Search

Aims Stress echocardiography is widely used to assess patients with chest pain. The clinical value of a positive or negative test result to inform on likely longer-term outcomes when applied in real-world practice across a healthcare system has not been previously reported. Methods and results Five thousand five hundred and three patients recruited across 32 UK NHS hospitals between 2018 and 2022, participating in the EVAREST/BSE-NSTEP prospective cohort study, with data on medical outcomes up to 2023 available from NHS England were included in the analysis. Stress echocardiography results were related to outcomes, including death, procedures, hospital admissions, and relevant cardiovascular diagnoses, based on Kaplan–Meier analysis and Cox proportional hazard ratios (HRs). Median follow-up was 829 days (interquartile range 224–1434). A positive stress echocardiogram was associated with a greater risk of myocardial infarction [HR 2.71, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.73–4.24, P < 0.001] and a composite endpoint of cardiac-related mortality and myocardial infarction (HR 2.03, 95% CI 1.41–2.93, P < 0.001). Hazard ratios increased with ischaemic burden. A negative stress echocardiogram identified an event-free 'warranty period' of at least 5 years in patients with no prior history of coronary artery disease and 4 years for those with disease. Conclusion In real-world practice, the degree of myocardial ischaemia recorded by clinicians at stress echocardiography correctly categorizes risk of future events over the next 5 years. Reporting a stress echocardiogram as negative correctly identifies patients with no greater than a background risk of cardiovascular events over a similar time period. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: Stress echocardiography is widely used to assess patients with chest pain. The clinical value of a positive or negative test result to inform on likely longer-term outcomes when applied in real-world practice across a healthcare system has not been previously reported., Methods and Results: Five thousand five hundred and three patients recruited across 32 UK NHS hospitals between 2018 and 2022, participating in the EVAREST/BSE-NSTEP prospective cohort study, with data on medical outcomes up to 2023 available from NHS England were included in the analysis. Stress echocardiography results were related to outcomes, including death, procedures, hospital admissions, and relevant cardiovascular diagnoses, based on Kaplan-Meier analysis and Cox proportional hazard ratios (HRs). Median follow-up was 829 days (interquartile range 224-1434). A positive stress echocardiogram was associated with a greater risk of myocardial infarction [HR 2.71, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.73-4.24, P < 0.001] and a composite endpoint of cardiac-related mortality and myocardial infarction (HR 2.03, 95% CI 1.41-2.93, P < 0.001). Hazard ratios increased with ischaemic burden. A negative stress echocardiogram identified an event-free 'warranty period' of at least 5 years in patients with no prior history of coronary artery disease and 4 years for those with disease., Conclusion: In real-world practice, the degree of myocardial ischaemia recorded by clinicians at stress echocardiography correctly categorizes risk of future events over the next 5 years. Reporting a stress echocardiogram as negative correctly identifies patients with no greater than a background risk of cardiovascular events over a similar time period., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: A.K. has received an educational grant from Lantheus Medical Imaging and honoraria from Bracco and Tom-Tec-Phillips. K.W. is a member of the British Cardiovascular Society Guidelines and Practice Committee (unpaid role). R.Se. has received honoraria from Bracco, Lantheus Medical Imaging, and GE Healthcare. P.L. is a shareholder and founder of Ultromics Ltd and has received personal consultancy fees from Ultromics Ltd. P.L. is an inventor on patients in the field of echocardiography. All other authors have no conflicts of interest to declare., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.)