BACKGROUND: Pericardial and intrathoracic fat depots may represent novel risk factors for obesity-related cardiovascular disease. We sought to determine the prevalence, distribution, and risk factor correlates of high pericardial and intrathoracic fat deposits. METHODS AND RESULTS: Participants from the Framingham Heart Study (n=3312; mean age, 52 years; 48% women) underwent multidetector CT imaging in 2002 to 2005; high pericardial and high intrathoracic fat were defined on the basis of the sex-specific 90th percentile for these fat depots in a healthy reference sample. For men and women, the prevalence of high pericardial fat was 29.3% and 26.3%, respectively, and high intrathoracic fat was 31.4% and 35.3%, respectively. Overall, 22.1% of the sample was discordant for pericardial and intrathoracic fat depots: 8.3% had high pericardial but normal intrathoracic fat and 13.8% had high intrathoracic but normal pericardial fat. Higher body mass index, higher waist circumference, and increased prevalence of metabolic syndrome were more prevalent in participants with high intrathoracic fat depots than with high pericardial fat (P<0.05 for all comparisons). High abdominal visceral adipose tissue was more frequent in participants with high intrathoracic adipose tissue compared with those with high pericardial fat (P<0.001). Intrathoracic fat but not waist circumference was more highly correlated with visceral adipose tissue (r=0.76 and 0.78 in men and women, respectively; P<0.0001) than with subcutaneous adipose tissue (SAT) (r=0.46 and 0.54 in men and women, respectively; P<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Although prevalence of pericardial fat and intrathoracic fat were comparable at 30%, intrathoracic fat correlated more closely with metabolic risk and visceral fat. Intrathoracic fat may be a potential marker of metabolic risk and visceral fat on thoracic imaging.
BACKGROUND: Pericardial and intrathoracic fat depots may represent novel risk factors for obesity-related cardiovascular disease. We sought to determine the prevalence, distribution, and risk factor correlates of high pericardial and intrathoracic fat deposits. METHODS AND RESULTS:Participants from the Framingham Heart Study (n=3312; mean age, 52 years; 48% women) underwent multidetector CT imaging in 2002 to 2005; high pericardial and high intrathoracic fat were defined on the basis of the sex-specific 90th percentile for these fat depots in a healthy reference sample. For men and women, the prevalence of high pericardial fat was 29.3% and 26.3%, respectively, and high intrathoracic fat was 31.4% and 35.3%, respectively. Overall, 22.1% of the sample was discordant for pericardial and intrathoracic fat depots: 8.3% had high pericardial but normal intrathoracic fat and 13.8% had high intrathoracic but normal pericardial fat. Higher body mass index, higher waist circumference, and increased prevalence of metabolic syndrome were more prevalent in participants with high intrathoracic fat depots than with high pericardial fat (P<0.05 for all comparisons). High abdominal visceral adipose tissue was more frequent in participants with high intrathoracic adipose tissue compared with those with high pericardial fat (P<0.001). Intrathoracic fat but not waist circumference was more highly correlated with visceral adipose tissue (r=0.76 and 0.78 in men and women, respectively; P<0.0001) than with subcutaneous adipose tissue (SAT) (r=0.46 and 0.54 in men and women, respectively; P<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Although prevalence of pericardial fat and intrathoracic fat were comparable at 30%, intrathoracic fat correlated more closely with metabolic risk and visceral fat. Intrathoracic fat may be a potential marker of metabolic risk and visceral fat on thoracic imaging.
Authors: Bret H Goodpaster; Shanthi Krishnaswami; Tamara B Harris; Andreas Katsiaras; Steven B Kritchevsky; Eleanor M Simonsick; Michael Nevitt; Paul Holvoet; Anne B Newman Journal: Arch Intern Med Date: 2005-04-11
Authors: Cynthia L Ogden; Margaret D Carroll; Lester R Curtin; Margaret A McDowell; Carolyn J Tabak; Katherine M Flegal Journal: JAMA Date: 2006-04-05 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Amir A Mahabadi; Joseph M Massaro; Guido A Rosito; Daniel Levy; Joanne M Murabito; Philip A Wolf; Christopher J O'Donnell; Caroline S Fox; Udo Hoffmann Journal: Eur Heart J Date: 2009-01-09 Impact factor: 29.983
Authors: Tomasz Mazurek; LiFeng Zhang; Andrew Zalewski; John D Mannion; James T Diehl; Hwyda Arafat; Lea Sarov-Blat; Shawn O'Brien; Elizabeth A Keiper; Anthony G Johnson; Jack Martin; Barry J Goldstein; Yi Shi Journal: Circulation Date: 2003-10-27 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Haim Shmilovich; Damini Dey; Victor Y Cheng; Ronak Rajani; Ryo Nakazato; Yuka Otaki; Rine Nakanishi; Piotr J Slomka; Louise E J Thomson; Sean W Hayes; John D Friedman; Heidi Gransar; Nathan D Wong; Leslee J Shaw; Matthew Budoff; Alan Rozanski; Daniel S Berman Journal: Am J Cardiol Date: 2011-08-30 Impact factor: 2.778
Authors: Kaffer Kara; Amir A Mahabadi; Marie H Geisel; Nils Lehmann; Hagen Kälsch; Marcus Bauer; Till Neumann; Nico Dragano; Susanne Moebus; Stefan Möhlenkamp; Karl-Heinz Jöckel; Raimund Erbel Journal: Clin Res Cardiol Date: 2013-10-15 Impact factor: 5.460
Authors: Jane J Lee; Alison Pedley; Udo Hoffmann; Joseph M Massaro; Christopher J O'Donnell; Emelia J Benjamin; Michelle T Long Journal: Am J Cardiol Date: 2017-10-19 Impact factor: 2.778
Authors: Jane J Lee; Alison Pedley; Udo Hoffmann; Joseph M Massaro; Daniel Levy; Michelle T Long Journal: Am J Med Date: 2018-03-05 Impact factor: 4.965
Authors: Gary Huang; Dan Wang; Irfan Zeb; Matthew J Budoff; S Mitchell Harman; Virginia Miller; Eliot A Brinton; Samar R El Khoudary; JoAnn E Manson; MaryFran R Sowers; Howard N Hodis; George R Merriam; Marcelle I Cedars; Hugh S Taylor; Frederick Naftolin; Rogerio A Lobo; Nanette Santoro; Rachel P Wildman Journal: Atherosclerosis Date: 2011-12-09 Impact factor: 5.162
Authors: Cynthia Philip; Rebecca Seifried; P Gabriel Peterson; Robert Liotta; Kevin Steel; Marcio S Bittencourt; Edward A Hulten Journal: Radiol Cardiothorac Imaging Date: 2021-04-01