 |
|
COMMENTS AND OPINIONS
The Hurdles of Translating a Single-Center Observation Into Practice
Luca Testa, PhD;
Ravinay Bhindi, MD, PhD;
Adrian Banning, MD, FESC
|
|
| Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings. |
|
|
|
We have carefully read the article by Peterson et al1 focusing on the prognostic value of the exercise treadmill test with regard to future major adverse events. They concluded that an exercise capacity less than predicted2-3 has an independent impact on the future risk of cardiac events and overall mortality. Some points with regard to the baseline characteristics of the population and the reliability of the predictive model deserve further elucidation.
First, the clinical indications for an exercise treadmill test included preoperative screening, risk stratification, and "other reasons." Together, these accounted for more than 25% of the study population (ie, approximately 2430 patients). The remaining population was referred with the diagnosis of chest pain. This heterogeneity profoundly alters the risk of future cardiac events during the follow-up period. No mention was made about the reason for "preoperative screening" nor . . . [Full Text of this Article]
AUTHOR INFORMATION
RELATED LETTER
The Hurdles of Translating a Single-Center Observation Into Practice—Reply
Pamela N. Peterson and Frederick A. Masoudi
Arch Intern Med. 2008;168(15):1720.
EXTRACT
| FULL TEXT
RELATED ARTICLE
Association of Exercise Capacity on Treadmill With Future Cardiac Events in Patients Referred for Exercise Testing
Pamela N. Peterson, David J. Magid, Colleen Ross, P. Michael Ho, John S. Rumsfeld, Michael S. Lauer, Ella E. Lyons, Scott S. Smith, and Frederick A. Masoudi
Arch Intern Med. 2008;168(2):174-179.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
|
