Yingmei Li1, Zaiqian Che2, Weiwei Quan3, Rong Yuan3, Yue Shen3, Zongjun Liu4, Weiqing Wang4, Huigen Jin4, Guoping Lu3. 1. Department of Geratology, Putuo Hospital, Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine Shanghai 200062, China. 2. Department of Emergency, Ruijin Hospital North, Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine Shanghai 200025, China. 3. Department of Cardiology, Ruijin Hospital, Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine Shanghai 200025, China. 4. Department of Cardiology, Putuo Hospital, Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine Shanghai 200062, China.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the diagnostic outcomes of magnetocardiography (MCG) on the patients with coronary artery disease and compared the outcomes between MCG, ECG and Echocardiography. METHODS: MCG measurements were performed on 101 patients with coronary artery disease and 116 healthy volunteers with a seven-channel magnetocardiographic system (MCG7, SQUID AG, Germany) installed in an unshielded room. CAD was diagnosed when stenosis ≥ 70% in ≥ 1 vessel. Three quantitative indicators were analyzed, R-max/T-max ratio, R value and á average angle. RESULTS: R-max/T-max ratio of CAD group (6.30 ± 4.07) was much higher than that of healthy group (3.73 ± 1.41) (P < 0.001), R value of CAD group (69.16 ± 27.87)% was significantly higher than that of healthy group (34.96 ± 19.09)% (P < 0.001), á average angle of CAD group (221.46° ± 64.53°) was higher than that of healthy group (24.32° ± 20.70°) (P < 0.01). In 75 of 101 CAD patients (74.26%), MCG had abnormal mapping patterns. The resting ECG examination showed ischemic changes, such as abnormal Q waves and ST-T change in 49 patients (48.51%). Echocardiography revealed abnormal left ventricular wall motion and asynergy in 46 patients (45.54%). Thus, the diagnostic outcomes of MCG for the patients with CAD were much significant than those of ECG and echocardiography (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Our result showed that resting MCG under condition of an advanced data analysis has higher diagnostic outcomes and is superior to ECG or echocardiography for patients with CAD. MCG can detect ST-segment displacement caused by ischemic myocardium, thus helpful in diagnosing coronary artery disease early.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the diagnostic outcomes of magnetocardiography (MCG) on the patients with coronary artery disease and compared the outcomes between MCG, ECG and Echocardiography. METHODS: MCG measurements were performed on 101 patients with coronary artery disease and 116 healthy volunteers with a seven-channel magnetocardiographic system (MCG7, SQUID AG, Germany) installed in an unshielded room. CAD was diagnosed when stenosis ≥ 70% in ≥ 1 vessel. Three quantitative indicators were analyzed, R-max/T-max ratio, R value and á average angle. RESULTS: R-max/T-max ratio of CAD group (6.30 ± 4.07) was much higher than that of healthy group (3.73 ± 1.41) (P < 0.001), R value of CAD group (69.16 ± 27.87)% was significantly higher than that of healthy group (34.96 ± 19.09)% (P < 0.001), á average angle of CAD group (221.46° ± 64.53°) was higher than that of healthy group (24.32° ± 20.70°) (P < 0.01). In 75 of 101 CAD patients (74.26%), MCG had abnormal mapping patterns. The resting ECG examination showed ischemic changes, such as abnormal Q waves and ST-T change in 49 patients (48.51%). Echocardiography revealed abnormal left ventricular wall motion and asynergy in 46 patients (45.54%). Thus, the diagnostic outcomes of MCG for the patients with CAD were much significant than those of ECG and echocardiography (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Our result showed that resting MCG under condition of an advanced data analysis has higher diagnostic outcomes and is superior to ECG or echocardiography for patients with CAD. MCG can detect ST-segment displacement caused by ischemic myocardium, thus helpful in diagnosing coronary artery disease early.
Entities:
Keywords:
Magnetocardiography (MCG); coronary artery disease (CAD); current density distribution map (CDDM); echocardiography; electrocardiogram (ECG); magnetic field map (MFM)
Authors: A Kandori; H Kanzaki; K Miyatake; S Hashimoto; S Itoh; N Tanaka; T Miyashita; K Tsukada Journal: Med Biol Eng Comput Date: 2001-01 Impact factor: 2.602
Authors: Helena Hänninen; Panu Takala; Petri Korhonen; Lasse Oikarinen; Markku Mäkijärvi; Jukka Nenonen; Toivo Katila; Lauri Toivonen Journal: Ann Med Date: 2002 Impact factor: 4.709
Authors: Margarita E Pena; Claire L Pearson; Marc P Goulet; Viviane M Kazan; Alexandra L DeRita; Susan M Szpunar; Robert B Dunne Journal: Int J Cardiol Heart Vasc Date: 2020-01-08