Inter-software and inter-scan variability in measurement of epicardial adipose tissue. A three-way comparison of a research-specific, a freeware and a coronary application software platform
Creators
- 1. Monash Cardiovascular Research Centre, Monash University and MonashHeart, Monash Health, Clayton, VIC (Australia)
- 2. Cedars Sinai Medical Center, Biomedical Imaging Research Institute, Los Angeles, CA (United States)
- 3. Baker Heart and Diabetes Institute, Melbourne, VIC (Australia)
Description
Epicardial adipose tissue (EAT) is a proposed marker of cardiovascular risk; however, clinical application may be limited by variability in post-processing software platforms. We assessed inter-vendor agreement of EAT volume (EATv) and attenuation on both contrast-enhanced (CE) and non-contrast CT (NCT) using a standard coronary CT reporting software (Vitrea), an EAT research-specific software (QFAT) and a freeware imaging software (OsiriX). Seventy-six consecutive patients undergoing simultaneous CE and NCT had complete volumetric EAT measurement. Between-software, within-software NCT vs. CE, and inter- and intra-observer agreement were evaluated with analysis by ANOVA (with post hoc adjustment), Bland-Altman with 95% levels of agreement (LoA) and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Mean EATv (freeware 53 ± 31 mL vs. research 93 ± 43 mL vs. coronary 157 ± 64 mL) and attenuation (freeware - 72 ± 25 HU vs. research - 75 ± 3 HU vs. coronary - 61 ± 10 HU) were significantly different between all vendors (ANOVA p < 0.001). EATv was consistently higher in NCT vs. CE for all software packages, with most reproducibility found in research software (bias 26 mL, 95% LoA: 2 to 56 mL), compared to freeware (bias 11 mL 95% LoA: - 46 mL to 69 mL) and coronary software (bias 10 mL 95% LoA: - 127 to 147 mL). Research software had more comparable NCT vs. CE attenuation (- 75 vs. - 72 HU) compared to freeware (- 72 vs. - 57 HU) and coronary (- 61 vs. - 39 HU). Excellent inter-observer agreement was seen with research (ICC 0.98) compared to freeware (ICC 0.73) and coronary software (ICC 0.75) with narrow LoA on Bland-Altman analysis. There are significant inter-vendor differences in EAT assessment. Our study suggests that research-specific software has better agreement and reproducibility compared to freeware or coronary software platforms.
Additional details
Identifiers
Publishing Information
- Journal Title
- European Radiology (Internet)
- Journal Volume
- 33
- Journal Issue
- 12
- Journal Page Range
- p. 8445-8453
- ISSN
- 1432-1084
- CODEN
- EURAE3
INIS
- Country of Publication
- Germany
- Country of Input or Organization
- Germany
- INIS RN
- 55019785
- Subject category
- S62: RADIOLOGY AND NUCLEAR MEDICINE;
- Descriptors DEI
- ADIPOSE TISSUE; ARTERIOSCLEROSIS; ATTENUATION; COMPARATIVE EVALUATIONS; COMPUTER CODES; COMPUTERIZED TOMOGRAPHY; CORONARIES; CORRELATIONS; HEART; IMAGE PROCESSING; MEASURING METHODS
- Descriptors DEC
- ANIMAL TISSUES; ARTERIES; BLOOD VESSELS; BODY; CARDIOVASCULAR DISEASES; CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEM; CONNECTIVE TISSUE; DIAGNOSTIC TECHNIQUES; DISEASES; EVALUATION; ORGANS; PROCESSING; TOMOGRAPHY; VASCULAR DISEASES