Cited by 9

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Fatty acid composition MRI of epicardial adipose tissue: methods and detection of proinflammatory biomarkers in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction patients

Echols, John T., Wang, Shuo, Patel, Amit R., Hogwood, Austin C., Abbate, Antonio, Epstein, Frederick H.·2025·Magnetic Resonance in Medicine

Abstract

Purpose: To develop a method for quantifying the fatty acid composition (FAC) of human epicardial adipose tissue (EAT) using accelerated MRI and identify its potential for detecting proinflammatory biomarkers in patients with ST‐segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). Methods: A multi‐echo radial gradient‐echo sequence was developed for accelerated imaging during a breath hold using a locally low‐rank denoising technique to reconstruct undersampled images. FAC mapping was achieved by fitting the multi‐echo images to a multi‐resonance complex signal model based on triglyceride characterization. Validation of the method was assessed using a phantom comprised of multiple oils. In vivo imaging was performed in STEMI patients (n = 21; 14 males/seven females). FAC was quantified in EAT, subcutaneous AT, and abdominal visceral AT. Results: Phantom validation demonstrated strong correlations (r > 0.97) and statistical significance (p < 0.0001) between measured and reference proton density fat fraction and FAC values. In vivo imaging of STEMI patients revealed a distinct EAT FAC profile compared to subcutaneous AT and abdominal visceral AT. EAT FAC parameters had significant correlations with left ventricular (LV) end‐diastolic volume index (p < 0.05), LV end‐systolic volume index (p < 0.05), and LV mass index (p < 0.05). Conclusions: Accelerated MRI enabled accurate quantification of human EAT FAC. The relationships between the EAT FAC profile and LV structure and function in STEMI patients suggest the potential of EAT FAC MRI as a biomarker for adipose tissue quality and inflammatory status in cardiovascular disease.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/mrm.30285

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Investigators have demonstrated the ability to use CMR to assess fatty acid composition (saturated vs unsaturated) within EAT, and this may better differentiate HFpEF subtypes and response to therapy than volume alone.

    “Investigators have demonstrated the ability to use CMR to assess fatty acid composition (saturated vs unsaturated) within EAT,23,24 and this may better differentiate HFpEF subtypes and response to therapy than volume alone.”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 54

  1. Gaborit B, 2017, Role of epicardial adipose tissue in health and disease: a matter of fat?, Compr Physiol, 7, 317, 10.1002/j.2040-4603.2017.tb00767.x · DOI
  2. 10.1007/s11154-014-9301-0 · DOI
  3. Pezeshkian M, 2013, Epicardial and subcutaneous adipose tissue fatty acids profiles in diabetic and non‐diabetic patients candidate for coronary artery bypass graft, Bioimpacts, 3, 83
  4. 10.1007/s10554-014-0579-5 · DOI
  5. 10.1007/s12350-013-9739-6 · DOI
  6. 10.1186/1532-429X-12-40 · DOI
  7. 10.1002/ejhf.2741 · DOI · Paper page
  8. 10.1016/j.jnutbio.2019.04.013 · DOI
  9. 10.1080/21623945.2020.1760674 · DOI
  10. 10.1080/21623945.2015.1131881 · DOI
  11. 10.1007/s10517-017-3860-5 · DOI
  12. 10.3390/ijms22010330 · DOI
  13. 10.1002/iub.1428 · DOI
  14. 10.1002/oby.20149 · DOI
  15. 10.1186/s41747-022-00274-0 · DOI
  16. 10.1016/j.jacl.2017.08.018 · DOI
  17. 10.1002/mrm.29348 · DOI · Paper page
  18. 10.1002/mrm.27557 · DOI
  19. 10.1016/j.ejrad.2019.04.024 · DOI
  20. 10.1002/jmri.26586 · DOI
  21. 10.1002/mrm.29623 · DOI
  22. 10.1002/nbm.1622 · DOI
  23. 10.1016/j.mri.2011.07.004 · DOI
  24. 10.1002/mrm.22563 · DOI
  25. 10.1002/mrm.23185 · DOI
  26. Lugauer F, 2015, Medical Image Computing and Computer‐Assisted Intervention–MICCAI 2015, 667
  27. 10.1007/s10334-016-0595-7 · DOI
  28. 10.1109/TIT.2014.2323359 · DOI
  29. 10.1002/mrm.24196 · DOI
  30. 10.1002/mrm.10501 · DOI
  31. 10.1002/mrm.24643 · DOI
  32. 10.1002/mrm.24267 · DOI
  33. 10.1016/j.jmr.2007.06.012 · DOI
  34. 10.1002/mrm.24751 · DOI
  35. 10.1080/10556788.2013.858156 · DOI
  36. Bush EC, 2018, Fat‐water phantoms for magnetic resonance imaging validation: a flexible and scalable protocol, J Vis Exp
  37. 10.1089/met.2008.0056 · DOI · Paper page
  38. 10.1186/s12933-024-02342-8 · DOI
  39. 10.1186/s12968-020-00607-1 · DOI
  40. 10.1186/1532-429X-11-15 · DOI
  41. 10.1186/s12880-020-00478-z · DOI
  42. 10.1186/s12968-020-00649-5 · DOI
  43. 10.1002/mrm.20624 · DOI
  44. 10.1002/mrm.21522 · DOI
  45. 10.1002/mrm.21657 · DOI
  46. 10.1038/s41598-021-85774-6 · DOI
  47. 10.1002/mrm.29860 · DOI
  48. 10.1016/j.jocmr.2024.101048 · DOI
  49. 10.1016/j.numecd.2008.05.002 · DOI
  50. 10.1097/MCA.0000000000000296 · DOI
  51. 10.3390/medicina59020232 · DOI
  52. 10.1016/j.jcct.2017.11.007 · DOI
  53. 10.1038/s41598-021-02427-4 · DOI
  54. 10.1177/2047487316679524 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Echols, J. T., Wang, S., Patel, A. R., Hogwood, A. C., Abbate, A., & Epstein, F. H.
Affiliations
  • Biomedical Engineering University of Virginia Charlottesville Virginia USA
  • Division of Cardiovascular Medicine University of Virginia Charlottesville Virginia USA
  • Robert M. Berne Cardiovascular Research Center University of Virginia Charlottesville Virginia USA
Venue
Magnetic Resonance in Medicine
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2024-09-25
Volume
93
Issue
2
Pages
519-535
ISSN
  • 0740-3194
  • 1522-2594
Cited by
9
References
3
Language
en
Funders
  • National Institute on Aging (R01 AG076360)
  • National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (R01 HL162872)

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review