2012
DOI: 10.1111/j.1747-0803.2012.00702.x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Limited Utility of Exercise Stress Tests in the Evaluation of Children with Chest Pain

Abstract: In children referred to pediatric cardiology clinic for chest pain, EST has a low yield in identifying cardiac abnormalities.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
11
0

Year Published

2013
2013
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5
4

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 17 publications
(13 citation statements)
references
References 13 publications
1
11
0
Order By: Relevance
“…3,4,11 EST is extremely low yield in this population, as evidenced by 3 recent studies of more than 600 pediatric patients with chest pain in whom EST detected no cardiac disorders. 2,3,18 Ambulatory ECG also has extremely low yield in this population and has no role in evaluating chest pain in the absence of palpitations or syncope. 3,19 Echocardiography is also low yield and is considerably more likely to uncover incidental findings than the etiology of chest pain, 3,4 but nonetheless it remains the modality of choice for patients with concerning history, examination, or ECG findings given its ability to diagnosis most of the serious cardiac conditions that can present with chest pain, including anomalous coronary artery origin, cardiomyopathies, pulmonary HTN, pericardial effusion due to pericarditis, and left ventricular outflow tract obstruction.…”
Section: Chest Painmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…3,4,11 EST is extremely low yield in this population, as evidenced by 3 recent studies of more than 600 pediatric patients with chest pain in whom EST detected no cardiac disorders. 2,3,18 Ambulatory ECG also has extremely low yield in this population and has no role in evaluating chest pain in the absence of palpitations or syncope. 3,19 Echocardiography is also low yield and is considerably more likely to uncover incidental findings than the etiology of chest pain, 3,4 but nonetheless it remains the modality of choice for patients with concerning history, examination, or ECG findings given its ability to diagnosis most of the serious cardiac conditions that can present with chest pain, including anomalous coronary artery origin, cardiomyopathies, pulmonary HTN, pericardial effusion due to pericarditis, and left ventricular outflow tract obstruction.…”
Section: Chest Painmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…23 In this setting, objective testing to elicit ischemic changes and especially to evaluate the severity of a given case of ACAOS has not been studied prospectively in large series, mainly because the initial general experience with this approach has been disappointing. 24 Electrocardiographic, nuclear or cardiac MRI, and echocardiographic stress testing for myocardial ischemic manifestations in the clinical laboratory setting have frustrated clinicians by producing both low numbers of true-positive and relatively high numbers of false-positive results. In fact, some CAAs have been fortuitous findings associated with (falsely) positive stress test results (which are reported to constitute 15-30% of the reasons for diagnostic heart catheterization).…”
Section: Clinical Evaluation: Symptoms and Objective Signs Of Ischemiamentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Exercise stress test dropped drastically from pre‐SCAMP use, though was not eliminated as predicted. Recent and prior studies continue to show that exercise stress test does not detect cardiac pathology in young people complaining of chest pain . In the study by Basso et al, even in elite athletes who died of coronary anomalies, pre‐mortem stress testing did not demonstrate ischemia …”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 96%
“…An echocardiogram is the test of choice for further evaluation of patients with noteworthy findings. Additional testing, including exercise stress test and rhythm monitoring, is not recommended by the SCAMP given the low yield of positive findings related to chest pain . Clinicians using the SCAMP are unhindered in their medical choices and are only asked to provide reasoning if they choose to divert from the algorithm.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%