Accuracy of Cardiogoniometry in Diagnosing Acute Coronary Syndrome: A Cross-sectional Study

Document Type : Original Article


1 Lorestan Heart Center (Madani Hospital), Lorestan University of Medical Sciences (LUMS), Khorramabad, Lorestan, IR Iran.

2 Department of Cardiac Rehabilitation, Rajaie Cardiovascular Medical and Research Center, Iran University of Medical Sciences (IUMS), Tehran, IR Iran.

3 Department of Pacemaker and Electrophysiology, Rajaie Cardiovascular Medical and Research Center, Iran University of Medical Sciences (IUMS), Tehran, IR Iran.

4 Rajaie Cardiovascular Medical and Research Center, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, IR Iran.

5 Department of the English Language, School of Medicine, Lorestan University of Medical Sciences, Khorramabad, Lorestan, IR Iran.


Background: Ischemic heart disease (IHD) is the most common cause of mortality, and prompt treatment can be life-saving. Cardiogoniometry (CGM) is a noninvasive method that seems reliable for IHD diagnosis. This study aimed to determine the accuracy of CGM in IHD diagnosis in patients with suspected acute coronary syndrome (ACS), especially those with unstable angina or non–ST-elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI), whose diagnosis may be challenging.
Methods: This cross-sectional study was performed at Rajaie Cardiovascular Medical and Research Center, a tertiary public hospital. Forty-five patients with ACS in the emergency ward were enrolled. The patients underwent CGM about 24 hours before catheterization, and the results were compared with angiography as the gold standard for IHD diagnosis. The data were analyzed using the SPSS software and were reported separately for age, sex, and hypertension.
Results: The sensitivity and specificity of this method were 96.7% and 55.3%, respectively. The positive and negative predictive values were 80.6% and 88.9%, respectively.
Conclusions: CGM is a sensitive method for confirming or ruling out ACS. It is useful when the diagnosis is challenging, especially when ACS is suspected and electrocardiography or laboratory test results are unremarkable. Other studies are needed to confirm our conclusion. (Iranian Heart Journal 2023; 24(1): 39-44)


  1. Murray CJ, Vos T, Lozano R, et al. Disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) for 291 diseases and injuries in 21 regions, 1990-2010: A systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease study 2010. Lancet. 2012; 380(9859):2197-223. PMID: 23245608; doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(12)61689-4.
  2. Bruyninckx R, Aertgeerts B, Bruyninckx P, Buntinx F. Signs and symptoms in diagnosing acute myocardial infarction and acute coronary syndrome: a diagnostic meta-analysis. Br J Gen Pract. 2008; 58(547):105-11. PMID: 18307844; doi:10.3399/bjgp08X277014.
  3. How Is a Heart Attack Treated? National heart, lung and blood institute (NIH), U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Available from: Accessed in 2018 (May 24).
  4. Kumar A, Cannon C. Mayo Clin Proc. 2009; 84(10):917-38. PMID: 19797781; doi:10.1016/S0025-6196(11)60509-0.
  5. Anderson JL, Adams CD, Antman EM, et al. ACC/AHA 2007 guidelines for the management of patients with unstable angina/non-ST-Elevation myocardial infarction: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (Writing Committee to Revise the 2002 Guidelines for the Management of Patients With Unstable Angina/Non-ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction) developed in collaboration with the American College of Emergency Physicians, the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, and the Society of Thoracic Surgeons endorsed by the American Association of Cardiovascular and Pulmonary Rehabilitation and the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2007; 50(7):e1-e157. PMID: 17692738; doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2007.02.013.
  6. Weber S, Birkemeyer R, Schultes D, Grewenig W, Huebner T. Comparison of Cardiogoniometry and ECG at Rest versus Myocardial Perfusion Scintigraphy. Ann Noninvasive Electrocardiol. 2014; 19(5):462-70. PMID: 24612044; doi:10.1111/anec.12151.
  7. Gibbons RJ, Balady GJ, Bricker JT, et al. ACC/AHA 2002 guideline update for exercise testing: summary article: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (Committee to Update the 1997 Exercise Testing Guidelines). Circulation. 2002; 106(14):1883-92. PMID: 12356646.
  8. Sanz E, Steger JP, Thie W. Carogoniometry. Clin Cardiol. 1983; 6(5):199-206. PMID: 6851278.
  9. Saner H, Baur HR, Sanz E, Gurtner HP. Cardiogoniometry: a new noninvasive method for detection of ischemic heart disease. Clin Cardiol. 1983; 6(5):207-10. PMID: 6851279
  10. Tölg R, Zeymer U, Birkemeyer R. Cardiogoniometry as a diagnostic tool in patients with acute coronary syndromes: results of the CGM@ACS trial. Clin Res Cardiol. 2012; 101(9):727–36. PMID: 22485015; doi:10.1007/s00392-012-0452-2.
  11. Ghadrdoost B, Haghjoo M, Firouzi A. Accuracy of cardiogoniometry compared with electrocardiography in the diagnosis of coronary artery disease. Res Cardiovasc Med. 2015; 4(1):e25547. PMID: 25785254; doi:10.5812/cardiovascmed.25547.
  12. Schüpbach WM, Emese B, Loretan P, et al. Non-invasive diagnosis of coronary artery disease using cardiogoniometry performed at rest. Swiss Med Wkly. 2008; 19:138(15-16):230-8. PMID: 18431698; doi:2008/15/smw-12040.
  13. Vontobel H, Tartini R, Steinbrunn W. Cardiogoniometry in Coronary Heart Disease. A Clinical Study. Schweiz Med Wochenschr. 1988; 118(44):1609-11. PMID: 3070742.
  14. Weber A, Smid J, Luani B, Braun-Dullaeus RC, Tanev I. Role of exercise cardiogoniometry in coronary artery disease diagnostics. Clin Res Cardiol. 2017; 106(8):573-81. PMID: 28289841; doi:10.1007/s00392-017-1087-0.