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

IF 4.7 2区 医学 Q1 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING
Tingting Wu, Xin Zhao, Lanxin Feng, Shuwen Yang, Haoran Xing, Zhao Ma, Xueyao Yang, Min Zhang, Ming Ding, Yi He, Chenchen Tu, Xiantao Song, Hongjia Zhang
{"title":"Comparison of magnetocardiography and coronary computed tomographic angiography for detection of coronary artery stenosis and the influence of calcium.","authors":"Tingting Wu, Xin Zhao, Lanxin Feng, Shuwen Yang, Haoran Xing, Zhao Ma, Xueyao Yang, Min Zhang, Ming Ding, Yi He, Chenchen Tu, Xiantao Song, Hongjia Zhang","doi":"10.1007/s00330-025-11389-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>This 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.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A 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.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>According 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.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The 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.</p><p><strong>Key points: </strong>Question How does the diagnostic performance of MCG compare with coronary computed tomographic angiography (CCTA) at different levels of calcification scores (CACS)? Findings MCG demonstrated better performance than CCTA in detecting coronary artery stenosis, particularly in patients with high CACS. Clinical relevance MCG 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.</p>","PeriodicalId":12076,"journal":{"name":"European Radiology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Radiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-025-11389-4","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: This 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.

Methods: A 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.

Results: According 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.

Conclusions: The 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 points: Question How does the diagnostic performance of MCG compare with coronary computed tomographic angiography (CCTA) at different levels of calcification scores (CACS)? Findings MCG demonstrated better performance than CCTA in detecting coronary artery stenosis, particularly in patients with high CACS. Clinical relevance MCG 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.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
European Radiology
European Radiology 医学-核医学
CiteScore
11.60
自引率
8.50%
发文量
874
审稿时长
2-4 weeks
期刊介绍: European Radiology (ER) continuously updates scientific knowledge in radiology by publication of strong original articles and state-of-the-art reviews written by leading radiologists. A well balanced combination of review articles, original papers, short communications from European radiological congresses and information on society matters makes ER an indispensable source for current information in this field. This is the Journal of the European Society of Radiology, and the official journal of a number of societies. From 2004-2008 supplements to European Radiology were published under its companion, European Radiology Supplements, ISSN 1613-3749.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信