This Article  • Full text  • PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Related article  • Similar articles in this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings.

I read with interest the article on electron-beam computed tomography (EBCT) in the diagnosis of coronary artery disease (CAD) by Nallamothu et al.¹ I was particularly amused by the authors' concluding remark that "EBCT appears to be reasonably accurate at detecting obstructive CAD in patients undergoing coronary angiography, with sensitivity and specificity comparable to those reported for traditional exercise stress testing"¹ (italics mine). But the authors did not mention the relative costs of EBCT and traditional exercise stress testing; EBCT costs much more than the traditional exercise stress testing.

The recent American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) expert consensus document on EBCT for the diagnosis and prognosis of CAD did not support the widespread clinical use of EBCT for the diagnosis and prognosis of CAD.² One reason for the lack of support for the use of EBCT has been related to a new standard for medical evidence that . . . [Full Text of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?

RELATED ARTICLE

Electron-Beam Computed Tomography in the Diagnosis of Coronary Artery Disease: A Meta-analysis
Brahmajee K. Nallamothu, Sanjay Saint, Lawrence F. Bielak, Seema S. Sonnad, Patricia A. Peyser, Melvyn Rubenfire, and A. Mark Fendrick
Arch Intern Med. 2001;161(6):833-838.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT