Magnetocardiography for Distinguishing Obstructive Coronary Heart Disease and Coronary Microvascular Dysfunction: A Feasibility Study.

IF 1.9 4区 医学 Q3 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS
Cardiology Pub Date : 2026-02-13 DOI:10.1159/000550445
Nandi Bao, Tianwen Han, Dongkai Shan, Yuhao Miao, Jianguo Cui, Liangliang Liu, Xi Wang, Cui Tian, Feng Tian
{"title":"Magnetocardiography for Distinguishing Obstructive Coronary Heart Disease and Coronary Microvascular Dysfunction: A Feasibility Study.","authors":"Nandi Bao, Tianwen Han, Dongkai Shan, Yuhao Miao, Jianguo Cui, Liangliang Liu, Xi Wang, Cui Tian, Feng Tian","doi":"10.1159/000550445","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The objective of the study was to evaluate the capability of magnetocardiography (MCG) in distinguishing obstructive coronary heart disease (OCHD) from coronary microvascular dysfunction (CMVD).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patients with chest pain suspected of having CAD were consecutively enrolled in according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria. All patients underwent coronary angiography and coronary blood flow analysis, and were divided into OCHD group (n = 447) and CMVD group (n = 332) based on the results of imaging analysis. All patients also underwent MCG examination before or after coronary angiology in 48 h, the MCG parameters were analyzed by an independent third party. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to identify significant clinical and MCG parameters between groups. Diagnostic models were constructed using selected MCG parameters alone or in combination with clinical indicators. Performance was assessed using receiver operating characteristic curves, accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV). Clinical utility and model performance were further validated via calibration curves and decision curve analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In OCHD group, the prevalence of type 2 diabetes mellitus (35.79% vs. 25.30%, p = 0.022) and interventricular septal thickness (mm) (11.00 [10.25-12.00] vs. 11.00 [10.00-11.00], p < 0.001) was significantly higher than those in the CMVD group, while high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (mmol/L) was significantly lower (1.01 [0.85-1.16] vs. 1.06 [0.93-1.22], p < 0.001). Seven MCG parameters showed significant intergroup differences: QR-enav (10.08 [9.02-11.22] vs. 9.36 [8.38-10.41], p < 0.001), RS-enav (10.29 [9.32-11.33] vs. 9.66 [8.71-10.73], p < 0.001), TT-dicar (0.04 [0.02-0.14] vs. 0.02 [0.01-0.09], p < 0.001), TT-dicd (41.40 [25.75-77.55] vs. 34.40 [20.83-62.90], p < 0.001), TT-didav (60.70 [55.50-66.40] vs. 63.80 [58.02-67.80], p < 0.001), TT-didmse (3.70 [2.10-6.35] vs. 2.90 [1.70-4.77], p < 0.001), and TT-enav (10.44 [9.20-11.57] vs. 9.96 [8.79-11.01], p < 0.001). RS-enav achieved the highest AUC (0.615), with sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV of 48.77%, 69.21%, 70.10%, and 47.72%, respectively. TT-didmse exhibited specificity of 73.51% and PPV of 69.41%, while TT-enav showed specificity of 60.26% and PPV of 67.21%. TT-dicd demonstrated the highest diagnostic sensitivity (78.30%) in distinguishing OCHD patients from CMVD. The integrated model combining seven MCG parameters yielded an AUC of 0.681 (95% CI: 0.642-0.720), which improved to 0.713 (95% CI: 0.674-0.751) in the combined model. Calibration curves confirmed high agreement between nomogram predictions and observed outcomes, and decision curve analysis indicated better net benefit for the combined model.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>MCG parameters, either alone or in combination with clinical indicators, demonstrate feasibility in distinguishing OCHD from CMVD. As a novel noninvasive diagnostic tool, MCG holds potential value in discriminating between OCHD and CMVD.</p>","PeriodicalId":9391,"journal":{"name":"Cardiology","volume":" ","pages":"1-15"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2026-02-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cardiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000550445","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: The objective of the study was to evaluate the capability of magnetocardiography (MCG) in distinguishing obstructive coronary heart disease (OCHD) from coronary microvascular dysfunction (CMVD).

Methods: Patients with chest pain suspected of having CAD were consecutively enrolled in according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria. All patients underwent coronary angiography and coronary blood flow analysis, and were divided into OCHD group (n = 447) and CMVD group (n = 332) based on the results of imaging analysis. All patients also underwent MCG examination before or after coronary angiology in 48 h, the MCG parameters were analyzed by an independent third party. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to identify significant clinical and MCG parameters between groups. Diagnostic models were constructed using selected MCG parameters alone or in combination with clinical indicators. Performance was assessed using receiver operating characteristic curves, accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV). Clinical utility and model performance were further validated via calibration curves and decision curve analysis.

Results: In OCHD group, the prevalence of type 2 diabetes mellitus (35.79% vs. 25.30%, p = 0.022) and interventricular septal thickness (mm) (11.00 [10.25-12.00] vs. 11.00 [10.00-11.00], p < 0.001) was significantly higher than those in the CMVD group, while high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (mmol/L) was significantly lower (1.01 [0.85-1.16] vs. 1.06 [0.93-1.22], p < 0.001). Seven MCG parameters showed significant intergroup differences: QR-enav (10.08 [9.02-11.22] vs. 9.36 [8.38-10.41], p < 0.001), RS-enav (10.29 [9.32-11.33] vs. 9.66 [8.71-10.73], p < 0.001), TT-dicar (0.04 [0.02-0.14] vs. 0.02 [0.01-0.09], p < 0.001), TT-dicd (41.40 [25.75-77.55] vs. 34.40 [20.83-62.90], p < 0.001), TT-didav (60.70 [55.50-66.40] vs. 63.80 [58.02-67.80], p < 0.001), TT-didmse (3.70 [2.10-6.35] vs. 2.90 [1.70-4.77], p < 0.001), and TT-enav (10.44 [9.20-11.57] vs. 9.96 [8.79-11.01], p < 0.001). RS-enav achieved the highest AUC (0.615), with sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV of 48.77%, 69.21%, 70.10%, and 47.72%, respectively. TT-didmse exhibited specificity of 73.51% and PPV of 69.41%, while TT-enav showed specificity of 60.26% and PPV of 67.21%. TT-dicd demonstrated the highest diagnostic sensitivity (78.30%) in distinguishing OCHD patients from CMVD. The integrated model combining seven MCG parameters yielded an AUC of 0.681 (95% CI: 0.642-0.720), which improved to 0.713 (95% CI: 0.674-0.751) in the combined model. Calibration curves confirmed high agreement between nomogram predictions and observed outcomes, and decision curve analysis indicated better net benefit for the combined model.

Conclusion: MCG parameters, either alone or in combination with clinical indicators, demonstrate feasibility in distinguishing OCHD from CMVD. As a novel noninvasive diagnostic tool, MCG holds potential value in discriminating between OCHD and CMVD.

心磁图鉴别阻塞性冠心病和冠状动脉微血管功能障碍的可行性研究。
简介:本研究的目的是评估心脏磁图(MCG)在区分阻塞性冠心病(OCHD)和冠状动脉微血管功能障碍(CMVD)方面的能力。方法:按照纳入和排除标准,对疑似冠心病胸痛患者进行连续入组。所有患者均行冠状动脉造影和冠状动脉血流分析,根据影像学分析结果分为OCHD组(n = 447)和CMVD组(n = 332)。所有患者在冠脉造影前后48 h均行MCG检查,由独立第三方分析MCG参数。进行单因素和多因素logistic回归分析,以确定组间显著的临床和MCG参数。选择MCG参数单独或结合临床指标构建诊断模型。使用受试者工作特征曲线、准确性、敏感性、特异性、阳性预测值(PPV)和阴性预测值(NPV)评估治疗效果。通过标定曲线和决策曲线分析进一步验证了模型的临床实用性和性能。结果:ohd组2型糖尿病患病率(35.79% vs. 25.30%, p = 0.022)、室间隔厚度(mm) (11.00 [10.25-12.00] vs. 11.00 [10.00-11.00], p < 0.001)显著高于CMVD组,而高密度脂蛋白胆固醇(mmol/L) (1.01 [0.85-1.16] vs. 1.06 [0.93-1.22], p < 0.001)显著低于CMVD组。7项MCG参数组间差异显著:QR-enav(10.08(9.02 - -11.22)和9.36 (8.38 - -10.41),p < 0.001), RS-enav(10.29(9.32 - -11.33)和9.66 (8.71 - -10.73),p < 0.001), TT-dicar(0.04(0.02 - -0.14)和0.02 (0.01 - -0.09),p < 0.001), TT-dicd(41.40(25.75 - -77.55)和34.40 (20.83 - -62.90),p < 0.001), TT-didav(60.70(55.50 - -66.40)和63.80 (58.02 - -67.80),p < 0.001), TT-didmse(3.70(2.10 - -6.35)和2.90 (1.70 - -4.77),p < 0.001),和TT-enav(10.44(9.20 - -11.57)和9.96 (8.79 - -11.01),p < 0.001)。RS-enav的AUC最高,为0.615,敏感性为48.77%,特异性为69.21%,PPV为70.10%,NPV为47.72%。TT-didmse的特异性为73.51%,PPV为69.41%;TT-enav的特异性为60.26%,PPV为67.21%。TT-dicd在区分OCHD和CMVD患者方面表现出最高的诊断敏感性(78.30%)。综合7个MCG参数的综合模型的AUC为0.681 (95% CI: 0.642 ~ 0.720),综合模型的AUC为0.713 (95% CI: 0.674 ~ 0.751)。校准曲线证实了nomogram预测结果与观测结果之间的高度一致性,决策曲线分析表明组合模型具有更好的净效益。结论:MCG参数单独或结合临床指标,均可用于鉴别OCHD与CMVD。作为一种新型的无创诊断工具,MCG在区分OCHD和CMVD方面具有潜在的价值。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Cardiology
Cardiology 医学-心血管系统
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
5.30%
发文量
56
审稿时长
1.5 months
期刊介绍: ''Cardiology'' features first reports on original clinical, preclinical and fundamental research as well as ''Novel Insights from Clinical Experience'' and topical comprehensive reviews in selected areas of cardiovascular disease. ''Editorial Comments'' provide a critical but positive evaluation of a recent article. Papers not only describe but offer critical appraisals of new developments in non-invasive and invasive diagnostic methods and in pharmacologic, nutritional and mechanical/surgical therapies. Readers are thus kept informed of current strategies in the prevention, recognition and treatment of heart disease. Special sections in a variety of subspecialty areas reinforce the journal''s value as a complete record of recent progress for all cardiologists, internists, cardiac surgeons, clinical physiologists, pharmacologists and professionals in other areas of medicine interested in current activity in cardiovascular diseases.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书