Key result
Higher abdominal core NAMA/BMI predicts ~37% lower risk of positive CAC.
Why the study?
The study was conducted to evaluate the correlation between DSCT-measured abdominal muscle mass and coronary artery calcification in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus, and identify preferred muscle imaging indicators.
Does abdominal muscle mass measured by DSCT correlate with and predict coronary artery calcification in patients with Type 2 diabetes mellitus?
Observational (n=108)
No
Does abdominal muscle mass measured by DSCT correlate with and predict coronary artery calcification in patients with Type 2 diabetes mellitus?
Effect estimate: OR 0.63 (95% CI 0.43-0.91)
p-value: p=0.02
Higher normal attenuation muscle area adjusted for BMI (NAMA/BMI) measured by DSCT is associated with a lower risk of coronary artery calcification in patients with Type 2 diabetes mellitus.
Core muscle quality assessment may aid CAC risk stratification in T2DM; extends observational sarcopenia-CVD links but leaves causality open.
Objective To describe the correlation between abdominal muscle mass and CAC in T2DM patients using DSCT, and to determine the preferred muscle imaging indicators in diagnosing and predicting positive CAC patients. Materials and methods 108 T2DM patients were included (57.0 ± 10.9 years old). We acquired both CAC score and abdominal-chest DSCT data. DSCT measurements (intermuscular adipose tissue [IMAT], total abdominal muscle area [TAMA], normal attenuation muscle area [NAMA], low attenuation muscle area [LAMA], fat fraction [FF], LAMA/body mass index [BMI], NAMA/BMI, and NAMA/TAMA index) of 7 muscles (psoas major [PM], quadratus lumborum [QL], erector spinae [ES], rectus abdominis [RA], transversus abdominis [TA], oblique abdominals [OA], abdominal core muscles [ACM]) on the level of the third lumbar vertebra were conducted. T2DM patients were divided into four subgroups based on CAC score: negative controls (NCs) (0 score), mild (<100 score), moderate (100–300 score), and severe (>300 score). The following statistical analyses were conducted: intergroup differences were compared using the Mann-Whitney test, diagnostic performance was evaluated via receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis, associations were assessed with Spearman correlation, and predictors were identified through logistic regression. A P -value <0.05 was considered statistically significant. Result Compared with NCs, TAMA, NAMA, NAMA/BMI, and NAMA/TAMA index were significantly higher in the group of all CAC ( P <0.05), while TAMA was significantly lower ( P <0.05). The NAMA, NAMA/BMI and the NAMA/TAMA index in four representative muscles (PM, QL, ES, and RA) demonstrated certain diagnostic performance (AUC range, 0.70-0.97, 0.85-0.99 and 0.81-0.97). Overall, NAMA/TAMA index in OA exhibited the strongest negative correlation with CAC score (r=-0.56, P < 0.01), and NAMA/BMI in the ACM emerged as an independent risk factor for positive CAC (odds ratio=0.63, P = 0.02). Conclusion Abdominal muscle mass measured by DSCT was significantly associated with CAC score in T2DM patients. Overall, the NAMA/BMI showed optimal diagnostic value for CAC across severity levels. Moreover, NAMA/BMI in the ACM may serve as a predictive biomarker for positive CAC.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Chen et al. (2026) conducted an observational in Type 2 diabetes mellitus and coronary artery calcification (n=108). Abdominal muscle mass measurement via DSCT (NAMA/BMI) vs. Negative controls (CAC score 0) was evaluated on Positive coronary artery calcification (CAC) (OR 0.63, 95% CI 0.43-0.91, p=0.02). Higher normal attenuation muscle area to body mass index ratio (NAMA/BMI) in abdominal core muscles independently predicted a lower risk of positive coronary artery calcification (OR 0.63).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: