ArticleInsights into imaging2024
Radiological biomarkers reflecting visceral fat distribution help distinguish inflammatory bowel disease subtypes: a multicenter cross-sectional study.
Article in Insights into imaging, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Association between metabolic syndrome and inflammatory bowel disease: a bidirectional two-sample Mendelian randomized study.Archives of medical science : AMS · 2026Article
- Imbalance between skeletal muscle and intermuscular fat predicts treatment failure in Crohn's disease: an imaging biomarker for risk stratification.Annals of medicine · 2025Article
- Enhancing radiologist's detection: an imaging-based grading system for differentiating Crohn's disease from ulcerative colitis.BMC medicine · 2024Article
- Exploring causal association between malnutrition, nutrients intake and inflammatory bowel disease: a Mendelian randomization analysis.Frontiers in nutrition · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTo achieve automated quantification of visceral adipose tissue (VAT) distribution in CT images and screen out parameters with discriminative value for inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) subtypes.
methodsThis retrospective multicenter study included Crohn's disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC) patients from three institutions between 2012 and 2021, with patients with acute appendicitis as controls. An automatic VAT segmentation algorithm was developed using abdominal CT scans. The VAT volume, as well as the coefficient of variation (CV) of areas within the lumbar region, was calculated. Binary logistic regression and receiver operating characteristic analysis was performed to evaluate the potential of indicators to distinguish between IBD subtypes.
resultsThe study included 772 patients (365 CDs, median age [inter-quartile range] = 31.0. (25.0, 42.0) years, 255 males; 241 UCs, 46.0 (34.0, 55.5) years, 138 males; 166 controls, 40.0 (29.0, 53.0) years, 80 males). CD patients had lower VAT volume (CD = 1584.95 ± 1128.31 cm
conclusionCT-based VAT distribution can serve as a potential biomarker for distinguishing IBD subtypes. CRITICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: Visceral fat distribution features extracted from CT images using an automated segmentation algorithm (1.14 min) show differences between Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis and are promising for practical radiological screening. KEY POINTS: • Radiological parameters reflecting visceral fat distribution were extracted for the discrimination of Crohn's disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC). • In CD, visceral fat was concentrated in the lower lumbar vertebrae, and the coefficient of variation was a significant predictor (OR = 6.05 (1.17, 31.12), p = 0.03). • The differences between CD, UC, and controls are promising for practical radiological screening.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.