Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41233698›Full record

ArticleThe international journal of cardiovascular imaging2026

Validation of a deep learning approach for epicardial adipose tissue segmentation in computed tomography.

Rúben Baeza, Fábio Nunes, Carolina Santos, Jennifer Mancio, Ricardo Fontes-Carvalho, Francesco Renna, João Pedrosa

Abstract readValidation Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in The international journal of cardiovascular imaging, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Rúben BaezaInstitute for Systems and Computer Engineering, Technology and Science (INESC TEC), Rua Dr Roberto Frias, Porto, 4200-465, Portugal. up202103374@edu.fe.up.pt.
Fábio NunesFaculty of Medicine University of Porto (FMUP), Porto, Portugal.
Carolina SantosFaculty of Medicine University of Porto (FMUP), Porto, Portugal.
Jennifer MancioFaculty of Medicine University of Porto (FMUP), Porto, Portugal.
Ricardo Fontes-CarvalhoFaculty of Medicine University of Porto (FMUP), Porto, Portugal.
Francesco RennaInstitute for Systems and Computer Engineering, Technology and Science (INESC TEC), Rua Dr Roberto Frias, Porto, 4200-465, Portugal.
João PedrosaInstitute for Systems and Computer Engineering, Technology and Science (INESC TEC), Rua Dr Roberto Frias, Porto, 4200-465, Portugal.

Funding

Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia LA/P/0063/2020
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The link between epicardial adipose tissue (EAT) and cardiovascular risk is well established, with EAT volume being strongly associated with inflammation, coronary artery disease (CAD) risk, and mortality. However, its EAT quantification is hindered by the time-consuming nature of manual EAT segmentation in cardiac computed tomography (CT). 300 non-contrast cardiac CT scans were collected and the pericardium was manually delineated. In a subset of this data (N = 30), manual delineation was repeated by the same operator and by a second operator. Two automatic methods were then used for pericardial segmentation: a commercially available tool, Siemens Cardiac Risk Assessment (CRA) software; and a deep learning solution based on a U-Net architecture trained exclusively with external public datasets (CardiacFat and OSIC). EAT segmentations were obtained through thresholding to [- 150,- 50] Hounsfield units. Pericardial and EAT segmentation performance was evaluated considering the segmentations by the first operator as reference. Statistical significance of differences for all metrics and segmentation methods was tested through Student t-tests. Pericardial segmentation intra-/interobserver variability was excellent, with the U-Net outperforming Siemens CRA (p < 0.0001). The intra- and interobserver agreement for EAT segmentation was lower with Dice Scores (DSC) of 0.862 and 0.775 respectively, while the U-Net and Siemens CRA obtained DSCs of 0.723 and 0.679 respectively. EAT volume quantification showed that the agreement between a human observer and the U-Net was better than that of two human observers (p = 0.0141), with a Pearson Correlation Coefficient (PCC) of 0.896 and a bias of - 2.83 cm

Indexed as

Adipose TissueAdiposityDeep LearningMultidetector Computed TomographyPericardiumRadiographic Image Interpretation, Computer-AssistedTomography, X-Ray ComputedAgedEpicardial Adipose TissueFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedObserver VariationPredictive Value of TestsReproducibility of ResultsDeep learningEpicardial adipose tissuePericardiumSegmentationValidation

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.