Key result
CT coronary angiography underestimates epicardial adipose tissue volume by ~30% versus calcium score imaging.
Why the study?
Does CT coronary angiography provide comparable epicardial adipose tissue quantification to coronary calcium score imaging in patients with suspected CAD?
Cross-Sectional (n=76)
No
Does CT coronary angiography provide comparable epicardial adipose tissue quantification to coronary calcium score imaging in patients with suspected CAD?
CT coronary angiography systematically underestimates epicardial adipose tissue volume compared to non-contrast calcium score imaging, even after adjusting for contrast attenuation.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
CTCA underestimates EAT volume versus CS imaging; leaves open optimal protocol for EAT quantification in suspected CAD.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to compare epicardial adipose tissue (EAT) characteristics assessed with coronary calcium score (CS) and CT coronary angiography (CTCA) image data sets. METHODS: In 76 patients (mean age 59 ± 13 years) who underwent CS and CTCA owing to suspected coronary artery disease (CAD), EAT was quantified in terms of density (Hounsfield units), thickness and volume. The EAT volume was extracted with a semi-automatic software. RESULTS: A moderate correlation was found between EAT density in CS and CTCA image data sets (-100 ± 19 HU vs -70 ± 24 HU; p < 0.05, r = 0.55). The distribution of EAT was not symmetrical with a maximal thickness at the right atrioventricular groove (14.2 ± 5.3 mm in CS, 15.7 ± 5 mm in CTCA; p > 0.05, r = 0.76). The EAT volume resulted as 122 ± 50 cm(3) in CS and 86 ± 40 cm(3) in CTCA (Δ = 30%, p < 0.05, r = 0.92). After adjustment for post-contrast EAT attenuation difference (Δ = 30 HU), the volume was 101 ± 47 cm(3) (Δ = 17%, p < 0.05, r = 0.92). Based on EAT volume median values, no differences were found between groups with smaller and larger volumes in terms of Agatston score and CAD severity. CONCLUSION: CS and CTCA image data sets may be equally employed for EAT assessment; however, an underestimation of volume is found with the latter acquisition even after post-contrast attenuation adjustment. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: EAT may be measured by processing either the CS or CTCA image data sets.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Grutta et al. (2016) conducted a cross-sectional in Suspected coronary artery disease (n=76). CT coronary angiography (CTCA) vs. Coronary calcium score (CS) was evaluated on Epicardial adipose tissue (EAT) volume (cm3) (p=<0.05). CT coronary angiography underestimated epicardial adipose tissue volume compared to coronary calcium score imaging, even after post-contrast attenuation adjustment.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: