enverdis Symposium during DGK Annual Congress Mannheim 2012

Also this year our symposium “Cardiogoniometry – an update for the current situation of studies regarding diagnosis of cardiac heart disease and myocardic ischemia”, latest study results for the use of cardiogoniometry in practical were presented.Here the focus was on the comparison of medicinal magnetic diagnostic, mainly MRI and scintography.


1. Diabetis, cardiovascular risk and present importance of non-invasive screening procedures: rationale for CGM@DIABETES Study R. Wessely (Duisburg)

  • Up until 2025 the number of ischemic heart diseases in Germany will increase by about 35%.
  • Ergometry: “an extensive method of examination which is not harmless, time-consuming and not really informative”.
  • The ECG/stress ECG is not ideal in order to guarantee a sufficient high sensicivity and specifity with cardial early diagnostic .
  • Unmed Nedd of a simple and more precise mehod for early detection of oronary heart disease as well as (in acute situations) of a cardiac cause of chest pain which is mainly suitable for the use in preclinical and CPU .
  • Cardiogoniometry could close this diagnostic gap.

2. Cardiac ischemia diagnostic with CGM in comparison with the established standard procedure ergometry and myocardic scintegraphy; S. Weber (Regensburg)

  • In western industrial countries the chronic ischemic heart disease and the acute myocardic infarction are the main causes of death, with 16,8% of all natural cases of death in Germany.
  • Rated as standard method was the 12-channel resting ECG, the ECG as well as ergometry, the latter one mainly referred to limitations (limited sensitivity of 67% and specifity of 72%. Often one does not reach the target stress limit neither many patients – elderly patients cannot put up with the stress.
  • In the prospective study the CGM result was compared with the scintography result, the folowing analysis were presented:


  1. normal scinti (no findings), abnormal scinti: perfusion defect in rest and/or after Adenosin) = what is the accuracy rate of CGM to detect scars and/or ischemia “-Accuracy : 82%
  2. normal scinti (no findings) vs.perfusion defect already at rest,(i.e. scars and if so additional ischemia). Real ischemia without scars, i.e.scinti at rest (-) but according to adenosin (+) out. = “what is the accuracy rate of CGM to detect real scars” – Accuracy 83%
  3. normal scinti (no findings) vs perfusion defect only after adenosin (.e. ischemia without scars), scars, i.e. scinti at rest (+) out. “What is the accuracy rate of CGM to detect real ischemia”- Accuracy: 81%

3. Cardiogoniometry in comparison with cardioMRI: the CGM@MRI-study R. Birkemeyer (Villingen-Schwenningen)

  • 40 patients were selected
  • Within the routine diagnostic a CGM was performd prior to the cardio MRI
  • CGM achieved a total accuracy of 83% (sensitivity of 70% and specifity of 95%);the positve redictive value was 93)
  • The high specifity in particular and the high positive predictive value confirm the qualification of CGM forscreening examinations

Thanks to all visitors for your large interest and many thanks to our chairmen and referees for your engagement

and support.

On request we would be pleased to give you a summary of this years symposium and we are looking forward to your applications. Please contact: