the International Stress Echo Complication Registry). Am J Cardiol. 2006, 98: 541-3. 10.1016/j.amjcard.2006.02.064View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  59. Ostojic M, Picano E, Beleslin B, Djordjevic-Dikic A, Distante A, Stepanovic J, Reisenhofer B, Babic R, Stojkovic S, Nedeljkovic M, Stankovic G, Simeunovic S, Kanjuh V: Dipyridamole-dobutamine echocardiography: a novel test for the detection of milder forms of coronary artery disease. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1994, 23: 1115-22.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  60. Poli A, Previtali M, Lanzarini L, Fetiveau R, Diotallevi P, Ferrario M, Mussini A, Specchia G, Montemartini C: Comparison of dobutamine stress echocardiography with dipyridamole stress echocardiography for detection of viable myocardium after myocardial infarction treated with thrombolysis. Heart. 1996, 75: 240-6. 10.1136/hrt.75.3.240View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  61. Sicari R, Nihyoannopoulos P, Evangelista A, Karspzak J, Lancelotti P, Poldermans D, Voigt JU, Zamorano JL: Stress echocardiography expert consensus statement of European Association of Echocardiography. Eur J Echocardiography. 2008, 9: 415-37. 10.1093/ejechocard/jen175. 10.1093/ejechocard/jen175View ArticleGoogle Scholar

Copyright

© Picano et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2008

This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Advertisement