MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415117676 · doi:10.1093/ehjdh/ztaf116

Deep learning-based quantification of epicardial adipose tissue volume from non-contrast computed tomography images: a multi-centre study

2025· article· en· W4415117676 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Heart Journal - Digital Health · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Disease and Adiposity
Canadian institutionsArtificial Intelligence in Medicine (Canada)
FundersNaval Medical Research CenterNational Medical Research CouncilMedical Research CouncilSingapore Energy CentreDuke-NUS Medical School
KeywordsComputed tomographyVolume (thermodynamics)Adipose tissueEpicardial adipose tissueTomography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Aims Epicardial adipose tissue (EAT), located within the pericardial sac, has emerged as a biomarker for coronary artery disease (CAD) progression. This study aimed to develop and validate a deep learning-based system for automated EAT volume quantification using non-contrast computed tomography (NCCT) scans from a large, multi-centre, pan-Asian cohort. Methods and results A total of 1243 NCCT patient scans from three centres were used to train and internally validate a deep learning model based on 3D UNet++ architecture for pericardium segmentation, followed by intensity thresholding to derive EAT volume. Epicardial adipose tissue quantification required ∼30 s per scan. The final model was evaluated on an external testing cohort of 160 patients, including 90 non-Asian individuals. In this cohort, AI-predicted EAT volumes showed excellent agreement with expert annotations (r = 0.975; P < 0.0001). The Bland–Altman analysis demonstrated a mean bias of −5.2 cm3with 95% limits of agreement from −25.1 to 14.7 cm3. Among the non-Asian subgroup, model performance remained strong (r = 0.970; bias, −3.2 cm3; limits of agreement, −25.1–18.7 cm3). AI-derived EAT volume was independently associated with obstructive CAD (odds ratio 1.11; 95% confidence interval, 1.04–1.19; P = 0.004), after adjusting for confounders. The global χ2 statistic increased from 81.7 with coronary calcium score alone to 93.3 when EAT volume was added (P = 0.001), indicating improved risk prediction. Conclusion We developed and validated a deep learning system for automated EAT volume quantification from NCCT scans. The model demonstrated high accuracy and generalizability across ethnically diverse populations, supporting its potential for routine EAT assessment and CAD risk stratification. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05509010.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.100
Threshold uncertainty score0.906

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.276 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it