Abstract
ObjectivesTo systematically analyze the influence of technical parameters on quantification of epicardial fat volume (EATV) at cardiac CT. Methods153 routine cardiac CT data sets were analyzed using three-dimensional pericardial border delineation. Three image series were reconstructed per patient: (a) CTAD: coronary CT angiography (CTA), diastolic phase; (b) CTAS: coronary CTA, systolic phase; (c) CaScD: non-contrast CT, diastolic phase. EATV was calculated using three different upper thresholds (−15HU, −30HU, −45HU). Repeated measures ANOVA, Spearman's rho, and Bland Altman plots were used. ResultsMean EATV differed between all three image series at a −30HU threshold (CTAD 87.2±38.5ml, CTAS 90.9±37.7ml, CaScD 130.7±49.5ml, P<0.001). EATV of diastolic and systolic CTA reconstructions did not differ significantly (P=0.225). Mean EATV for contrast enhanced CTA at a −15HU threshold (CTAD15 102.4±43.6ml, CTAS15 105.3±42.3ml) could be approximated most closely by non-contrast CT at −45HU threshold (CaScD45 105.3±40.8ml). The correlation was excellent: CTAS15–CTAD15, rho=0.943; CTAD15–CaScD45, rho=0.905; CTAS15–CaScD45, rho=0.924; each P<0.001). Bias values from Bland Altman Analysis were: CTAS15–CTAD15, 4.9%; CTAD15–CaScD45, −4.3%; CTAS15–CaScD45, 0.6%. ConclusionsMeasured EATV can differ substantially between contrast enhanced and non-contrast CT studies, which can be reconciled by threshold modification. Heart cycle phase does not significantly influence EATV measurements.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.