Skip to main content
PMC home page
Annals of Noninvasive Electrocardiology logoLink to Annals of Noninvasive Electrocardiology
. 2006 Oct 27;7(2):98–105. doi: 10.1111/j.1542-474X.2002.tb00149.x

What Percent Luminal Stenosis Should Be Used to Define Angiographic Coronary Artery Disease for Noninvasive Test Evaluation?

Michael Lipinski 1, Dat Do 1, Anthony Morise 2, Victor Froelicher 1
PMCID: PMC7027740  PMID: 12049680

Abstract

Background: There has been controversy over what is the best angiographic luminal dimension criterion associated with ischemia for evaluating diagnostic tests. If one assumes that ST‐segment depression or scores are indicators of ischemia, then whatever angiographic criteria best discriminates those with ischemic and nonischemic responses would be the best angiographic marker for ischemia. To study this, we calculated the area under the ROC curves for ST depression and scores at different angiographic cut‐points in order to determine the best angiographic cut‐point for defining ischemia‐producing coronary disease.

Methods: Twelve hundred and seventy‐six consecutive males without prior Ml with a mean age of 59 ± 11 years who had undergone exercise testing and coronary angiography were analyzed in this study. We calculated the number of patients of this population that would be considered to have coronary artery disease at different cut‐points for angiographic luminal stenosis. For example, 59% of the patients had significant CAD when disease was defined as 50% or greater coronary lumen stenosis of any coronary vessel while 49% of the patients had significant CAD when disease was defined as 70% or greater coronary lumen stenosis. Cut‐points were considered between 40 to 100% coronary lumen stenosis. ROC analysis was then performed comparing ST depression and treadmill scores at each of these cut‐points.

Results: The cut‐point for coronary lumen stenosis that returned the highest AUC for ST depression and scores was between 70 and 80% coronary luminal stenosis. However, the difference between the 50% and 75% luminal stenosis criteria was minimal.

Conclusion: It appears that the best cut‐point for defining significant angiographic disease when evaluating diagnostic tests of ischemia is 75% or greater coronary luminal stenosis. A.N.E. 2002;7(2):98–105

Keywords: exercise test, coronary disease, angiography

REFERENCES

  • 1. Sones FM, Shirey EK. Cine coronary arteriography. Mod Concepts Cardiovasc Dis 1962;31:735–738. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2. Proudfit WL, Shiley EK, Sones FM. Selective cine coronary arteriography correlation with clinical findings in 1,000 patients. Circulation 1966;33:901–910. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3. White CW, Wright CB, Doty DB, et al. Does visual interpretation of the coronary arteriogram predict the physiology importance of a coronary stenosis N Engl J Med 1984;310:819–824. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4. Kern MJ, Donohue TJ. Aguirre FV, et al. Assessment of the angiographically intermediate coronary stenoses using the Doppler flow wire. Am J Cardiol 1993;71:26D–33D. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5. Gould KL, Lipscomb K, Hamilton GW. Physiologic basis for assessing critical coronary stenosis: Instantaneous flow response and regional distribution during coronary hyperemia as measures of coronary flow reserve. Am J Cardiol 1974;33:87–93. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6. Nissen SE, Elion JL, Booth DC. Value and limitations of computer analysis of digital subtraction angiography in assessment of coronary flow reserve. Circulation 1986;73:562–571. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7. Coronary Artery Surgery Study (CASS) : A randomized trial of coronary artery bypass surgery. Circulation 1983;68: 939–950. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8. Yusuf S, Zucker D, Peduzzi P, et al. Effect of coronary artery bypass graft surgery on survival: overview of 10‐year results from randomized trials by the Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery Trialists Collaboration. Lancet 1994;344:563–570. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9. Moise A, Lesperance J, Theroux P, et al. Clinical and angiographic predictors of new total coronary occlusion in coronary artery disease: Analysis of 313 nonoperated patients. Am J Cardiol 1984;54:1176–1181. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10. Ambrose JA, Tannenbaum MA, Alexopoulos D, et al. Anglographic progression of coronary artery disease and the development of myocardial infarction. J Am Coll Cardiol 1988;12:56–62. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11. Little WC, Constantinescu M, Applegate RJ, et al. Can coronary angiography predict the site of a subsequent myocardial infarction in patients with mild to moderate coronary artery disease Circulation 1988;78:1157–1166. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12. Taeymans Y, Theroux P, Lesperance J, et al. Quantitative angiographic morphology of the coronary artery lesions at risk of thrombotic occlusion. Circulation 1992;85:78–85. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13. Arnett EN, Isner JM, Redwood CR, et al. Coronary artery narrowing in coronary heart disease: Comparison of cineangiographic and necropsy findings. Ann Intern Med 1979;91:350–356. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14. Grodin CM, Dyrda I, Pasternac A, et al. Discrepancies between cineangiographic and post‐mortem findings in patients with coronary artery disease and recent myocardial revascularization. Circulation 1974;49:703–709. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15. Kemp HG, Evans H, Elliott WC, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of selective coronary cinearteriography. Circulation 1967;36:526–533. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16. Detrano R, Gianrossi R, Froelicher V. The diagnostic accuracy of the exercise electrocardiogram: A meta‐analysis of 22 years of research. Prog Cardiovasc Dis 1989;32:173–206. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17. Fearon W, Lee D, Froelicher VF. The effect of resting ST segment depression on the diagnostic characteristics of the standard exercise test. J Am Coll Cardiol 2000;35:1206–1211. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18. Ustin J, Umann T, Froelicher V. Data management: A better approach. Phys Comput 1994;12:30–33. [Google Scholar]
  • 19. Froelicher V, Shiu P. Exercise test interpretation system. Phys Comput 1996;14: 40–44. [Google Scholar]
  • 20. Wolthuis R, Froelicher VF, Fischer J, et al. New practical treadmill protocol for clinical use. Am J Cardiol 1977;39:697–700. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21. Myers J, Buchanan N, Walsh D, et al. A comparison of the ramp versus standard exercise protocols. J Am Coll Cardiol 1991;17:1334–1342. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22. Myers J, Do D, Herbert W, et al. A nomogram to predict exercise capacity from a specific activity questionnaire and clinical data. Am J Cardiol 1994;73:591–596. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23. Reid M, Lachs M, Feinstein A. Use of methodological standards in diagnostic test research. JAMA 1995;274:645–651. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24. Fletcher GF, Froelicher VF, Hartley LH, et al. Exercise Standards. A statement for health professionals from the American Heart Association. Circulation 1990;82:2286–2321. Circulation 1995;91: 580–632. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25. Shue P, Froelicher V. Extra: An Expert System for Exercise Reporting. J Noninvas Testing 1998;II‐4: 21–27. [Google Scholar]
  • 26. Mark DB, Hlatky MA, Harrell FE Jr, et al. Exercise treadmill score for predicting prognosis in coronary artery disease. Ann Intern Med 1987;106:793–800. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27. Mark DB, Shaw L, Harrell FE Jr, et al. Prognostic value of a treadmill exercise score in outpatients with suspected coronary artery disease. New Engl J Med 1991;325:849–53. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28. Shaw LJ, Peterson ED, Shaw LK, et al. Use of a prognostic treadmill score in identifying diagnostic coronary disease subgroups. Circulation 1998;98:1622–30. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29. Gibbons RJ, Balady GJ, Beasely JW, et al. ACC/AHH guidelines for exercise testing. J Am Coll Cardiol 1997;30:260–315. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30. Do D, West J, Morise A, et al. A consensus approach to diagnosing coronary artery disease based on clinical and exercise test data. Chest 1997;111:1742–1749. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31. Detrano R, Bobbio M, Olson H, et al. Computer probability estimates of angiographic coronary artery disease: Transportability and comparison with cardiologists' estimates. Comp Bio Res 1992;25:468–485. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32. Morise AP, Detrano R, Bobbio M, et al. Development and validation of a logistic regression ‐ derived algorithm for estimating the incremental probability of coronary artery disease before and after exercise testing. J Am Coll Cardiol 1992;20:1187–96. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33. Raxwal V, Shetler K, Morise A, et al. A simple treadmill score. Chest 119;1933–1940. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34. Morise AP, Diamond GA, Detrano R, et al. The effect of disease‐prevalence adjustments on the accuracy of a logistic prediction rule. Med Dec Making 1996;16:133–142. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35. Topol EJ, Nissen SE. Our preoccupation with coronary luminology: The dissociation between clinical and anglographic findings in ischemic heart disease. Circulation 1995;92:2333–2342. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36. Ellestad MH. The time has come to reexamine the gold standard when evaluating noninvasive testing. Am J Car diol 2001;87:100–101. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37. Briguori C, Anzuini A, Airoldi F, et al. Intravascular ultrasound criteria for the assessment of the functional significance of intermediate coronary artery stenoses and comparison with fractional flow reserve. Am J Cardiol 2001;87:136–141. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38. Wilson RF, Marcus ML, Christensen BV, et al. Accuracy of exercise electrocardiology in detecting physiologically significant coronary arterial lesions. Circulation 1991;83:412–421. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Annals of Noninvasive Electrocardiology are provided here courtesy of International Society for Holter and Noninvasive Electrocardiology, Inc. and Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

RESOURCES