Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current
    • Ahead of print
    • Archive
  • Info for
    • Authors
    • Reviewers
  • About Us
    • About the Ochsner Journal
    • Editorial Board
  • More
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
  • Other Publications
    • Ochsner Journal Blog

User menu

  • My alerts
  • Log in

Search

  • Advanced search
Ochsner Journal
  • Other Publications
    • Ochsner Journal Blog
  • My alerts
  • Log in
Ochsner Journal

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current
    • Ahead of print
    • Archive
  • Info for
    • Authors
    • Reviewers
  • About Us
    • About the Ochsner Journal
    • Editorial Board
  • More
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
Review ArticleReviews and Contemporary Updates

False-Positive Stress Echocardiograms: A Continuing Challenge

Salima Qamruddin
Ochsner Journal September 2016, 16 (3) 277-279;
Salima Qamruddin
Department of Cardiology, Ochsner Clinic Foundation, New Orleans, LA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • References
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

Background: Stress echocardiography is an integral test in the cardiac diagnostic laboratory and has high sensitivity and specificity. Despite the excellent specificity of stress echocardiography, we continue to see a subset of patients with false-positive tests (defined as <50% diameter stenosis on subsequent coronary angiography). These false-positive findings present a management challenge because it remains unclear if and how to treat these patients.

Methods: This article reviews relevant clinical studies and their outcomes.

Results: Studies suggest that a group of patients develops a hypertensive response to exercise and therefore may have false-positive stress echocardiography. Hence, superior blood pressure control prior to stress echocardiography may prevent some false-positive tests. In addition, a subset of patients has microvascular abnormalities, vasomotor changes, endothelial dysfunction, and/or small vessel coronary disease that can lead to false-positive stress echocardiography.

Conclusion: The evidence is insufficient to state that a false-positive stress echocardiography in the absence of obstructive coronary artery disease portends a poor outcome, but considerable evidence shows that some of these patients have microvascular abnormalities and endothelial dysfunction and consequently may benefit from aggressive medical management and further testing.

Keywords
  • Coronary artery disease
  • coronary stenosis
  • echocardiography–stress
  • false-positive reactions

INTRODUCTION

Advancements in stress echocardiography during the past 2 decades have made this test an integral part of the cardiac diagnostic laboratory. In a large laboratory, 15-20 tests are performed per day.1 Stress echocardiography is a cost-effective test with high sensitivity (88%) and specificity (83%) for detection of significant coronary artery stenosis, most often defined as >50% diameter stenosis on coronary angiography.2

A study of insurance billing data extracted from a national insurance provider from November 2004 through June 2007 identified 80,676 people aged 40-64 years (53% women, mean age 51.5 years) referred for outpatient stress testing. Fifty-four percent were referred for nuclear stress myocardial perfusion imaging, 21% underwent stress echocardiography, and 25% had exercise tolerance testing without imaging as their initial test.

Studies comparing the accuracy of nuclear perfusion imaging and stress echocardiography in the same patient population have shown that the tests have similar sensitivities for the detection of coronary artery disease, but stress echocardiography has higher specificity. In a pooled analysis of 18 studies with 1,304 patients who underwent exercise or pharmacologic stress echocardiography in conjunction with thallium- or technetium-labeled radioisotope imaging, sensitivity and specificity were 80% and 86%, respectively, for echocardiography. Corresponding sensitivity and specificity were 84% and 77% for myocardial perfusion imaging, respectively.2

Despite the excellent specificity of stress echocardiography, we continue to see a subset of patients with false-positive tests (ie, <50% diameter coronary artery stenosis on the subsequent angiogram) in the absence of left bundle branch morphology, right ventricular pacing, prior cardiac surgery, or abnormal wall tethering at baseline. These false-positive findings present a management challenge, as it remains unclear if and how to treat patients with a false-positive stress echocardiography.

CLINICAL STUDIES AND OUTCOMES

In a retrospective study of 1,477 patients who underwent stress echocardiography (either treadmill stress echocardiography or dobutamine stress echocardiography), From et al found that 480 patients (32.5%) had false-positive results.3 Furthermore, in patients with markedly abnormal stress echocardiographic findings (n=605), 28% had <50% stenosis or normal coronary arteries. Hypertensive response to exercise (defined as peak systolic blood pressure >210 mmHg in men and >190 mmHg in women) is considered to be one of the reasons for false-positive stress echocardiography. In the From et al study, 10% of the patients with abnormal stress echocardiography who were referred for angiography developed a hypertensive response to exercise.3 Subsequent multivariate analysis showed that those who were most likely to have a false-positive stress echocardiography were nondiabetic, nonhypertensive, younger females without a prior history of coronary artery disease and negative peak stress electrocardiogram (ECG). Eleven percent of the patients with abnormal stress echocardiography underwent additional testing. Four patients had positive acetylcholine studies (suggesting endothelial dysfunction), 3 patients had catheter-induced spasm, 3 patients had myocardial bridging, and 2 patients had anomalous coronary vessels. After 2.4 years of follow-up, no significant mortality difference was seen between patients with and without >50% luminal narrowing on angiography after abnormal stress echocardiography.

Another study with the same lead author evaluated 31 patients with normal left ventricular function at rest, extensive regional wall motion abnormalities at peak stress (with an increase in left ventricular end-systolic cavity size at peak stress), and angiographically normal coronary arteries, with a 2-year follow-up.4 The mid and apical ventricular segments were more likely to be abnormal on echocardiography, leading the authors to suggest that some false-positive stress echocardiograms may be a forme fruste variety of apical ballooning syndrome. Eighty-four percent of these patients were women, with a mean age of 61 years. Forty-five percent of the cohort were deemed low probability for obstructive coronary artery disease. Twenty-six percent of patients developed a hypertensive response to stress. Stress ECG was positive in only 6% of the patients, and no deaths had occurred at follow-up.

Yet another retrospective study from some of the same researchers examined abnormal treadmill stress echocardiography in 7,236 patients who achieved >10 metabolic equivalents.5 Twelve percent of the patients had exercise echocardiographic results that were positive for ischemia, and 4% of the patients had echocardiographic criteria consistent with extensive ischemia. Prior to stress testing, 30% of patients in the abnormal stress echocardiography group were thought to be at low probability for obstructive coronary artery disease. Subsequently, 3.2% of patients with abnormal stress echocardiography underwent coronary angiography within 30 days, and only one-fourth of those patients required coronary revascularization. A prognostic model did not add incremental value by adding stress echocardiography to the excellent short- and medium-term prognosis of these exertion-tolerant patients when followed for an average of 4.8 years.

DISCUSSION

These studies suggest the existence of a group of patients who develop hypertensive response to exercise and therefore may have false-positive stress echocardiography (10%-26% in the studies cited above). Hence, superior blood pressure control prior to stress echocardiography may prevent some false-positive tests.

In addition, a subset of patients has microvascular abnormalities, vasomotor changes, endothelial dysfunction, and/or small vessel coronary disease that can lead to false-positive stress echocardiography. In support of this hypothesis, perfusion imaging by single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) has shown clear defects in myocardial perfusion in the absence of angiographic stenosis in some cases.6 Abnormal coronary flow reserve has also been demonstrated in patients without significant coronary lesions by traditional coronary angiography despite an abnormal SPECT.7 Rodés-Cabau et al performed intravascular ultrasound on a group of patients with stable coronary disease with abnormal radionuclide stress results and normal coronary circulation on angiography and demonstrated a significantly increased plaque burden in this subset of patients.8 This group of patients may benefit from provocative testing as well as aggressive medical management.

Pooled accuracy studies of stress echocardiography have typically used >50% diameter stenosis by angiography as the definition of obstructive disease,2 but we know from animal studies that >70% stenosis is required to cause enough of a decrease in coronary flow reserve to cause ischemia.9 Hence, we may need to challenge the current definition and redefine what we term false-positive.

CONCLUSION

The evidence is insufficient to state that false-positive stress echocardiography in the absence of obstructive coronary artery disease portends a poor outcome, but considerable evidence shows that some of these patients have microvascular abnormalities and endothelial dysfunction. Consequently, this group may benefit from aggressive medical management and further testing. Stress echocardiography remains useful for prognostication in select patients.

This article meets the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education and the American Board of Medical Specialties Maintenance of Certification competencies for Patient Care, Medical Knowledge, and Practice-Based Learning and Improvement.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The author has no financial or proprietary interest in the subject matter of this article.

  • © Academic Division of Ochsner Clinic Foundation

REFERENCES

  1. ↵
    1. Mudrick DW,
    2. Cowper PA,
    3. Shah BR,
    4. et al.
    Downstream procedures and outcomes after stress testing for chest pain without known coronary artery disease in the United States. Am Heart J. 2012 3; 163 3: 454- 461. doi: 10.1016/j.ahj.2011.11.022. pmid:22424017
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  2. ↵
    1. Pellikka PA,
    2. Nagueh SF,
    3. Elhendy AA,
    4. Kuehl CA,
    5. Sawada SG
    American Society of Echocardiography. American Society of Echocardiography recommendations for performance, interpretation, and application of stress echocardiography. J Am Soc Echocardiogr. 2007 9; 20 9: 1021- 1041. doi: 10.1016/j.echo.2007.07.003. pmid:17765820
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  3. ↵
    1. From AM,
    2. Kane G,
    3. Bruce C,
    4. Pellikka PA,
    5. Scott C,
    6. McCully RB.
    Characteristics and outcomes of patients with abnormal stress echocardiograms and angiographically mild coronary artery disease (<50% stenoses) or normal coronary arteries. J Am Soc Echocardiogr. 2010 2; 23 2: 207- 214. doi: 10.1016/j.echo.2009.11.023. pmid:20152703
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  4. ↵
    1. From AM,
    2. Prasad A,
    3. Pellikka PA,
    4. McCully RB.
    Are some false-positive stress echocardiograms a forme fruste variety of apical ballooning syndrome? Am J Cardiol. 2009 5 15; 103 10: 1434- 1438. doi: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2009.01.352. pmid:19427442
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  5. ↵
    1. Fine NM,
    2. Pellikka PA,
    3. Scott CG,
    4. Gharacholou SM,
    5. McCully RB.
    Characteristics and outcomes of patients who achieve high workload (≥10 metabolic equivalents) during treadmill exercise echocardiography. Mayo Clin Proc. 2013 12; 88 12: 1408- 1419. doi: 10.1016/j.mayocp.2013.07.021. pmid:24290114
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  6. ↵
    1. Laboratoryovitz AJ.
    The “myth” of the false positive stress echo. J Am Soc Echocardiogr. 2010 2; 23 2: 215- 216. doi: 10.1016/j.echo.2009.12.018. pmid:20152704
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  7. ↵
    1. Verna E,
    2. Ceriani L,
    3. Giovanella L,
    4. Binaghi G,
    5. Garancini S.
    “False-positive” myocardial perfusion scintigraphy findings in patients with angiographically normal coronary arteries: insights from intravascular sonography studies. J Nucl Med. 2000 12; 41 12: 1935- 1940. pmid:11138675
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  8. ↵
    1. Rodés-Cabau J,
    2. Candell-Riera J,
    3. Angel J,
    4. et al.
    Relation of myocardial perfusion defects and nonsignificant coronary lesions by angiography with insights from intravascular ultrasound and coronary pressure measurements. Am J Cardiol. 2005 12 15; 96 12: 1621- 1626. doi: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2005.07.077. pmid:16360346
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  9. ↵
    1. Bober RM,
    2. Jahangir E.
    What is ischemia and how should this be defined based on modern imaging? Prog Cardiovasc Dis. 2015 May-Jun; 57 6: 537- 554. doi: 10.1016/j.pcad.2015.02.001. pmid:25727175
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
View Abstract
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

Ochsner Journal
Vol. 16, Issue 3
Sep 2016
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign up with your email address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on Ochsner Journal.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
False-Positive Stress Echocardiograms: A Continuing Challenge
(Your Name) has sent you a message from Ochsner Journal
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the Ochsner Journal web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
False-Positive Stress Echocardiograms: A Continuing Challenge
Salima Qamruddin
Ochsner Journal Sep 2016, 16 (3) 277-279;

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
False-Positive Stress Echocardiograms: A Continuing Challenge
Salima Qamruddin
Ochsner Journal Sep 2016, 16 (3) 277-279;
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
    • Abstract
    • INTRODUCTION
    • CLINICAL STUDIES AND OUTCOMES
    • DISCUSSION
    • CONCLUSION
    • ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
    • REFERENCES
  • Info & Metrics
  • References
  • PDF

Cited By...

  • No citing articles found.
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Current Approaches to Risk Assessment and Prevention of Preterm Birth—A Continuing Public Health Crisis
  • Pelvic Organ Prolapse: A Review of In Vitro Testing of Pelvic Support Mechanisms
  • Prevention of Surgical Site Infections in Gynecologic Surgery: A Review of Risk Factors and Recommendations
Show more REVIEWS AND CONTEMPORARY UPDATES

Similar Articles

Keywords

  • coronary artery disease
  • coronary stenosis
  • echocardiography–stress
  • false-positive reactions

Current Post at the Blog

Publishing Without Coauthor Consent

Our Content

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Ahead of Print
  • Archive
  • Featured Contributors
  • Ochsner Journal Blog
  • Archive at PubMed Central

Information & Forms

  • Instructions for Authors
  • Instructions for Reviewers
  • Submission Checklist
  • FAQ
  • License for Publishing-Author Attestation
  • Patient Consent Form
  • Submit a Manuscript

Services & Contacts

  • Permissions
  • Sign up for our electronic table of contents
  • Feedback Form
  • Contact Us

About Us

  • Editorial Board
  • About the Ochsner Journal
  • Ochsner Health
  • University of Queensland-Ochsner Clinical School
  • Alliance of Independent Academic Medical Centers

© 2021 Ochsner Clinic Foundation

Powered by HighWire