Context Both attenuated heart rate recovery following exercise and the Duke
treadmill exercise score have been demonstrated to be independent predictors
of mortality, but their prognostic value relative to each other has not been
studied.
Objective To assess the associations among abnormal heart rate recovery, treadmill
exercise score, and death in patients referred specifically for exercise electrocardiography.
Design and Setting Prospective cohort study conducted in an academic medical center between
September 1990 and December 1997, with a median follow-up of 5.2 years.
Patients A total of 9454 consecutive patients (mean [SD] age, 53 [11] years;
78% male) who underwent symptom-limited exercise electrocardiographic testing.
Exclusion criteria included age younger than 30 years, history of heart failure
or valvular disease, pacemaker implantation, and uninterpretable electrocardiograms.
Main Outcome Measures All-cause mortality, as predicted by abnormal heart rate recovery, defined
as failure of heart rate to decrease by more than 12/min during the first
minute after peak exercise, and by treadmill exercise score, defined as (exercise
time) − (5 × maximum ST-segment deviation) − (4 ×
treadmill angina index).
Results Three hundred twelve deaths occurred in the cohort. Abnormal heart rate
recovery and intermediate- or high-risk treadmill exercise score were present
in 20% (n = 1852) and 21% (n = 1996) of patients, respectively. In univariate
analyses, death was predicted by both abnormal heart rate recovery (8% vs
2% in patients with normal heart rate recovery; hazard ratio [HR], 4.16; 95%
confidence interval [CI], 3.33-5.19; χ2 = 158; P<.001) and intermediate- or high-risk treadmill exercise score
(8% vs 2% in patients with low-risk scores; HR, 4.28; 95% CI, 3.43-5.35; χ2 = 164; P<.001). After adjusting for age,
sex, standard cardiovascular risk factors, medication use, and other potential
confounders, abnormal heart rate recovery remained predictive of death (among
the 8549 patients not taking β-blockers, adjusted HR, 2.13; 95% CI, 1.63-2.78; P<.001), as did intermediate- or high-risk treadmill
exercise score (adjusted HR, 1.49; 95% CI, 1.15-1.92; P = .002). There was no interaction between these 2 predictors.
Conclusions In this cohort of patients referred specifically for exercise electrocardiography,
both abnormal heart rate recovery and treadmill exercise score were independent
predictors of mortality. Heart rate recovery appears to provide additional
prognostic information to the established treadmill exercise score and should
be considered for routine incorporation into exercise test interpretation.
Attenuated heart rate recovery after exercise, which is thought to be
a marker of reduced parasympathetic activity,1,2
has been shown to be an independent predictor of mortality among patients
referred for stress nuclear testing3 and among
healthy adults enrolled in a population-based cohort study.4
The Duke treadmill exercise score, a composite of measures of functional capacity
and stress-induced ischemia, has been shown to predict mortality risk in different
patient subsets.5-7
It is unknown, however, whether or how heart rate recovery and the treadmill
exercise score relate to each other as prognostic measures. The purpose of
this study was to determine whether heart rate recovery adds to or interacts
with the treadmill exercise score as a predictor of all-cause mortality8 among patients referred for exercise electrocardiography
(ECG).
The study population consisted of consecutive patients referred specifically
for exercise ECG at the Cleveland Clinic Foundation between September 1990
and December 1997. Patients were excluded if they were younger than 30 years
old, had a history of heart failure, valvular or congenital disease, or had
pacemaker implantation. No patients had uninterpretable ST segments due to
left bundle-branch block, digoxin use, preexcitation syndrome, left ventricular
hypertrophy, or more than 1 mm of resting ST-segment depression, and no patients
were undergoing concurrent imaging studies. Patients were excluded if a valid
Social Security number was not available or if they lived outside the United
States. The protocol was approved by the foundation's institutional review
board.
Prior to exercise testing, each patient underwent a structured history
taking and medical record review to document symptoms, past medical history,
medication use, cardiac risk factors, and prior cardiac events and procedures.9 Patients were considered to be undergoing screening
tests if they had no symptoms suggestive of coronary heart disease and had
no notable cardiac history.
Resting tachycardia was considered present if the resting heart rate
was 100/min or greater. Hypertension was defined as systolic blood pressure
of 140 mm Hg or higher, diastolic blood pressure of 90 mm Hg or higher, or
use of antihypertensive medications.10 Diabetes
was defined as documented prescription of a diabetic diet or use of insulin
or other hypoglycemic medications. Prior coronary artery disease was considered
present if diagnosed by prior coronary angiography; if there was a documented
history of revascularization, myocardial infarction, or unstable angina; or
if pathologic Q waves were present in at least 2 contiguous ECG leads. Total
cholesterol values were routinely recorded if obtained within the previous
3 months and if they were 200 mg/dL (5.18 mmol/L) or higher. Hypercholesterolemia
was defined as a documented total cholesterol level of 200 mg/dL (5.18 mmol/L)
or higher or the use of lipid-lowering medications. Chronic obstructive pulmonary
disease was based on documentation in the medical record or use of inhaled
or oral bronchodilators. Patients were considered smokers if they regularly
smoked cigarettes within the past year.
To describe pretest risk of prognostically significant coronary artery
disease, we used a validated Mayo Clinic risk index in which 1 point was added
for each of the following: male sex, typical angina pectoris, prior myocardial
infarction by history or ECG, diabetes, and insulin use.11
All clinical and exercise data were recorded prospectively into a computerized
database.9 All data fields were standardized
with prespecified definitions; all personnel involved with administering tests
were formally trained how to complete data fields. For quality control, we
periodically performed random comparisons of exercise reports with chart reviews.
Patients underwent "symptom-limited" exercise treadmill testing using
primarily Bruce or modified Bruce protocols.12
Predicted peak heart rate was calculated as 220 − age. Patients were
encouraged to exercise until they experienced limiting symptoms, even if 85%
of maximum predicted heart rate was achieved. During each exercise stage and
recovery stage, symptoms (eg, chest discomfort, shortness of breath, fatigue,
dizziness, leg pain, and heart palpitations), blood pressure, heart rate,
cardiac rhythm, and exercise workload in metabolic equivalents (METs) were
recorded. An ischemic ST-segment response was defined as at least 1 mm of
horizontal or downsloping ST-segment depression 80 milliseconds after the
J point.
Following peak exercise, patients walked for a 2-minute cool-down period
at 1.5 mph at a 2.5% grade. Heart rate recovery was defined as the difference
between heart rate at peak exercise and 1 minute later. A cutoff value of
12/min or less was considered abnormal, based on a previous study from our
laboratory that involved a different cohort.3
Chronotropic incompetence was considered present if less than 80% of the patient's
heart rate reserve (calculated as 220 − age − resting heart rate)
was used at peak exercise.13,14
The Duke treadmill exercise score was calculated as previously described:
[duration of exercise (in minutes)] − [5 × maximal ST-segment
deviation during or after exercise (in millimeters)] − [4 × treadmill
angina index (0 = no angina, 1 = nonlimiting angina, 2 = exercise-limiting
angina)]. A treadmill exercise score of 5 or greater was considered low risk;
–10 to +4, intermediate risk; and less than –10, high risk.5-7
Patients were followed up for a median of 5.2 years (range for survivors,
1.4-8.7 years) through May 1999. The primary end point was all-cause mortality
as reported by the Social Security Death Index,15
which has been shown to be more specific and possibly less biased than the
National Death Index.16 Unlike "cardiac mortality,"
all-cause mortality is an objective and unbiased end point.8
The high specificity, exceeding 99%, of the Social Security Death Index
has been established.17 To assess the likely
sensitivity of this index in our population, we analyzed the outcomes of 873
patients who had undergone coronary artery bypass graft surgery and had subsequently
an exercise thallium study at our institution between 1990 and 1993.18 Vital status was ascertained by contacting all patients
or next of kin through 1998. There were 102 confirmed deaths linked to a Social
Security number; of these, the Social Security Death Index correctly identified
the decedent status of 99 (sensitivity, 97%, 95% confidence interval [CI],
91%-99%).
The univariate associations of abnormal heart rate recovery, an intermediate-
or high-risk treadmill exercise score, chronotropic incompetence, and other
potential predictors of death were assessed using Kaplan-Meier curves19 and Cox proportional hazards models.20
Analyses of heart rate recovery and treadmill exercise score as continuous
variables included tests of logarithmically transformed values. The Cox proportional
hazards assumption was confirmed by examination of log (−log[survival])
curves. Additional analyses were performed to assess potential interactions
with certain prespecified candidate covariates, including age, sex, use of β-blockers,
use of calcium channel antagonists, smoking, hypertension, diabetes, known
coronary artery disease, chronotropic incompetence, testing for screening,
and abnormal treadmill exercise score. If an interaction was found, specific
terms describing the concurrent presence of factors were defined such that
separate hazard ratios could be estimated according to the presence of the
effect-modifying factor.
An additional set of Cox analyses was performed to confirm the validity
of the estimates for the model in which all exercise variables were considered
in dichotomous terms. A series of bootstrap resamplings were performed.21,22 First, 250 resampling analyses were
done for variable selection, using P = .10 for model
entry and P≤.05 for retention. Second, those variables
that were still retained in at least half the models were considered in 1000
fixed variable resamplings.
All analyses were performed using SAS version 6.12 software (SAS Inc,
Cary, NC). Bootstrapping was performed using SAS macros written by one of
us (E.H.B.; available on request).
Baseline and Exercise Characteristics
The study cohort consisted of 9454 patients. The median value of heart
rate recovery was 19/min, with 25th and 75th percentile values of 14/min and
24/min, respectively. Twenty percent of the population (n = 1852) had abnormal
heart rate recovery, and 21% (n = 1996) had an intermediate- to high-risk
treadmill exercise score. Only 25 patients (<1%) had a high-risk treadmill
exercise score, so they were considered together with patients with an intermediate
score. There were 3565 potentially eligible patients who either did not have
valid Social Security numbers recorded or lived outside the United States.
Those patients had nearly identical distributions of age, functional capacity,
ST-segment responses, and heart rate recovery as study patients.
Baseline characteristics of the study population are shown in Table 1. Patients with abnormal heart rate
recovery had more adverse risk profiles. Cholesterol data were available in
about 25% of patients, irrespective of heart rate recovery; there was no association
between heart rate recovery and cholesterol level.
Exercise characteristics according to heart rate recovery are summarized
in Table 2. Patients with abnormal
heart rate recovery had lower functional capacity and lower peak heart rates,
and they used less of their heart rate reserve at peak exercise. The 2 groups
(abnormal and normal heart rate recovery) were similar with regard to measured
ST-segment depression, ST-segment slope interpretation, and non–test-limiting
angina.
Heart Rate Recovery and Mortality
During a median follow-up of 5.2 years, there were 312 deaths. The presence
of abnormal heart rate recovery was strongly associated with death (8% vs
2% in patients with normal heart rate recovery; hazard ratio [HR], 4.16; 95%
CI, 3.33-5.19; χ2 = 158, P<.001).
Other univariate predictors of mortality included resting tachycardia (9%
vs 3% in patients without tachycardia; HR, 2.76; 95% CI, 1.95-3.91; χ2 = 33, P<.001), an intermediate- or high-risk
treadmill exercise score (8% vs 2% in patients with low-risk scores; HR, 4.28;
95% CI, 3.43-5.35; χ2 = 164, P<.001),
and chronotropic incompetence (9% vs 2% in patients without chronotropic incompetence;
HR, 4.68; 95% CI, 3.74-5.84; χ2 = 184, P<.001).
Stratified analyses relating normal and abnormal values for heart rate
recovery to death among prespecified subgroups are shown in Table 3. Abnormal heart rate recovery was associated with death
in all subgroups except for patients taking β-blockers. Abnormal heart
rate recovery provided additive prognostic information to the treadmill exercise
score, with no interaction noted (Table
3 and Figure 1).
Heart rate recovery also was predictive of mortality when considered
as a continuous variable. Heart rate recovery values less than 10/min to 12/min
were associated with increasing risk of death (Figure 2).
Multivariate Cox Regression Analyses
In multivariate proportional hazards analyses, adjusting for potential
confounders (listed in the footnote to Table 4), abnormal heart rate recovery was predictive of death.
There were no interactions noted between heart rate recovery and either the
treadmill exercise score or chronotropic incompetence; however, a significant
interaction was noted such that heart rate recovery was not predictive of
death among patients taking β-blockers. An intermediate- to high-risk
treadmill exercise score and chronotropic incompetence were also predictive
of mortality. There was no interaction noted between the treadmill exercise
score and β-blocker use. When the 25 patients with an exercise treadmill
score lower than −10 were excluded, the results were essentially unchanged.
When heart rate recovery and the exercise treadmill score were analyzed
as continuous variables, similar results were noted; model fit was improved
with logarithmic transformation of heart rate recovery, but not of treadmill
exercise score. When the 3 components of the treadmill exercise score were
analyzed separately, functional capacity was predictive of death (for each
2.5-MET decrease: adjusted HR, 1.57; 95% CI, 1.33-1.85; P<.001), but ST-segment changes (for each additional 1 mm of ST-segment
depression: adjusted HR, 1.09; 95% CI, 0.93-1.29; P
= .30) and exercise-induced angina (adjusted HR, 1.14; 95% CI, 0.69-1.89; P = .62) were not. In this model, the association between
heart rate recovery and death was similar to the primary model shown in Table 4.
Bootstrap Resampling Analyses
In 250 bootstrap resamplings, the only variables that entered at least
50% of models were age (100%), chronotropic incompetence (97%), resting tachycardia
(97%), heart rate recovery (96%), current or recent smoking (96%), the treadmill
exercise score (79%), sex (76%), and use of vasodilators (74%). No interaction
term, including the β-blocker interaction term, entered even 50% of models.
After 1000 subsequent fixed-model resamplings, abnormal heart rate recovery
was still predictive of death (adjusted HR, 1.77; 95% CI, 1.39-2.28), as was
chronotropic incompetence (adjusted HR, 2.13; 95% CI, 1.62-2.72) and a high-
or intermediate-risk treadmill exercise score (adjusted HR, 1.52; 95% CI,
1.16-2.03).
Predictors of Death After Screening Exercise Tests
Among 7095 patients who were referred for screening exercise tests,
179 (3%) died during 5 years of follow-up. Abnormal heart rate recovery predicted
death just as well in this group as among nonscreening patients (Table 3). Abnormal heart rate recovery
as an isolated finding was noted in 709 patients (10%), among whom 28 (4%)
died (age- and sex-adjusted HR, 2.73; 95% CI, 1.71-4.34; P<.001). An additional 469 patients (7%) had abnormal heart rate
recovery along with either chronotropic incompetence or a high- or intermediate-risk
treadmill exercise score; 50 (11%) of these patients died (adjusted HR, 4.43;
95% CI, 2.88-6.81; P<.001).
Heart Rate Recovery, Treadmill Exercise Score, and Mortality in Women
Of 2123 women, 68 (3%) died. Heart rate recovery was associated with
death in women, but there was no sex interaction noted (Table 3). Abnormal treadmill exercise score also was predictive
of death (6% vs 2%; HR, 4.43; 95% CI, 2.69-7.29; P<.001).
In a multivariate model independent predictors of mortality included abnormal
heart rate recovery (adjusted HR, 2.73; 95% CI, 1.66-4.50; P<.001), age (for each 10 years, adjusted HR, 1.96; 95% CI, 1.54-2.48; P<.001), and Mayo risk index (for each additional risk
factor, adjusted HR, 1.60; 95% CI, 1.20-2.13; P =
.001). The treadmill exercise score was not independently predictive.
Achievement of Maximal Predicted Heart Rate
There were 4060 patients (43%) who achieved 100% or more of their age-predicted
maximum heart rate. Among these, 70 patients (2%) died; abnormal heart rate
recovery was associated with death (5% vs 1%; HR, 4.26; 95% CI, 2.65-6.68; P<.001). In a multivariate model the only independent
predictors of mortality were age (for each 10 years, adjusted HR, 3.65; 95%
CI, 2.82-4.73; P<.001) and abnormal heart rate
recovery (adjusted HR, 2.30; 95% CI, 1.41-3.77; P<.001);
the treadmill exercise score was not independently predictive.
Among patients referred for exercise ECG, heart rate recovery was a
strong and independent predictor of all-cause mortality. Furthermore, heart
rate recovery gave additional prognostic information over and above the Duke
treadmill exercise score.
Multiple exercise variables obtained during stress testing have been
assessed for prognostic value.5,23-29
The treadmill exercise score is an established exercise assessment that considers
the duration of exercise, ST-segment deviation, and angina during exercise.5-7 Exercise heart rate
response variables, specifically heart rate recovery and chronotropic incompetence,
have been shown to have prognostic value.3,4,14,30-32
We have demonstrated that heart rate recovery was a predictor of mortality
in a moderate-risk population undergoing symptom-limited exercise thallium
testing.3 We also have found heart rate recovery
to be predictive of death among healthy individuals in a population-based
cohort study undergoing submaximal exercise testing.4
The current study extends previous findings in several respects. First,
it confirms the prognostic value of heart rate recovery as a strong and independent
predictor of mortality in a cohort of patients referred specifically for exercise
ECG; our cohort is likely to be similar to patients seen in general medical
practice. Of note, despite the very different risk profile of the population
studied, the association between the level of heart rate recovery, assessed
as a continuous variable (Figure 2),
and risk of death was similar to that of the higher-risk population studied
previously.3 When heart rate recovery decreases
to less than 10/min to 12/min, risk of death increases markedly.
Second, heart rate recovery, along with treadmill exercise score and
chronotropic response, were found to predict mortality among adults undergoing
screening exercise testing, which is a controversial practice.33
Our study suggests that by using heart rate response and treadmill exercise
score, exercise tests can be used as a powerful marker of risk even in healthy
patients. In fact, there was no difference in the predictive properties of
heart rate recovery in the screening and symptomatic groups.
Third, heart rate recovery further risk-stratified patients over and
above the treadmill exercise score. Patients with intermediate- to high-risk
treadmill exercise scores were found to have even higher mortality if abnormal
heart rate recovery was also present (Figure
1). Patients with both low-risk treadmill exercise scores and normal
heart rate recovery had very low risk of death.
We found that heart rate recovery was not predictive of mortality among
patients taking β-blockers, which contrasts with our previous observation
in a different, higher-risk population.3 This
observation must be interpreted with caution given the small number of events
that occurred among patients taking β-blockers and the failure of the β-blocker
interaction term to be validated in a rigorous bootstrap analysis.
The mechanisms of adverse outcome associated with abnormal heart rate
recovery are unclear. Parasympathetic activation is thought to be the underlying
mechanism of heart rate recovery after exercise,1,2
and abnormalities in parasympathetic activation have been suggested as the
link to mortality.3 Together, heart rate recovery
and treadmill exercise score appear to be complementary, strengthening the
predictive value of exercise stress testing.
Our current study has several limitations. It was an observational,
single-center experience, and it is not known if heart rate recovery is a
modifiable risk factor. In addition, we had incomplete data on lipid abnormalities;
only total cholesterol values were available for those patients who had blood
samples drawn within 3 months of exercise testing and high-density lipoprotein
cholesterol values were not recorded. Thus, we could not use the Framingham
coronary heart disease index34 to control for
baseline risk. Nonetheless, we found little if any association between lipid
abnormalities and heart rate recovery. Previously we found no association
between lipid abnormalities and heart rate recovery,4
so it is unlikely that the association between heart rate recovery and mortality
was materially confounded by lipid disorders.
Heart rate recovery was a strong and independent predictor of mortality
among patients referred for exercise ECG. Heart rate recovery provides additional
prognostic information to the established treadmill exercise score and should
be considered for routine incorporation into exercise test interpretation.
1.Arai Y, Saul JP, Albrecht P.
et al. Modulation of cardiac autonomic activity during and immediately after
exercise.
Am J Physiol.1989;256:H132-H141.Google Scholar 2.Imai K, Sato H, Hori M.
et al. Vagally mediated heart rate recovery after exercise is accelerated
in athletes but blunted in patients with chronic heart failure.
J Am Coll Cardiol.1994;24:1529-1535.Google Scholar 3.Cole CR, Blackstone EH, Pashkow FJ, Snader CE, Lauer MS. Heart-rate recovery immediately after exercise as a predictor of mortality.
N Engl J Med.1999;341:1351-1357.Google Scholar 4.Cole CR, Foody JM, Blackstone EH, Lauer MS. Heart rate recovery after submaximal exercise testing as a predictor
of mortality in a cardiovascularly healthy cohort.
Ann Intern Med.2000;132:552-555.Google Scholar 5.Mark DB, Hlatky MA, Harrell Jr FE, Lee KL, Califf RM, Pryor DB. Exercise treadmill score for predicting prognosis in coronary artery
disease.
Ann Intern Med.1987;106:793-800.Google Scholar 6.Mark DB, Shaw L, Harrell Jr FE.
et al. Prognostic value of a treadmill exercise score in outpatients with
suspected coronary artery disease.
N Engl J Med.1991;325:849-853.Google Scholar 7.Kwok JM, Miller TD, Christian TF, Hodge DO, Gibbons RJ. Prognostic value of a treadmill exercise score in symptomatic patients
with nonspecific ST-T abnormalities on resting ECG.
JAMA.1999;282:1047-1053.Google Scholar 8.Lauer MS, Blackstone EH, Young JB, Topol EJ. Cause of death in clinical research: time for a reassessment?
J Am Coll Cardiol.1999;34:618-620.Google Scholar 9.Snader CE, Marwick TH, Pashkow FJ, Harvey SA, Thomas JD, Lauer MS. Importance of estimated functional capacity as a predictor of all-cause
mortality among patients referred for exercise thallium single-photon emission
computed tomography: report of 3,400 patients from a single center.
J Am Coll Cardiol.1997;30:641-648.Google Scholar 10. The fifth report of the Joint National Committee on Detection, Evaluation,
and Treatment of High Blood Pressure (JNC V).
Arch Intern Med.1993;153:154-183.Google Scholar 11.Hubbard BL, Gibbons RJ, Lapeyre III AC, Zinsmeister AR, Clements IP. Identification of severe coronary artery disease using simple clinical
parameters.
Arch Intern Med.1992;152:309-312.Google Scholar 12.Fletcher GF, Balady G, Froelicher VF, Hartley LH, Haskell WL, Pollock ML. Exercise standards: a statement for healthcare professionals from the
American Heart Association.
Circulation.1995;91:580-615.Google Scholar 13.Wilkoff BL, Miller RE. Exercise testing for chronotropic assessment.
Cardiol Clin.1992;10:705-717.Google Scholar 14.Lauer MS, Francis GS, Okin PM, Pashkow FJ, Snader CE, Marwick TH. Impaired chronotropic response to exercise stress testing as a predictor
of mortality.
JAMA.1999;281:524-529.Google Scholar 15.Curb JD, Ford CE, Pressel S, Palmer M, Babcock C, Hawkins CM. Ascertainment of vital status through the National Death Index and
the Social Security Administration.
Am J Epidemiol.1985;121:754-766.Google Scholar 16.Boyle CA, Decoufle P. National sources of vital status information: extent of coverage and
possible selectivity in reporting.
Am J Epidemiol.1990;131:160-168.Google Scholar 17.Newman TB, Brown AN. Use of commercial record linkage software and vital statistics to identify
patient deaths.
J Am Med Inform Assoc.1997;4:233-237.Google Scholar 18.Lauer MS, Lytle B, Pashkow F, Snader CE, Marwick TH. Prediction of death and myocardial infarction by screening with exercise-thallium
testing after coronary-artery-bypass grafting.
Lancet.1998;351:615-622.Google Scholar 19.Kaplan E, Meier P. Nonparametric estimation from incomplete observations.
J Am Stat Soc.1958;53:457-481.Google Scholar 20.Cox D. Regression models and life tables.
J R Stat Soc B.1972;34:187-220.Google Scholar 21.Chen CH, George SL. The bootstrap and identification of prognostic factors via Cox's proportional
hazards regression model.
Stat Med.1985;4:39-46.Google Scholar 22.Collett D, Stepniewska K. Some practical issues in binary data analysis.
Stat Med.1999;18:2209-2221.Google Scholar 23.Brunelli C, Cristofani R, L'Abbate A. Long-term survival in medically treated patients with ischaemic heart
disease and prognostic importance of clinical and electrocardiographic data
(the Italian CNR Multicentre Prospective Study OD1).
Eur Heart J.1989;10:292-303.Google Scholar 24.Gohlke H, Samek L, Betz P, Roskamm H. Exercise testing provides additional prognostic information in angiographically
defined subgroups of patients with coronary artery disease.
Circulation.1983;68:979-985.Google Scholar 25.Hammermeister KE, DeRouen TA, Dodge HT. Variables predictive of survival in patients with coronary disease:
selection by univariate and multivariate analyses from the clinical, electrocardiographic,
exercise, arteriographic, and quantitative angiographic evaluations.
Circulation.1979;59:421-430.Google Scholar 26.Ladenheim ML, Kotler TS, Pollock BH, Berman DS, Diamond GA. Incremental prognostic power of clinical history, exercise electrocardiography
and myocardial perfusion scintigraphy in suspected coronary artery disease.
Am J Cardiol.1987;59:270-277.Google Scholar 27.Luwaert RJ, Melin JA, Brohet CR.
et al. Non-invasive data provide independent prognostic information in patients
with chest pain without previous myocardial infarction: findings in male patients
who have had cardiac catheterization.
Eur Heart J.1988;9:418-426.Google Scholar 28.Morrow K, Morris CK, Froelicher VF.
et al. Prediction of cardiovascular death in men undergoing noninvasive evaluation
for coronary artery disease.
Ann Intern Med.1993;118:689-695.Google Scholar 29.Weiner DA, Ryan TJ, McCabe CH.
et al. Prognostic importance of a clinical profile and exercise test in medically
treated patients with coronary artery disease.
J Am Coll Cardiol.1984;3:772-779.Google Scholar 30.Lauer MS, Okin PM, Larson MG, Evans JC, Levy D. Impaired heart rate response to graded exercise: prognostic implications
of chronotropic incompetence in the Framingham Heart Study.
Circulation.1996;93:1520-1526.Google Scholar 31.Lauer MS, Pashkow FJ, Larson MG, Levy D. Association of cigarette smoking with chronotropic incompetence and
prognosis in the Framingham Heart Study.
Circulation.1997;96:897-903.Google Scholar 32.Lauer MS, Mehta R, Pashkow FJ, Okin PM, Lee K, Marwick TH. Association of chronotropic incompetence with echocardiographic ischemia
and prognosis.
J Am Coll Cardiol.1998;32:1280-1286.Google Scholar 33.Pilote L, Pashkow F, Thomas JD.
et al. Clinical yield and cost of exercise treadmill testing to screen for
coronary artery disease in asymptomatic adults.
Am J Cardiol.1998;81:219-224.Google Scholar 34.Wilson PW, D'Agostino RB, Levy D, Belanger AM, Silbershatz H, Kannel WB. Prediction of coronary heart disease using risk factor categories.
Circulation.1998;97:1837-1847.Google Scholar