Clinical implications of ST segment time-course recovery patterns during the exercise stress test

D. Naidoo
{"title":"Clinical implications of ST segment time-course recovery patterns during the exercise stress test","authors":"D. Naidoo","doi":"10.4314/IJMU.V10I2.2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The exercise stress test (EST) is the commonest non-invasive test to elucidate the nature of chest pain/discomfort. ST segment depression provides evidence of ischemia, but is hampered by a significant number of false negative and false positive tests. This study evaluated patterns and duration of ST depression in an attempt to differentiate false positive and false negative tests. One hundred consecutive patients with suspected angina referred to the Cardiac Clinic, who underwent an EST, and subsequently a coronary angiogram, were studied. The EST was classified as positive if significant ST depression (greater than 1mm 80msec after the J point) developed during exercise or the recovery phase. Based on the angiographic findings as the reference, the EST was classified as true positive (TP), true negative (TN), false positive (FP) or false negative (FN). Onset, magnitude and type of ST depression in relation to disease, the recovery time (RT), total ischemic time (TIT) and time-course patterns in TP versus FP results were compared by Chi square test. The EST was positive in 77 patients (true positive n = 65; false positive n = 12). The angiographic findings were classified as normal (17), non-occlusive atheroma (10) and as significant coronary stenosis in the remainder. Though the mean time to ST recovery (IRT) was shorter (183 + 118sec) in subjects with false positive compared to true positive (264 + 116sec) p<0.05, it was over three minutes and did not really help in differentiating FP from TP tests. TIT was more reliable than the IRT in delineating true positive from false positive tests. Up-sloping ST changes were more commonly associated with false positivity. Time-course patterns could not reliably distinguish TP from FP tests (TIT = 8/12, RT = 7/12), but TIT was more reliable in verifying TP (64/65) tests than IRT (59/65). KEY WORDS: Exercise stress test; ST segment time course patterns","PeriodicalId":14472,"journal":{"name":"Internet Journal of Medical Update - EJOURNAL","volume":"39 1","pages":"3-9"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Internet Journal of Medical Update - EJOURNAL","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4314/IJMU.V10I2.2","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

The exercise stress test (EST) is the commonest non-invasive test to elucidate the nature of chest pain/discomfort. ST segment depression provides evidence of ischemia, but is hampered by a significant number of false negative and false positive tests. This study evaluated patterns and duration of ST depression in an attempt to differentiate false positive and false negative tests. One hundred consecutive patients with suspected angina referred to the Cardiac Clinic, who underwent an EST, and subsequently a coronary angiogram, were studied. The EST was classified as positive if significant ST depression (greater than 1mm 80msec after the J point) developed during exercise or the recovery phase. Based on the angiographic findings as the reference, the EST was classified as true positive (TP), true negative (TN), false positive (FP) or false negative (FN). Onset, magnitude and type of ST depression in relation to disease, the recovery time (RT), total ischemic time (TIT) and time-course patterns in TP versus FP results were compared by Chi square test. The EST was positive in 77 patients (true positive n = 65; false positive n = 12). The angiographic findings were classified as normal (17), non-occlusive atheroma (10) and as significant coronary stenosis in the remainder. Though the mean time to ST recovery (IRT) was shorter (183 + 118sec) in subjects with false positive compared to true positive (264 + 116sec) p<0.05, it was over three minutes and did not really help in differentiating FP from TP tests. TIT was more reliable than the IRT in delineating true positive from false positive tests. Up-sloping ST changes were more commonly associated with false positivity. Time-course patterns could not reliably distinguish TP from FP tests (TIT = 8/12, RT = 7/12), but TIT was more reliable in verifying TP (64/65) tests than IRT (59/65). KEY WORDS: Exercise stress test; ST segment time course patterns
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
运动应激试验中ST段时程恢复模式的临床意义
运动压力测试(EST)是最常见的非侵入性测试,用于阐明胸痛/不适的性质。ST段下降提供了缺血的证据,但受到大量假阴性和假阳性试验的阻碍。本研究评估了ST抑郁的模式和持续时间,试图区分假阳性和假阴性测试。研究人员对100名连续的心绞痛疑似患者进行了研究,这些患者接受了EST检查,随后又进行了冠状动脉造影。如果在运动或恢复阶段出现明显的ST下降(J点后80msec大于1mm),则EST为阳性。以血管造影结果为参考,EST分为真阳性(TP)、真阴性(TN)、假阳性(FP)和假阴性(FN)。采用卡方检验比较TP与FP结果的发病、程度和类型、恢复时间(RT)、总缺血时间(TIT)和时程模式。EST阳性77例(真阳性65例;假阳性n = 12)。血管造影结果分为正常(17例),非闭塞性动脉粥样硬化(10例),其余为明显的冠状动脉狭窄。虽然假阳性受试者的平均ST恢复时间(IRT)(183 + 118秒)短于真阳性受试者(264 + 116秒)(p<0.05),但它超过3分钟,并不能真正帮助区分FP和TP试验。在区分假阳性和真阳性方面,TIT比IRT更可靠。向上倾斜的ST改变更常与假阳性相关。时间过程模式不能可靠地区分TP和FP测试(TIT = 8/12, RT = 7/12),但TIT在验证TP(64/65)测试上比IRT(59/65)更可靠。关键词:运动应激试验;ST段时间航线模式
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Editorial: An overview of gamblers anonymous Herpes encephalitis in an elderly immunocompetent lady – A case report Traumatic long bone fractures in children seen in a metropolitan tertiary hospital in Enugu, Nigeria Laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery - a prospective study of short-term outcomes of consecutive cases over 3 years Editorial : Plagiarism
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1