Related Experiment Video
Updated: Sep 17, 2026

Testing Acetylcholine Followed by Adenosine for Invasive Diagnosis of Coronary Vasomotor Disorders
Published on: February 3, 2021
ESC vs. ACC/AHA Guidelines for Non-Invasive Imaging in Chronic Coronary Disease: Guideline Discordance, Gaps, and
Anas Bader1, Adham Elsherbini2, Kevin R An3,4
1School of Medicine, University College Dublin, Belfield, Dublin, Ireland.
Aims:
Chronic coronary disease remains a complex condition for which non-invasive imaging is central to diagnosis, risk stratification, follow-up, and management. An understanding of contemporary clinical practice guidelines is critical to appropriate test selection, avoidance of low-value testing, and individualized care. This review compares the contemporary European Society of Cardiology guidelines and the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association guidelines regarding non-invasive imaging for chronic coronary disease/syndromes.
Methods And Results:
The European and American guidelines are broadly concordant in supporting clinical likelihood assessment before testing, selective use of coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) and functional imaging, and avoidance of routine surveillance testing in clinically stable patients. However, several distinctions emerge. First, the European guideline provides a more prescriptive diagnostic algorithm for suspected chronic coronary syndromes, using pre-test likelihood thresholds to guide deferral of testing, CCTA, functional imaging, and invasive angiography, whereas the American guideline is more focused on established chronic coronary disease, symptom change, functional decline, and whether testing will alter management. Second, the European guideline assigns a stronger early role to CCTA, particularly in low-to-moderate likelihood patients, and provides more high-risk anatomic and ischemic imaging thresholds. Third, the guidelines differ in the positioning of exercise electrocardiography and in the diagnostic evaluation of angina or ischemia with non-obstructive coronary arteries, microvascular angina, and vasospastic angina.
Conclusion:
The latest ESC guideline remains more diagnosis-forward and algorithmic, whereas the ACC/AHA guideline is more management-forward and symptom-driven. These differences may influence imaging selection, repeat testing, and evaluation of non-obstructive coronary syndromes.
Related Concept Videos
Acute Coronary Syndrome III: Diagnostic Studies
Coronary Artery Disease V: Interprofessional Care
Acute Coronary Syndrome II: Pathophysiology and Clinical Manifestations
Imaging Studies for Cardiovascular System VI: Calcium -Scoring CT
Imaging Studies for Cardiovascular System V: CT
Coronary Artery Disease IV: Preventive Measures

