Epicardial fat volume measured on nongated chest CT is a predictor of coronary artery disease.
Body fat distribution
Coronary artery disease
Multidetector computed tomography
Pericardium
Predictive value of tests
Journal
European radiology
ISSN: 1432-1084
Titre abrégé: Eur Radiol
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 9114774
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Jul 2019
Jul 2019
Historique:
received:
26
09
2018
accepted:
07
02
2019
revised:
24
12
2018
pubmed:
13
3
2019
medline:
27
8
2019
entrez:
13
3
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
To investigate whether epicardial fat volume (EFV) quantified on ECG-nongated noncontrast CT (nongated-NCCT) could be used as a reliable and reproducible predictor for coronary artery disease (CAD). One hundred seventeen subjects (65 men, mean age 66.6 ± 11.9 years) underwent coronary CT angiography (CCTA) and nongated-NCCT during a single session because of symptoms suggestive of CAD. Two observers independently quantified EFV on both images. Correlation between CCTA-EFV and nongated-NCCT-EFV was assessed using Pearson's correlation coefficient and Bland-Altman plots. Inter-observer agreement was analyzed using concordance correlation coefficients (CCC). Coronary risk factors including EFV were compared between CAD-positive (> 50% stenosis) and CAD-negative groups. The association between EFV and CAD was analyzed using multivariate logistic regression. ROC analysis was performed, and AUC was compared with DeLong's method. Seventy-four subjects were diagnosed with CAD. An excellent correlation was noted between CCTA-EFV and nongated-NCCT-EFV (r = 0.948, p < 0.001), despite the systematic difference between both measurements (mean bias, 1.26). Inter-observer agreement was nearly perfect (CCC, 0.988 and 0.985 for CCTA and nongated-NCCT, respectively, p < 0.001). Significant differences were noted between subjects with versus without CAD in age, hypertension, and EFV on both types of images (p ≤ 0.026). Multivariate analysis revealed that increased EFV on CCTA (odds ratio 1.185, p = 0.003) and nongated-NCCT (odds ratio 1.20, p = 0.015) was independently associated with CAD. There was no significant difference between CCTA-EFV and nongated-NCCT-EFV in AUC for the prediction of CAD (0.659 vs 0.665, p = 0.706). Despite the absence of ECG gating, EFV measured on NCCT may serve as a reproducible predictor for CAD with accuracy equivalent to EFV measured on CCTA. • Despite the absence of ECG gating, the EFV on NCCT provides nearly perfect inter-observer reproducibility and shows excellent correlation with measurements on gated CCTA. • EFV on nongated-NCCT may serve as an independent biomarker for predicting coronary artery disease with accuracy equivalent to that of EFV on gated CCTA.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30859284
doi: 10.1007/s00330-019-06079-x
pii: 10.1007/s00330-019-06079-x
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
3638-3646Commentaires et corrections
Type : ErratumIn
Références
J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr. 2013 Jan-Feb;7(1):3-10
pubmed: 23452994
Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2018 May 1;19(5):490-497
pubmed: 29236951
J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr. 2017 Jan - Feb;11(1):74-84
pubmed: 27916431
Stat Methods Med Res. 1999 Jun;8(2):135-60
pubmed: 10501650
Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2016 Dec;17(12):1361-1367
pubmed: 27550661
Int J Cardiol. 2010 Jun 11;141(3):311-3
pubmed: 19110328
Atherosclerosis. 2008 Apr;197(2):896-903
pubmed: 17884060
Eur Radiol. 2019 Feb;29(2):932-940
pubmed: 29955949
Radiology. 2017 Sep;284(3):685-693
pubmed: 28562205
Nat Clin Pract Cardiovasc Med. 2005 Oct;2(10):536-43
pubmed: 16186852
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2011 Mar 8;57(10):1237-47
pubmed: 21145688
Eur J Radiol. 2015 Jun;84(6):1062-7
pubmed: 25843418
Cardiovasc Pathol. 2010 May-Jun;19(3):e61-8
pubmed: 19375947
J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr. 2016 Mar-Apr;10(2):141-9
pubmed: 26817413
J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr. 2009 Mar-Apr;3(2):122-36
pubmed: 19272853
J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr. 2014 Sep-Oct;8(5):342-58
pubmed: 25301040
Biometrics. 1988 Sep;44(3):837-45
pubmed: 3203132
Br J Radiol. 2016 Jun;89(1062):20150773
pubmed: 26987374
Int J Cardiol. 2013 Sep 10;167(6):2852-8
pubmed: 22882959
JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2010 Apr;3(4):352-60
pubmed: 20394896
Lancet. 1986 Feb 8;1(8476):307-10
pubmed: 2868172
Eur Radiol. 2018 Jul;28(7):3082-3087
pubmed: 29383526
Am Heart J. 2007 Jun;153(6):907-17
pubmed: 17540190
Arch Intern Med. 2009 Dec 14;169(22):2071-7
pubmed: 20008689
Clin Cardiol. 2011 Mar;34(3):166-71
pubmed: 21337349
Am J Cardiol. 2013 Oct 1;112(7):943-9
pubmed: 23809622
Circ J. 2015;79(5):1084-91
pubmed: 25739955
Atherosclerosis. 2010 Apr;209(2):573-8
pubmed: 19892354
Eur Radiol. 2018 Apr;28(4):1345-1355
pubmed: 29058029
Atherosclerosis. 2010 May;210(1):150-4
pubmed: 20031133
Circ Cardiovasc Imaging. 2013 Jul;6(4):514-21
pubmed: 23756678
Arq Bras Cardiol. 2013 Jul;101(1):e18-28
pubmed: 23917514
Atherosclerosis. 2010 Dec;213(2):649-55
pubmed: 21040916
Acta Radiol. 2012 Jun 1;53(5):536-40
pubmed: 22593121
Eur Radiol. 2014 Jul;24(7):1557-64
pubmed: 24816936
Int J Cardiol. 2012 Jun 28;158(1):26-32
pubmed: 21255849
JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2016 Feb;9(2):152-9
pubmed: 26777213