Comparison of epicardial adipose tissue radiodensity threshold between contrast and non-contrast enhanced computed tomography scans: A cohort study of derivation and validation.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Epicardial adipose tissue (EAT) volume derived from contrast enhanced (CE) computed tomography (CT) scans is not well validated. We aim to establish a reliable threshold to accurately quantify EAT volume from CE datasets.

METHODS: We analyzed EAT volume on paired non-contrast (NC) and CE datasets from 25 patients to derive appropriate Hounsfield (HU) cutpoints to equalize two EAT volume estimates. The gold standard threshold (-190HU, -30HU) was used to assess EAT volume on NC datasets. For CE datasets, EAT volumes were estimated using three previously reported thresholds: (-190HU, -30HU), (-190HU, -15HU), (-175HU, -15HU) and were analyzed by a semi-automated 3D Fat analysis software. Subsequently, we applied a threshold correction to (-190HU, -30HU) based on mean differences in radiodensity between NC and CE images (ΔEATrd = CE radiodensity - NC radiodensity). We then validated our findings on EAT threshold in 21 additional patients with paired CT datasets.

RESULTS: EAT volume from CE datasets using previously published thresholds consistently underestimated EAT volume from NC dataset standard by a magnitude of 8.2%-19.1%. Using our corrected threshold (-190HU, -3HU) in CE datasets yielded statistically identical EAT volume to NC EAT volume in the validation cohort (186.1 ± 80.3 vs. 185.5 ± 80.1 cm3 , Δ = 0.6 cm3 , 0.3%, p = 0.374).

CONCLUSIONS: Estimating EAT volume from contrast enhanced CT scans using a corrected threshold of -190HU, -3HU provided excellent agreement with EAT volume from non-contrast CT scans using a standard threshold of -190HU, -30HU.