MCG Clinical Studies & Research Papers
Premier Heart maintains an archive of published clinical study articles and other research papers on our technology for convenient reference by our customers and the general public. Where permitted copies of these publications are provided below, sorted by publication date.
​Note: Studies performed prior to 2009 may refer to MCG analysis using its previous branding, 3DMP or mfEMT.
Modern MCG analysis is built upon these earlier iterations of the technology, with enhanced analysis and reporting capabilities and improvements in product usability.
​
Premier Heart is currently migrating articles to our new website - if you would like a copy of an article not listed here please contact us for a complete clinical information package which includes all of our trial articles and whitepapers.
Takashita et. al. – Japan
This study compared MCG analysis to the classical and functional SYNTAX scores in a sample of 87 patients. A strong correlation between MCG Severity Score and the functional SYNTAX score was found, suggesting that MCG may be useful in identifying functionally significant ischemia, and in reducing unnecessary angiography procedures.
Results were published online to Wiley Online Library in Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions 00:00-00 (2015)
2015
Amano, Shinoda, Kumura et. al. – Japan
This study evaluated the accuracy MCG in detecting functionally significant coronary ischemia by comparison to FFR. MCG showed consistently high specificity and a high negative predictive value (varying based on the FFR threshold used), suggesting that MCG can be used to both identify functionally significant ischemia and to reduce unnecessary use of angiography.
Results were published in OpenHeart 2014;1:e000144 (2014)
2014
Strobeck, Rainford, Arkus, Imhoff - Treatment Strategies
This report discusses the use of MCG in detecting coronary artery disease and ischemia, specifically in women. MCG achieved 92.4% sensitivity and 85.3% specificity in this review of female patients, well above the typical performance of traditional resting ECGs, and exceeding the typical sensitivity of traditional stress ECGs.
This report was published in Treatment Strategies – Cardiology 2013
2013
Strobeck, Mangieri, and Rainford - Valley Hospital, NJ
This trial compared MCG, SPECT Myocardial Perfusion Imaging, and Coronary Angiography for the detection of clinically relevant coronary artery obstruction. MCG performed well in this study, with a sensitivity of 91% and a specificity of 87% (PPV: 86%, NPV: 92%), and exceeded the performance of SPECT MPI in classifying patients with clinically relevant coronary artery obstruction.
Results were published in International Journal of Medical Sciences 2011; 8(8): 717-724
2011
American Academy of Urgent Care Medicine
The AAUCM conducted an appropriateness criteria review for MCG in 2009, highlighting areas in which MCG can assist Urgent Care and Emergency physicians in reachng an accurate diagnosis. Table 11 in the article provides a summary of conditions and scenarios where the AAUCM found MCG to be an appropriate diagnostic tool. In reviewing clinical data and physician case reports since 2009 and in light of the MCG Categorization Algorithm Premier Heart also believes many indications in Table 12 can benefit from improvements in MCG analysis since these guidelines were published.
This guidance was published in the December 17, 2009 edition of AAUCM In The News
2009
In 2009 Premier Heart completed a meta analysis of clinical studies using the MCG technology conducted at various centers between 2000 and 2004.
This meta analysis, conducted using the Westchester Medical Center protocol, evaluated MCG's ability to identify clinically relevant coronary artery stenosis in a cohort of over 1000 patients.
​
These studies and the meta analysis are limited in that their comparison considers only coronary artery obstruction rather than functional ischemia. Studies from 2014 and later which consider functional ischema and account for collateral circulation using tools like FFR have demonstrated that some "false negative" MCG results in these early trials may be related to collateral circulation providing blood flow beyond areas of visible stenosis.
​
The meta analysis was published in The International Journal of Medical Sciences (Int. J. Med. Sci. 2009, 6), and can be downloaded here.
The component studies and their published articles are also listed below.​
Siegburg Heart Center – Germany
This study compared MCG to coronary angiography in a convenience sample of 423 patients with no prior history of interventional procedures (PCI, CABG). Patients in this study presented to the Siegburg Heart Hospital, and were scheduled for diagnostic coronary angiography. MCG testing was performed prior to the angiography procedure, and analyzed independently (angiographers were blind to MCG results, and MCG analysis was performed without angiography results as input).
Results were published in International Journal of Medical Sciences 2008 5(2): pp 50-61.
2008
Asian Multi-Center Trial – Four Sites
This study compared MCG to coronary angiography in a convenience sample of 189 patients, both with and without a history of prior coronary artery revascularization (PCI, CABG). Patients in this study presented to one of five study centers, and were scheduled for diagnostic coronary angiography. MCG testing was performed prior to the angiography procedure, and analyzed independently (angiographers were blind to MCG results, and MCG analysis was performed without angiography results as input).
Results were published in Congestive Heart Failure 2008 14: pp. 251-260
2008
Siegburg Heart Center (Revascularization) – Germany
This study compared MCG to coronary angiography in a convenience sample of 172 patients with a history of coronary artery revascularization. These patients presented to the Siegburg Heart Hospital with a history of coronary artery revascularization (PCI or CABG), and were scheduled to undergo diagnostic coronary angiography. MCG testing was performed prior to the angiography procedure, and analyzed independently (angiographers were blind to MCG results, and MCG analysis was performed without angiography results as input).
Results were published in International Journal of Medical Sciences 2007 4(5): pp 249-263.
2007
Westchester Medical Center – New York
This study compared MCG to coronary angiography in a sample of 136 patients who presented at Westchester Medical Center. These patients were selected to undergo diagnostic coronary angiography, and received MCG tests prior to that procedure, with the MCG analysis and diagnostic angiography findings reported independently (the angiographers were blinded to MCG results, and the MCG analysis was performed without angiography input).
Results were published in Heart Disease 2002; 4: pp 2-12.
2002
If you know of a publication we have missed, or if you are interested in conducting a study using MCG technology at your institution, please let us know.
​
Because of the unique nature of MCG analysis it is sometimes possible to perform retrospective studies based on existing patient data as long as high-quality ECG tracings are available from an MCG-Compatible data source.
Many 12-lead Holter and Telemetry solutions are MCG-Compatible, as are several bedside ECG systems.