Jeff Min1, Mary E Putt2, Wei Yang2, Alain G Bertoni3, Jingzhong Ding4, Joao A C Lima5, Matthew A Allison6, R Graham Barr7, Nadine Al-Naamani1, Ravi B Patel8, Lauren Beussink-Nelson8, Steven M Kawut9, Sanjiv J Shah8, Benjamin H Freed10. 1. Department of Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. 2. Department of Biostatistics, Epidemiology, and Informatics, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. 3. Department of Epidemiology and Prevention, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, North Carolina. 4. Department of Internal Medicine, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, North Carolina. 5. Department of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland. 6. Department of Family Medicine, University of California San Diego, San Diego, California. 7. Department of Medicine and Department of Epidemiology, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, New York. 8. Department of Medicine, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, Illinois. 9. Department of Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; Department of Biostatistics, Epidemiology, and Informatics, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. 10. Department of Medicine, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, Illinois. Electronic address: bfreed@nm.org.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Pericardial fat has been associated with adverse cardiovascular outcomes through adiposity-associated inflammation and insulin resistance, which in turn are linked to cardiac dysfunction. We sought to evaluate the association between pericardial fat volume and cardiac structure and function in adults without baseline cardiovascular disease. METHODS: We analyzed data from the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis. Linear regression was used to examine the association between pericardial fat volume (by cardiac computed tomography during exam 1, 2000-2002) and cardiac function by echocardiography, six-minute walk distance (6MWD), and symptom severity as assessed using the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire-12 (exam 6, 2016-18). RESULTS: Among 3,032 participants, each 1 SD (39.3 cm3) increase in pericardial fat volume was associated with lower (worse) absolute left atrial reservoir strain (β = -0.98%; 95% CI, -1.29, -0.68; P < .001), right ventricular free wall strain (β = -0.75%; 95% CI, -1.00, -0.51; P < .001), and right atrial reservoir strain (β = -0.59%; 95% CI, -1.00, -0.19; P < .01) after adjustment for potential confounders. Greater pericardial fat volume was associated with lower 6MWDs (β = -5.70 m; 95% CI, -10.34, -1.06; P = .02) but not with Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire-12 scores or N-terminal pro b-type natriuretic peptide after multivariable adjustment. CONCLUSIONS: In a population-based cohort of adults, pericardial fat volume was independently associated with subclinical atrial and right ventricular dysfunction and reduced 6MWD. These distinct changes in cardiac structure and function suggest a potential mechanistic role for pericardial fat in early heart failure.
BACKGROUND: Pericardial fat has been associated with adverse cardiovascular outcomes through adiposity-associated inflammation and insulin resistance, which in turn are linked to cardiac dysfunction. We sought to evaluate the association between pericardial fat volume and cardiac structure and function in adults without baseline cardiovascular disease. METHODS: We analyzed data from the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis. Linear regression was used to examine the association between pericardial fat volume (by cardiac computed tomography during exam 1, 2000-2002) and cardiac function by echocardiography, six-minute walk distance (6MWD), and symptom severity as assessed using the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire-12 (exam 6, 2016-18). RESULTS: Among 3,032 participants, each 1 SD (39.3 cm3) increase in pericardial fat volume was associated with lower (worse) absolute left atrial reservoir strain (β = -0.98%; 95% CI, -1.29, -0.68; P < .001), right ventricular free wall strain (β = -0.75%; 95% CI, -1.00, -0.51; P < .001), and right atrial reservoir strain (β = -0.59%; 95% CI, -1.00, -0.19; P < .01) after adjustment for potential confounders. Greater pericardial fat volume was associated with lower 6MWDs (β = -5.70 m; 95% CI, -10.34, -1.06; P = .02) but not with Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire-12 scores or N-terminal pro b-type natriuretic peptide after multivariable adjustment. CONCLUSIONS: In a population-based cohort of adults, pericardial fat volume was independently associated with subclinical atrial and right ventricular dysfunction and reduced 6MWD. These distinct changes in cardiac structure and function suggest a potential mechanistic role for pericardial fat in early heart failure.
Authors: Chrishan J Nalliah; James R Bell; Antonia J A Raaijmakers; Helen M Waddell; Simon P Wells; Gabriel B Bernasochi; Magdalene K Montgomery; Simon Binny; Troy Watts; Subodh B Joshi; Elaine Lui; Choon Boon Sim; Marco Larobina; Michael O'Keefe; John Goldblatt; Alistair Royse; Geoffrey Lee; Enzo R Porrello; Matthew J Watt; Peter M Kistler; Prashanthan Sanders; Lea M D Delbridge; Jonathan M Kalman Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2020-09-08 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Eric A Hoffman; Rui Jiang; Heather Baumhauer; Michael A Brooks; J Jeffrey Carr; Robert Detrano; Joseph Reinhardt; Josanna Rodriguez; Karen Stukovsky; Nathan D Wong; R Graham Barr Journal: Acad Radiol Date: 2009-06 Impact factor: 3.173
Authors: Diane E Bild; David A Bluemke; Gregory L Burke; Robert Detrano; Ana V Diez Roux; Aaron R Folsom; Philip Greenland; David R Jacob; Richard Kronmal; Kiang Liu; Jennifer Clark Nelson; Daniel O'Leary; Mohammed F Saad; Steven Shea; Moyses Szklo; Russell P Tracy Journal: Am J Epidemiol Date: 2002-11-01 Impact factor: 4.897
Authors: David S Wenger; Steven M Kawut; Jingzhong Ding; David A Bluemke; Catherine L Hough; Richard A Kronmal; Joao A Lima; Peter J Leary Journal: PLoS One Date: 2016-06-16 Impact factor: 3.240