Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37636301›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine2023

Clinical magnetocardiography: the unshielded bet-past, present, and future.

D Brisinda, P Fenici, R Fenici

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

24 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Magnetocardiography in the Evaluation of Sudden Cardiac Death Risk: A Systematic Review.Annals of noninvasive electrocardiology : the official journal of the International Society for Holter and Noninvasive Electrocardiology, Inc · 2024
    Pooled it
  2. Letter to the Editor about the article:American heart journal plus : cardiology research and practice · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Magnetic field based investigation of Brugada syndrome.European biophysics journal : EBJ · 2026
    Article
  5. Review
  6. Magnetocardiography in diagnosis of MINOCA: a case series.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Observational
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

D BrisindaDipartimento Scienze dell'invecchiamento, ortopediche e reumatologiche, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli, IRCCS, Rome, Italy.
P FeniciSchool of Medicine and Surgery, Catholic University of the Sacred Heart, Rome, Italy.
R FeniciBiomagnetism and Clinical Physiology International Center (BACPIC), Rome, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Magnetocardiography (MCG), which is nowadays 60 years old, has not yet been fully accepted as a clinical tool. Nevertheless, a large body of research and several clinical trials have demonstrated its reliability in providing additional diagnostic electrophysiological information if compared with conventional non-invasive electrocardiographic methods. Since the beginning, one major objective difficulty has been the need to clean the weak cardiac magnetic signals from the much higher environmental noise, especially that of urban and hospital environments. The obvious solution to record the magnetocardiogram in highly performant magnetically shielded rooms has provided the ideal setup for decades of research demonstrating the diagnostic potential of this technology. However, only a few clinical institutions have had the resources to install and run routinely such highly expensive and technically demanding systems. Therefore, increasing attempts have been made to develop cheaper alternatives to improve the magnetic signal-to-noise ratio allowing MCG in unshielded hospital environments. In this article, the most relevant milestones in the MCG's journey are reviewed, addressing the possible reasons beyond the currently long-lasting difficulty to reach a clinical breakthrough and leveraging the authors' personal experience since the early 1980s attempting to finally bring MCG to the patient's bedside for many years thus far. Their nearly four decades of foundational experimental and clinical research between shielded and unshielded solutions are summarized and referenced, following the original vision that MCG had to be intended as an unrivaled method for contactless assessment of the cardiac electrophysiology and as an advanced method for non-invasive electroanatomical imaging, through multimodal integration with other non-fluoroscopic imaging techniques. Whereas all the above accounts for the past, with the available innovative sensors and more affordable active shielding technologies, the present demonstrates that several novel systems have been developed and tested in multicenter clinical trials adopting both shielded and unshielded MCG built-in hospital environments. The future of MCG will mostly be dependent on the results from the ongoing progress in novel sensor technology, which is relatively soon foreseen to provide multiple alternatives for the construction of more compact, affordable, portable, and even wearable devices for unshielded MCG inside hospital environments and perhaps also for ambulatory patients.

Indexed as

electroanatomical imagingelectrophysiology arrhythmias mapping and ablationgradiometer arrayinverse problemmagnetically shielded room (MSR)magnetic sensorsmagnetocardiography (MCG)source localization accuracy

Identifiers

PMID37636301
PMCPMC10448194

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.