Comparison of epicardial adipose tissue volume quantification between cardiac and chest computed tomography scans

Background This study investigated accuracy and consistency of epicardial adipose tissue (EAT) quantification in chest computed tomography (CT) scans. Methods and results EAT volume was quantified semi-automatically using a standard Hounsfield unit threshold (-190U, -30) in three independent cohorts: (1) Cohort 1 ( N = 30) consisted of paired 120 KV cardiac non-contrast CT (NCCT) and 120 KV chest NCCT; (2) Cohort 2 ( N = 20) consisted of paired 120 KV cardiac NCCT and 100 KV chest NCCT; (3) Cohort 3 ( N = 20) consisted of paired chest NCCT and chest contrast-enhanced CT (CECT) datasets. Images were reconstructed with the slice thicknesses of 1.25 mm and 5 mm in the chest CT datasets, and 3 mm in the cardiac NCCT datasets. In Cohort 1, the chest NCCT-1.25 mm EAT volume was similar to the cardiac NCCT EAT volume, whilst chest NCCT-5 mm underestimated the EAT volume by 7.0%. In Cohort 2, 100 KV chest NCCT-1.25mm and -5 mm EAT volumes were 9.7% and 6.4% larger than corresponding 120 KV cardiac NCCT EAT volumes. In Cohort 3, the chest CECT dataset underestimated EAT volumes by ∼25%, relative to chest NCCT datasets. All chest CT-derived EAT volumes were strongly correlated with their cardiac CT counterparts. Conclusions The chest NCCT-1.25 mm EAT volume with the 120 KV tube energy produced EAT volumes that are comparable to cardiac NCCT. All chest CT EAT volumes were strongly correlated with EAT volumes obtained from cardiac CT, if imaging protocol is consistently applied to all participants. ### Competing Interest Statement The authors have declared no competing interest. ### Funding Statement No external funding was received. ### Author Declarations I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained. Yes The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below: This study was approved by the local human research ethics committee of the University of Hong Kong-Shenzhen Hospital. All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived. Yes I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance). Yes I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable. Yes All data are available based on the reasonable requests.