P6429Epicardial adipose tissue is a robust measure of increased risk of myocardial infarction, a meta-analysis on over 6.600 patients

Abstract

Abstract Background Epicardial adipose tissue surrounds the heart and the coronary arteries. Endocrine and paracrine activity is accredited to EAT. Studies descripted the association between increased EAT and traditional cardiovascular risk factors as well as coronary events. While computed tomography is the gold standard for the assessment of 3-dimensional EAT-volume, echocardiography based EAT thickness is an easy accessible alternative in particular in an emergency setting. So far, little is known, how quantification of EAT in patients presenting with chest pain could alter patient management. Purpose To perform a meta-analysis on existing studies, comparing EAT in patients with and without myocardial infarction, stratifying by imaging technique. Methods We performed a systematic search using the Pubmed, Cochrane, SCOPUS, and Web of Science databases for studies, describing EAT in patients with and without myocardial infarction. Manuscripts, published until 1st of October 2018, were included. We made our search specific and sensitive using Medical Subject Headings terms and free text and considered studies published in English language. Search terms used were “epicardial adipose tissue” or “pericardial adipose tissue” and “myocardial infarction”, “coronary events”, or “acute coronary syndrome”. For comparability, EAT measures were normalized to mean values for patients without myocardial infarction for each study separately. Random effect models were calculated. All analyses were performed using Review Manager 5.3. Results Overall, 6.641 patients (mean aged 58.9 years, 53% male) from 7 studies were included. Patients with myocardial infarction had 37% higher measures of EAT compared to patients without myocardial infarction (95% CI: 21–54%, Figure A). Comparing studies using echocardiography for assessment of EAT thickness with studies using computed tomography based EAT volume, similar relative differences in EAT with wide overlap of confidence intervals were observed (Echo measures: 40 [4–76]%, CT measures: 36 [16–57]%, Figure B and C). No relevant heterogeneity and inconsistency between groups was present in all analyses (detailed data not shown). Figure 1 Conclusion EAT is increased in patients with myocardial infarction. Our data suggests that quantification of EAT thickness using echocardiography distinguishes equally between patients with and without myocardial infarction as compared to 3-dimensional EAT volume from computed tomography. Therefore, it may be an easy accessible alternative in clinical settings. However, further studies are warranted to determine, whether quantification of EAT may lead to improved patient management.