ArticleQuantitative imaging in medicine and surgery2025
Comparison of association between intrathoracic and abdominal visceral adipose tissue areas with metabolic syndrome and cardiometabolic risk factors: a cross-sectional study.
Article in Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Adaptive deep learning for quantification and spatial distribution of abdominal adipose tissue from magnetic resonance imaging proton density fat fraction in adults with a body mass index ≥24 kg/mQuantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Whether abdominal visceral adipose tissue (VAT) has a stronger association with metabolic syndrome (MS) and cardiometabolic risk factors (CMRFs) than intrathoracic adipose tissue (IAT) is not yet known. We aimed to compare the associations between IAT at multiple levels and VAT with MS and CMRFs using quantitative computed tomography (QCT). The predictive value of IAT and VAT was compared. Methods: A total of 256 participants who underwent chest low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) for lung cancer screening and QCT examinations for adipose tissue quantification were included. IAT at the T1/2 to T7/8 levels and VAT at the L2/3 level were measured by QCT. Correlation analysis was performed to determine the correlation of IAT and VAT with CMRFs. Logistic regression was used to calculate the odds ratio (OR) in adipose tissue for MS and the presence of two or more CMRFs, and the area under the curve (AUC) of the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was used to compare the predictive performance. Results: The VAT areas showed slightly stronger correlation with all CMRFs (r=-0.422 to 0.357, P<0.001) than IAT areas at different levels (r=-0.329 to 0.318, P<0.05). After adjusting for sex, age, and body mass index (BMI), the IAT areas were not associated with MS (P>0.05), but VAT areas remained associated with MS (OR =1.022, P=0.001). The VAT areas showed significantly higher predictive power (AUC =0.845) than IAT areas at T2/3 (AUC =0.725) and T6/7 (AUC =0.743) levels for predicting MS (P=0.004, P=0.021, respectively) in males. VAT areas had higher AUC values (AUC: 0.806 and 0.748) for predicting MS and the presence of two or more CMRFs than IAT areas at T2/3 (AUC: 0.707 and 0.657) and T6/7 (AUC: 0.748 and 0.636) levels without statistically significant differences (P>0.05) in females. Conclusions: Both VAT and IAT were associated with CMRFs, but VAT had a slightly stronger correlation with all CMRFs than IAT. After adjusting for sex, age, and BMI, VAT was an independent factor of MS rather than IAT. VAT may have slightly better predictive value for MS and the presence of two or more CMRFs.
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.