Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Our journals
    • Clinical Medicine
    • Future Healthcare Journal
  • Subject collections
  • About the RCP
  • Contact us

Clinical Medicine Journal

  • ClinMed Home
  • Content
    • Current
    • Ahead of print
    • Archive
  • Author guidance
    • Instructions for authors
    • Submit online
  • About ClinMed
    • Scope
    • Editorial board
    • Policies
    • Information for reviewers
    • Advertising

User menu

  • Log in

Search

  • Advanced search
RCP Journals
Home
  • Log in
  • Home
  • Our journals
    • Clinical Medicine
    • Future Healthcare Journal
  • Subject collections
  • About the RCP
  • Contact us
Advanced

Clinical Medicine Journal

clinmedicine Logo
  • ClinMed Home
  • Content
    • Current
    • Ahead of print
    • Archive
  • Author guidance
    • Instructions for authors
    • Submit online
  • About ClinMed
    • Scope
    • Editorial board
    • Policies
    • Information for reviewers
    • Advertising

Cardiac imaging to investigate suspected cardiac pain in the post-treadmill era

S Richard Underwood
Download PDF
DOI: https://doi.org/10.7861/clinmedicine.15-1-106
Clin Med February 2015
S Richard Underwood
AImperial College London, London, UK, and honorary consultant, Royal Brompton and Harefield NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
Roles: Professor of cardiac imaging
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Info & Metrics
Loading

Editor – I was pleased to see a review of cardiac imaging in patients with suspected cardiac chest pain, since this is a common problem with frequently an inconsistent approach to investigation (Clin Med 2014;14:475–81). However, I was saddened by its lack of proper perspective. X-ray computed tomography (CT) and cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) were appropriately described, less so stress echocardiography, and myocardial perfusion scintigraphy (MPS) was relegated to three small paragraphs and was not mentioned as an option in the conclusion. In fact, MPS is the most commonly performed non-invasive test of coronary function in Europe, including the UK, and elsewhere. A brief letter is not the place to redress the balance but it may partly suffice to make the following points.

The diagnostic accuracy of each of the techniques is similar and individual comparative studies can give misleading results that may not be applicable outside the research setting.1 This equivalence has been recognised by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) and European Society of Cardiology (ESC) in their chest pain guidance.2,3 In truth, the diagnostic accuracy of a technique depends more upon the operator than the technique, which is why those who focus too closely within cardiac imaging may not see the full picture.

The prognostic accuracy of MPS in stable coronary disease has much greater evidence to support it than the other techniques, although the main determinant of events is the ischaemic burden rather than the technique used to assess it. The advantage of MPS is its ability to measure the ischaemic burden and that it can be used to predict which patients will do better with revascularisation than with medical therapy. Because of this, MPS is the only technique that has been shown to influence patient outcome for the better, albeit mainly in non-randomised trials.4–6

Although there are concerns related to ionising radiation, no technique is free of debateable harmful effects.7,8 MPS and CT benefit from methods of reducing radiation exposure to the equivalent of one year of background radiation, which may be below the threshold for significant harm, depending upon one's take on extrapolating the harm of higher exposures to levels below 10 mSv.9 For MPS, these techniques include the increased sensitivity of solid state gamma cameras and the short half-life radionuclides of positron emission tomography.

MPS has good evidence for its cost-effectiveness10,11 and the only prospective randomised trial comparing the techniques in the setting of stable chest pain showed that, in contrast to MPS, stress echocardiography and perfusion CMR are unlikely to be cost effective compared with invasive coronary angiography.12 Indeed, there was evidence of harm in the group randomised to CMR.

Mark Twain is dubiously credited with saying that, to the man with a hammer, every problem looks like a nail. Such an attitude in cardiac imaging may benefit the carpenter but it may be of less benefit for our patients.

Footnotes

  • Please submit letters for the editor's consideration within three weeks of receipt of Clinical Medicine. Letters should ideally be limited to 350 words, and sent by email to: clinicalmedicine@rcplondon.ac.uk

  • © 2015 Royal College of Physicians
Back to top
Previous articleNext article

Article Tools

Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Citation Tools
Cardiac imaging to investigate suspected cardiac pain in the post-treadmill era
S Richard Underwood
Clinical Medicine Feb 2015, 15 (1) 106; DOI: 10.7861/clinmedicine.15-1-106

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Cardiac imaging to investigate suspected cardiac pain in the post-treadmill era
S Richard Underwood
Clinical Medicine Feb 2015, 15 (1) 106; DOI: 10.7861/clinmedicine.15-1-106
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Footnotes
  • Info & Metrics

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • No citing articles found.
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Vitamin D
  • Discharge criteria for patients with COVID-19 to long-term care facilities requires modification
  • Cardiac investigations after ischaemic stroke
Show more Letters to the editor

Similar Articles

Navigate this Journal

  • Journal Home
  • Current Issue
  • Ahead of Print
  • Archive

Related Links

  • ClinMed - Home
  • FHJ - Home
clinmedicine Footer Logo
  • Home
  • Journals
  • Contact us
  • Advertise
HighWire Press, Inc.

Follow Us:

  • Follow HighWire Origins on Twitter
  • Visit HighWire Origins on Facebook

Copyright © 2020 by the Royal College of Physicians