Evidence Hub

Myocardial viability evaluation using magnetocardiography in patients with coronary artery disease

Morguet AJ, Behrens S, Kosch O, Lange C, Zabel M, Selbig D, Munz DL, Schultheiss HP et al.

Coronary artery disease, 2004

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Magnetocardiography (MCG) has been used to risk stratify patients in terms of sudden death or to detect ischemia. We evaluated the potential of this technique to assess myocardial viability in coronary artery disease.

METHODS: Fifteen patients aged 36-75 (median, 59) years with stable single-vessel disease (> or =70% diameter stenosis) and corresponding regional wall-motion abnormality underwent (1) echocardiography to evaluate wall motion, (2) Tl dipyridamole single-photon emission computed tomography to document perfusion and (3) quantitative F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography to assess viability in 16 left-ventricular wall segments. MCG was performed in each patient using a shielded prototype 49-channel low-temperature superconducting quantum interference device (SQUID) system. Multiple time and area parameters were extracted automatically from each baseline-corrected data set.

RESULTS: Eleven patients had prior myocardial infarction. In each patient, four to 12 (median, seven) segments were lesion dependent, totalling up to 117 out of 240 segments. A total of 88 segments (75%) were viable and 29 segments (25%) represented scar. Patients were divided into three categories: (a) no scar segments (five patients), (b) scar in one to three segments (six patients) and (c) scar in > or = four segments (four patients). The three MCG parameters with the best selectivity were identified using linear discriminant analysis with forward inclusion (P<0.10).…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a clinical trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free