使用非心电图门控胸部计算机断层扫描图像量化心外膜脂肪组织的可行性。

IF 1 4区 医学 Q4 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING
Tomio Mikami, Kazushi Yokomachi, Kenji Mizuno, Masayuki Kobayashi
{"title":"使用非心电图门控胸部计算机断层扫描图像量化心外膜脂肪组织的可行性。","authors":"Tomio Mikami, Kazushi Yokomachi, Kenji Mizuno, Masayuki Kobayashi","doi":"10.1097/RCT.0000000000001662","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Epicardial adipose tissue (EAT) is an important imaging indicator of cardiovascular risk. EAT volume is usually measured using electrocardiogram (ECG) gating. However, there are concerns regarding the influence of motion artifacts when measuring EAT volume on non-ECG-gated plain chest computed tomography (CT) images. Few studies have evaluated the EAT volume using non-ECG gating. This study aimed to validate the accuracy of EAT quantification using non-ECG-gated chest CT imaging.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We included 100 patients (64 males, 36 females) who underwent simultaneous coronary artery calcification score imaging (ECG gated) and plain chest CT imaging (non-ECG gated). Images taken using non-ECG gating were reconstructed using the same field of view and slice thickness as those obtained with ECG gating. The EAT capacity of each image was measured and compared. An AZE Virtual Place (Canon) was used for the measurements. The Mann-Whitney U test and intraclass correlation coefficient were used for statistical analyses. P values <0.05 were considered statistically significant. Concordance was evaluated using Bland-Altman analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The mean EAT volume measured by ECG-gated imaging was 156.5 ± 66.9 mL and 155.4 ± 67.9 mL by non-ECG-gated imaging, with no significant difference between the two groups ( P = 0.86). Furthermore, the EAT volumes measured using ECG-gated and non-ECG-gated imaging showed a strong correlation ( r = 0.95, P < 0.05). Bland-Altman analysis revealed that the mean error of the EAT volume (non-ECG-gated imaging - ECG-gated imaging) was -1.02 ± 2.95 mL (95% confidence interval, -6.49 to 4.76).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The EAT volume obtained using non-ECG-gated imaging was equivalent to that obtained using ECG-gated imaging.</p>","PeriodicalId":15402,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Computer Assisted Tomography","volume":" ","pages":"80-84"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Feasibility of Epicardial Adipose Tissue Quantification Using Non-electrocardiogram-Gated Chest Computed Tomography Images.\",\"authors\":\"Tomio Mikami, Kazushi Yokomachi, Kenji Mizuno, Masayuki Kobayashi\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/RCT.0000000000001662\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Epicardial adipose tissue (EAT) is an important imaging indicator of cardiovascular risk. EAT volume is usually measured using electrocardiogram (ECG) gating. However, there are concerns regarding the influence of motion artifacts when measuring EAT volume on non-ECG-gated plain chest computed tomography (CT) images. Few studies have evaluated the EAT volume using non-ECG gating. This study aimed to validate the accuracy of EAT quantification using non-ECG-gated chest CT imaging.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We included 100 patients (64 males, 36 females) who underwent simultaneous coronary artery calcification score imaging (ECG gated) and plain chest CT imaging (non-ECG gated). Images taken using non-ECG gating were reconstructed using the same field of view and slice thickness as those obtained with ECG gating. The EAT capacity of each image was measured and compared. An AZE Virtual Place (Canon) was used for the measurements. The Mann-Whitney U test and intraclass correlation coefficient were used for statistical analyses. P values <0.05 were considered statistically significant. Concordance was evaluated using Bland-Altman analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The mean EAT volume measured by ECG-gated imaging was 156.5 ± 66.9 mL and 155.4 ± 67.9 mL by non-ECG-gated imaging, with no significant difference between the two groups ( P = 0.86). Furthermore, the EAT volumes measured using ECG-gated and non-ECG-gated imaging showed a strong correlation ( r = 0.95, P < 0.05). Bland-Altman analysis revealed that the mean error of the EAT volume (non-ECG-gated imaging - ECG-gated imaging) was -1.02 ± 2.95 mL (95% confidence interval, -6.49 to 4.76).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The EAT volume obtained using non-ECG-gated imaging was equivalent to that obtained using ECG-gated imaging.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15402,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Computer Assisted Tomography\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"80-84\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Computer Assisted Tomography\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/RCT.0000000000001662\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/8/20 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Computer Assisted Tomography","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/RCT.0000000000001662","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/8/20 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:心外膜脂肪组织(EAT心外膜脂肪组织(EAT)是心血管风险的重要影像指标。通常使用心电图(ECG)门控测量心外膜脂肪组织的体积。然而,在非心电图选通的胸部计算机断层扫描(CT)平扫图像上测量 EAT 体积时,人们担心会受到运动伪影的影响。很少有研究对使用非心电图选通的 EAT 容量进行评估。本研究旨在验证使用非心电图门控胸部 CT 成像量化 EAT 的准确性:我们纳入了 100 名患者(64 名男性,36 名女性),他们同时接受了冠状动脉钙化评分成像(心电图门控)和普通胸部 CT 成像(非心电图门控)。使用非心电图门控技术拍摄的图像与使用心电图门控技术拍摄的图像使用相同的视野和切片厚度进行重建。对每张图像的 EAT 容量进行了测量和比较。测量使用的是 AZE Virtual Place(佳能)。统计分析采用 Mann-Whitney U 检验和类内相关系数。P 值 结果:心电图门控成像测量的平均 EAT 容量为 156.5 ± 66.9 mL,非心电图门控成像测量的平均 EAT 容量为 155.4 ± 67.9 mL,两组之间无显著差异(P = 0.86)。此外,使用心电图标记成像和非心电图标记成像测量的 EAT 容量显示出很强的相关性(r = 0.95,P < 0.05)。Bland-Altman分析显示,EAT体积(非ECG门控成像-ECG门控成像)的平均误差为-1.02 ± 2.95 mL(95%置信区间,-6.49至4.76):结论:使用非心电图标记成像获得的 EAT 容量与使用心电图标记成像获得的 EAT 容量相当。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Feasibility of Epicardial Adipose Tissue Quantification Using Non-electrocardiogram-Gated Chest Computed Tomography Images.

Objective: Epicardial adipose tissue (EAT) is an important imaging indicator of cardiovascular risk. EAT volume is usually measured using electrocardiogram (ECG) gating. However, there are concerns regarding the influence of motion artifacts when measuring EAT volume on non-ECG-gated plain chest computed tomography (CT) images. Few studies have evaluated the EAT volume using non-ECG gating. This study aimed to validate the accuracy of EAT quantification using non-ECG-gated chest CT imaging.

Methods: We included 100 patients (64 males, 36 females) who underwent simultaneous coronary artery calcification score imaging (ECG gated) and plain chest CT imaging (non-ECG gated). Images taken using non-ECG gating were reconstructed using the same field of view and slice thickness as those obtained with ECG gating. The EAT capacity of each image was measured and compared. An AZE Virtual Place (Canon) was used for the measurements. The Mann-Whitney U test and intraclass correlation coefficient were used for statistical analyses. P values <0.05 were considered statistically significant. Concordance was evaluated using Bland-Altman analysis.

Results: The mean EAT volume measured by ECG-gated imaging was 156.5 ± 66.9 mL and 155.4 ± 67.9 mL by non-ECG-gated imaging, with no significant difference between the two groups ( P = 0.86). Furthermore, the EAT volumes measured using ECG-gated and non-ECG-gated imaging showed a strong correlation ( r = 0.95, P < 0.05). Bland-Altman analysis revealed that the mean error of the EAT volume (non-ECG-gated imaging - ECG-gated imaging) was -1.02 ± 2.95 mL (95% confidence interval, -6.49 to 4.76).

Conclusions: The EAT volume obtained using non-ECG-gated imaging was equivalent to that obtained using ECG-gated imaging.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
230
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The mission of Journal of Computer Assisted Tomography is to showcase the latest clinical and research developments in CT, MR, and closely related diagnostic techniques. We encourage submission of both original research and review articles that have immediate or promissory clinical applications. Topics of special interest include: 1) functional MR and CT of the brain and body; 2) advanced/innovative MRI techniques (diffusion, perfusion, rapid scanning); and 3) advanced/innovative CT techniques (perfusion, multi-energy, dose-reduction, and processing).
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信