高级检索
当前位置: 首页 > 详情页

Comparison of magnetocardiography and coronary computed tomographic angiography for detection of coronary artery stenosis and the influence of calcium

文献详情

资源类型:
WOS体系:
Pubmed体系:

收录情况: ◇ SCIE

机构: [1]Capital Med Univ, Beijing Anzhen Hosp, Dept Cardiol, Beijing, Peoples R China [2]Capital Med Univ, Beijing Tongren Hosp, Beijing, Peoples R China [3]Beihang Univ, Sch Instrumentat & Optoelect Engn, Beijing, Peoples R China [4]Capital Med Univ, Beijing Friendship Hosp, Dept Radiol, Beijing, Peoples R China [5]Capital Med Univ, Beijing Anzhen Hosp, Dept Cardiac Surg, Beijing, Peoples R China
出处:
ISSN:

关键词: Coronary artery disease Coronary artery calcium score Magnetocardiography Coronary computed tomography angiography

摘要:
ObjectivesThis study aimed to compare the diagnostic performance of magnetocardiography (MCG) and coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) in detecting coronary artery stenosis in relation to coronary calcification.MethodsA total of 587 patients who underwent invasive coronary angiography (ICA) with both CCTA and MCG between September 1, 2022, and August 31, 2023, were included. The patients were divided into three subgroups based on their coronary artery calcium score (CACS), namely less than 100, 100-400, and 400 and above, as determined by the Agatston score. The diagnostic sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC) of MCG, CCTA, and the combined diagnostic model (CCTA + MCG) were compared across all CACS subgroups.ResultsAccording to ICA, 481 out of 587 patients (81.94%) had ischemia. The area under the ROC curve (AUC) of MCG for detecting ischemia was 0.80, with a sensitivity of 74.64% and specificity of 84.91% for all patients. In the different CACS subgroups, the diagnostic specificity of CCTA notably decreased (78.57% vs 24.13% vs 17.46%), while that of MCG remained stable (92.86% vs 86.21% vs 82.54%). The diagnostic accuracy of MCG and the combined diagnostic model was better than that of CCTA when CACS was >= 400 (77.22% vs 67.22% vs 58.89%). The AUC values of MCG, CCTA, and the combined model in the CACS >= 400 subgroups were 0.78, 0.49, and 0.71, respectively.ConclusionsThe diagnostic performance of MCG is less affected by CACS than that of CCTA. MCG and the combined model demonstrate better performance than CCTA alone in detecting coronary artery stenosis, particularly in cases with CACS >= 400.Key PointsQuestionHow does the diagnostic performance of MCG compare with coronary computed tomographic angiography (CCTA) at different levels of calcification scores (CACS)?FindingsMCG demonstrated better performance than CCTA in detecting coronary artery stenosis, particularly in patients with high CACS.Clinical relevanceMCG or the MCG and CCTA combined model can be used to improve the noninvasive imaging diagnostic performance for detecting coronary artery stenosis and reduce unnecessary ICA, especially for patients with high calcification scores.Key PointsQuestionHow does the diagnostic performance of MCG compare with coronary computed tomographic angiography (CCTA) at different levels of calcification scores (CACS)?FindingsMCG demonstrated better performance than CCTA in detecting coronary artery stenosis, particularly in patients with high CACS.Clinical relevanceMCG or the MCG and CCTA combined model can be used to improve the noninvasive imaging diagnostic performance for detecting coronary artery stenosis and reduce unnecessary ICA, especially for patients with high calcification scores.Key PointsQuestionHow does the diagnostic performance of MCG compare with coronary computed tomographic angiography (CCTA) at different levels of calcification scores (CACS)?FindingsMCG demonstrated better performance than CCTA in detecting coronary artery stenosis, particularly in patients with high CACS.Clinical relevanceMCG or the MCG and CCTA combined model can be used to improve the noninvasive imaging diagnostic performance for detecting coronary artery stenosis and reduce unnecessary ICA, especially for patients with high calcification scores.

基金:
语种:
WOS:
PubmedID:
中科院(CAS)分区:
出版当年[2025]版:
大类 | 2 区 医学
小类 | 2 区 核医学
最新[2025]版:
大类 | 2 区 医学
小类 | 2 区 核医学
JCR分区:
出版当年[2023]版:
Q1 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING
最新[2023]版:
Q1 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING

影响因子: 最新[2023版] 最新五年平均 出版当年[2023版] 出版当年五年平均 出版前一年[2022版]

第一作者:
第一作者机构: [1]Capital Med Univ, Beijing Anzhen Hosp, Dept Cardiol, Beijing, Peoples R China [2]Capital Med Univ, Beijing Tongren Hosp, Beijing, Peoples R China
共同第一作者:
通讯作者:
推荐引用方式(GB/T 7714):
APA:
MLA:

资源点击量:23405 今日访问量:0 总访问量:1276 更新日期:2025-04-01 建议使用谷歌、火狐浏览器 常见问题

版权所有©2020 首都医科大学附属北京同仁医院 技术支持:重庆聚合科技有限公司 地址:北京市东城区东交民巷1号(100730)