Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Diagnostic accuracy of the magnetocardiograph for patients with suspected acute coronary syndrome.
Goodacre, Steve; Walters, Stephen J; Qayyum, Hasan; Coffey, Frank; Carlton, Edward; Coats, Timothy; Glazebrook, William; Unitt, Lynda.
Afiliação
  • Goodacre S; School of Health and Related Research (ScHARR), The University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK s.goodacre@sheffield.ac.uk.
  • Walters SJ; School of Health and Related Research (ScHARR), The University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK.
  • Qayyum H; Emergency Department, Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Sheffield, UK.
  • Coffey F; Department of Research and Education in Emergency Medicine, Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust, Nottingham, UK.
  • Carlton E; Emergency Department, Southmead Hospital, North Bristol NHS Trust, Bristol, UK.
  • Coats T; Department of Cardiovascular Sciences, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK.
  • Glazebrook W; St George's Emergency Department Clinical Research Unit, St George's University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
  • Unitt L; Clinical Affairs Department, Creavo Medical Technologies, Coventry, UK.
Emerg Med J ; 38(1): 47-52, 2021 Jan.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33051274
ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

We aimed to estimate the diagnostic accuracy of the VitalScan magnetocardiograph (MCG) for suspected acute coronary syndrome (ACS).

METHODS:

We undertook a prospective cohort study evaluating the diagnostic accuracy of the MCG in adults with suspected ACS. The reference standard of ACS was determined by an independent adjudication committee based on 30-day investigations and events. The cohort was split into a training sample, to derive the MCG algorithm and an algorithm combining MCG with a modified Manchester Acute Coronary Syndrome (MACS) clinical probability score, and a validation sample, to estimate diagnostic accuracy.

RESULTS:

We recruited 756 participants and analysed data from 680 (293 training, 387 validation), of whom 96 (14%) had ACS. In the training sample, the respective area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) curves were the following MCG 0.66 (95% CI 0.58 to 0.74), MACS 0.64 (95% CI 0.54 to 0.73) and MCG+MACS 0.70 (95% CI 0.63 to 0.77). MCG specificity was 0.16 (95% CI 0.12 to 0.21) at the threshold achieving acceptable sensitivity for rule-out (>0.98). In the validation sample (n=387), the respective AUROCs were the following MCG 0.56 (95% CI 0.48 to 0.64), MACS 0.69 (95% CI 0.61 to 0.77) and MCG+MACS 0.64 (95% CI 0.56 to 0.72). MCG sensitivity was 0.89 (95% CI 0.77 to 0.95) and specificity 0.15 (95% CI 0.12 to 0.20) at the rule-out threshold. MCG+MACS sensitivity was 0.85 (95% CI 0.73 to 0.92) and specificity 0.30 (95% CI 0.25 to 0.35).

CONCLUSION:

The VitalScan MCG is currently unable to accurately rule out ACS and is not yet ready for use in clinical practice. Further developmental research is required.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Magnetocardiografia / Síndrome Coronariana Aguda Tipo de estudo: Clinical_trials / Diagnostic_studies / Observational_studies Limite: Adult / Aged / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2021 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Magnetocardiografia / Síndrome Coronariana Aguda Tipo de estudo: Clinical_trials / Diagnostic_studies / Observational_studies Limite: Adult / Aged / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2021 Tipo de documento: Article