Next Article in Journal
A Population-Based Digital Reference Object (DRO) for Optimizing Dynamic Susceptibility Contrast (DSC)-MRI Methods for Clinical Trials
Previous Article in Journal
DCE-MRI Texture Features for Early Prediction of Breast Cancer Therapy Response
 
 
Tomography is published by MDPI from Volume 7 Issue 1 (2021). Previous articles were published by another publisher in Open Access under a CC-BY (or CC-BY-NC-ND) licence, and they are hosted by MDPI on mdpi.com as a courtesy and upon agreement with Grapho, LLC.
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Intrathoracic Fat Measurements Using Multidetector Computed Tomography (MDCT): Feasibility and Reproducibility

by
Jadranka Stojanovska
,
El-Sayed H. Ibrahim
*,
Aamer R. Chughtai
,
Elizabeth A. Jackson
,
Barry H. Gross
,
Jon A. Jacobson
,
Alexander Tsodikov
,
Brian Daneshvar
,
Benjamin D. Long
,
Thomas L. Chenevert
and
Ella A. Kazerooni
Department of Radiology, University of Michigan, UH-B1-209, 1500 East Medical Center Drive, Ann Arbor, MI 48109, USA
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Tomography 2017, 3(1), 33-40; https://doi.org/10.18383/j.tom.2017.00103
Submission received: 8 May 2017 / Revised: 6 June 2017 / Accepted: 9 July 2017 / Published: 1 August 2017

Abstract

Intrathoracic fat volume, more specifically, epicardial fat volume, is an emerging imaging biomarker of adverse cardiovascular events. The purpose of this work is to show the feasibility and reproducibility of intrathoracic fat volume measurement applied to contrast-enhanced multidetector computed tomography images. A retrospective cohort study of 62 subjects free of cardiovascular disease (55% females, age = 49 ± 11 years) conducted from 2008 to 2011 formed the study group. Intrathoracic fat volume was defined as all fat voxels measuring −50 to −250 Hounsfield Unit within the intrathoracic cavity from the level of the pulmonary artery bifurcation to the heart apex. The intrathoracic fat was separated into epicardial and extrapericardial fat by tracing the pericardium. The measurements were obtained by 2 readers and compared for interrater reproducibility. The fat volume measurements for the study group were 141 ± 72 cm3 for intrathoracic fat, 58 ± 27 cm3 for epicardial fat, and 84 ± 50 cm3 for extrapericardial fat. There was no statistically significant difference in intrathoracic fat volume measurements between the 2 readers, with correlation coefficients of 0.88 (P = .55) for intrathoracic fat volume and −0.12 (P = .33) for epicardial fat volume. Voxel-based measurement of intrathoracic fat, including the separation into epicardial and extrapericardial fat, is feasible and highly reproducible from multidetector computed tomography scans.
Keywords: epicardial fat volume; intrathoracic fat; MDCT; feasibility; reproducibility epicardial fat volume; intrathoracic fat; MDCT; feasibility; reproducibility

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Stojanovska, J.; Ibrahim, E.-S.H.; Chughtai, A.R.; Jackson, E.A.; Gross, B.H.; Jacobson, J.A.; Tsodikov, A.; Daneshvar, B.; Long, B.D.; Chenevert, T.L.; et al. Intrathoracic Fat Measurements Using Multidetector Computed Tomography (MDCT): Feasibility and Reproducibility. Tomography 2017, 3, 33-40. https://doi.org/10.18383/j.tom.2017.00103

AMA Style

Stojanovska J, Ibrahim E-SH, Chughtai AR, Jackson EA, Gross BH, Jacobson JA, Tsodikov A, Daneshvar B, Long BD, Chenevert TL, et al. Intrathoracic Fat Measurements Using Multidetector Computed Tomography (MDCT): Feasibility and Reproducibility. Tomography. 2017; 3(1):33-40. https://doi.org/10.18383/j.tom.2017.00103

Chicago/Turabian Style

Stojanovska, Jadranka, El-Sayed H. Ibrahim, Aamer R. Chughtai, Elizabeth A. Jackson, Barry H. Gross, Jon A. Jacobson, Alexander Tsodikov, Brian Daneshvar, Benjamin D. Long, Thomas L. Chenevert, and et al. 2017. "Intrathoracic Fat Measurements Using Multidetector Computed Tomography (MDCT): Feasibility and Reproducibility" Tomography 3, no. 1: 33-40. https://doi.org/10.18383/j.tom.2017.00103

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop