» Articles » PMID: 35149727

Healthy US Population Reference Values for CT Visceral Fat Measurements and the Impact of IV Contrast, HU Range, and Spinal Levels

Overview
Journal Sci Rep
Specialty Science
Date 2022 Feb 12
PMID 35149727
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Measurements of visceral adipose tissue cross-sectional area and radiation attenuation from computed tomography (CT) scans provide useful information about risk and mortality. However, scan protocols vary, encompassing differing vertebra levels and utilizing differing phases of contrast enhancement. Furthermore, fat measurements have been extracted from CT using different Hounsfield Unit (HU) ranges. To our knowledge, there have been no large studies of healthy cohorts that reported reference values for visceral fat area and radiation attenuation at multiple vertebra levels, for different contrast phases, and using different fat HU ranges. Two-phase CT scans from 1,677 healthy, adult kidney donors (age 18-65) between 1999 and 2017, previously studied to determine healthy reference values for skeletal muscle measures, were utilized. Visceral adipose tissue cross-sectional area (VFA) and radiation attenuation (VFRA) measures were quantified using axial slices at T10 through L4 vertebra levels. T-tests were used to compare males and females, while paired t-tests were conducted to determine the effect (magnitude and direction) of (a) contrast enhancement and (b) different fat HU ranges on each fat measure at each vertebra level. We report the means, standard deviations, and effect sizes of contrast enhancement and fat HU range. Male and female VFA and VFRA were significantly different at all vertebra levels in both contrast and non-contrast scans. Peak VFA was observed at L4 in females and L2 in males, while peak VFRA was observed at L1 in both females and males. In general, non-contrast scans showed significantly greater VFA and VFRA compared to contrast scans. The average paired difference due to contrast ranged from 1.6 to - 8% (VFA) and 3.2 to - 3.0% (VFRA) of the non-contrast value. HU range showed much greater differences in VFA and VFRA than contrast. The average paired differences due to HU range ranged from - 5.3 to 22.2% (VFA) and - 5.9 to 13.6% (VFRA) in non-contrast scans, and - 4.4 to 20.2% (VFA) and - 4.1 to 12.6% (VFRA) in contrast scans. The - 190 to - 30 HU range showed the largest differences in both VFA (10.8% to 22.2%) and VFRA (7.6% to 13.6%) compared to the reference range (- 205 to - 51 HU). Incidentally, we found that differences in lung inflation result in very large differences in visceral fat measures, particularly in the thoracic region. We assessed the independent effects of contrast presence and fat HU ranges on visceral fat cross-sectional area and mean radiation attenuation, finding significant differences particularly between different fat HU ranges. These results demonstrate that CT measurements of visceral fat area and radiation attenuation are strongly dependent upon contrast presence, fat HU range, sex, breath cycle, and vertebra level of measurement. We quantified contrast and non-contrast reference values separately for males and females, using different fat HU ranges, for lumbar and thoracic CT visceral fat measures at multiple vertebra levels in a healthy adult US population.

Citing Articles

Role of tumor-specific and whole-body imaging biomarkers for prediction of recurrence in patients with stage III colorectal cancer.

Borhani A, Zhang P, Diergaarde B, Darwiche S, Chuperlovska K, Wang S Abdom Radiol (NY). 2024; .

PMID: 39487920 DOI: 10.1007/s00261-024-04656-3.


Incorporating adipose tissue into a CT-based deep learning nomogram to differentiate granulomas from lung adenocarcinomas.

Jia Q, Niu Y, Xuan Q, Miao S, Huang W, Liu P iScience. 2024; 27(10):110733.

PMID: 39474083 PMC: 11519438. DOI: 10.1016/j.isci.2024.110733.


Visceral fat area and subcutaneous fat area as measures of body composition in soft tissue sarcoma.

Garibay E, Cruz S, Judge S, Monjazeb A, Thorpe S, Murphy W J Surg Oncol. 2024; 130(3):543-551.

PMID: 39402905 PMC: 11753180. DOI: 10.1002/jso.27751.


Effects of Interrupting Prolonged Sitting with Light-Intensity Physical Activity on Inflammatory and Cardiometabolic Risk Markers in Young Adults with Overweight and Obesity: Secondary Outcome Analyses of the SED-ACT Randomized Controlled Crossover....

Hoffmann S, Schierbauer J, Zimmermann P, Voit T, Grothoff A, Wachsmuth N Biomolecules. 2024; 14(8).

PMID: 39199416 PMC: 11352707. DOI: 10.3390/biom14081029.


Effect of abdominal adipose tissue glucose uptake on brain aging.

Lu W, Duan Y, Li K, Cheng Z, Qiu J Alzheimers Dement. 2024; 20(10):7104-7112.

PMID: 39136090 PMC: 11485312. DOI: 10.1002/alz.14193.


References
1.
Goodpaster B, Kelley D, Wing R, Meier A, Thaete F . Effects of weight loss on regional fat distribution and insulin sensitivity in obesity. Diabetes. 1999; 48(4):839-47. DOI: 10.2337/diabetes.48.4.839. View

2.
Borkan G, Gerzof S, Robbins A, Hults D, Silbert C, Silbert J . Assessment of abdominal fat content by computed tomography. Am J Clin Nutr. 1982; 36(1):172-7. DOI: 10.1093/ajcn/36.1.172. View

3.
Derstine B, Holcombe S, Goulson R, Ross B, Wang N, Sullivan J . Quantifying Sarcopenia Reference Values Using Lumbar and Thoracic Muscle Areas in a Healthy Population. J Nutr Health Aging. 2018; 21(10):180-185. DOI: 10.1007/s12603-017-0983-3. View

4.
Tapper E, Zhang P, Garg R, Nault T, Leary K, Krishnamurthy V . Body composition predicts mortality and decompensation in compensated cirrhosis patients: A prospective cohort study. JHEP Rep. 2020; 2(1):100061. PMC: 7005567. DOI: 10.1016/j.jhepr.2019.11.005. View

5.
Kvist H, Sjostrom L, Tylen U . Adipose tissue volume determinations in women by computed tomography: technical considerations. Int J Obes. 1986; 10(1):53-67. View