Comparison of exercise electrocardiography and magnetocardiography for detection of coronary artery disease using ST-segment fluctuation score
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Exercise electrocardiography (ECG) is frequently used as a diagnostic measure in patients with suspected coronary artery disease (CAD). However, it has low sensitivity for the detection of CAD. Magnetocardiography (MCG) has been proposed as an alternative tool to accurately diagnose CAD. OBJECTIVE: To date, a direct comparison of MCG to ECG has not been performed. This study sought to compare them for predicting the presence of significantly obstructive CAD. METHODS: The patients with chest pain or other symptoms suggestive of CAD were enrolled in the analysis. All the patients underwent a clinical evaluation, exercise ECG, MCG test, and coronary angiography (CA). CAD was defined as stenosis ≥70% in at least one major coronary artery on quantitative analysis of CA. RESULTS: We prospectively enrolled 202 consecutive patients who suggested CAD. The prevalence of CAD on CA was 39.1%. Sensitivity and accuracy for CAD diagnosis was higher for MCG compared with exercise ECG (sensitivities 68.4% and 40.5%, p <0.001, specificities 95.1% and 91.1%, p = 0.267, and accuracies 84.7% and 71.3%, p <0.001, respectively). There was no incremental diagnostic value of combined MCG and ECG to detect coronary artery disease (p = 0.357). CONCLUSIONS: For the patients with intermediate to high risk of CAD, MCG exercise test provides better diagnostic accuracy for the detection of relevant obstruction of the epicardial coronaries when directly compared to exercise ECG.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Few studies have been reported on movable MCG systems.
“However, despite the great clinical significance of movable MCG systems, few studies have been reported (14, 15, 23–27).”
From A movable unshielded magnetocardiography system (2023) · cites this paper as [26]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 33 · Cited by 20
- Authors
- Shin, E.-S., Chung, J.-H., Park, S. G., Saleh, A., Lam, Y.-Y., Bhak, J., Jung, F., Morita, S., & Brachmann, J.
- Affiliations
- Ulsan University Hospital (KR)
- Ulsan National Institute of Science and Technology (KR)
- Klinikum Coburg (DE)
- Chinese University of Hong Kong (HK)
- Berlin-Brandenburger Centrum für Regenerative Therapien (DE)
- Charité – Universitätsmedizin Berlin (DE)
- Corresponding author
- Shin, Eun-Seok
- ORCID
- Venue
- Clinical Hemorheology and Microcirculation
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2019-12-17
- Volume
- 73
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 283-291
- ISSN
- 1386-0291 (ISSN-L)
- 1875-8622
- OpenAlex
- W2912825932
- Cited by
- 20
- References
- 33
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 4 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 1
- FWCI
- 0.33
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Clinical Hemorheology and Microcirculation (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Cardiac Imaging and Diagnostics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › ECG Monitoring and Analysis
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Acute Myocardial Infarction Research
- Keywords
- magnetocardiography, exercise electrocardiography, coronary artery disease, diagnostic accuracy, coronary artery stenosis, chest pain, coronary angiography, exercise stress testing
- MeSH terms
- Aged, Coronary Artery Disease, Electrocardiography, Exercise Test, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Prospective Studies, Coronary Angiography, Magnetocardiography
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review