Copyright
©2011 Baishideng Publishing Group Co.
World J Gastroenterol. Jul 28, 2011; 17(28): 3335-3341
Published online Jul 28, 2011. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v17.i28.3335
Published online Jul 28, 2011. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v17.i28.3335
Table 1 The value of hepatic attenuation indices, splenic attenuation value, body fat volume, body mass index, body weight, waist-hip ratio, triglyceride, and low-density lipoprotein
mean ± SD | Range | |
CTLP | 63.0 ± 10.7 | 15.4-78.6 |
LS ratio | 1.2 ± 0.2 | 0.3-1.8 |
LSdif | 12.2 ± 10.4 | -30.4-33.4 |
CTS | 63.0 ± 10.7 | 15.4-78.6 |
TF (cm2) | 320.3 ± 144.7 | 68.8-869.6 |
VF (cm2) | 121.5 ± 68.1 | 15.7-377.2 |
SF (cm2) | 198.8 ± 97.5 | 12.9-628.6 |
BMI (kg/m2) | 24.5 ± 3.7 | 14.0-38.4 |
WT(kg) | 84.7 ± 12.3 | 65-124 |
WHR | 0.87 ± 0.05 | 0.69-1.01 |
TG (mg/dL) | 137.2 ± 93.5 | 37-762 |
LDL (mg/dL) | 99.5 ± 32.0 | 12.6-331.6 |
Table 2 Correlation between hepatic attenuation indices and total fat, visceral fat, and subcutaneous fat
TF | VF | SF | |
CTLP | r = -0.415 | r = -0.434 | r = -0.313 |
P = 0.000 | P = 0.000 | P = 0.000 | |
LS ratio | r = -0.258 | r = -0.298 | r = -0.172 |
P = 0.000 | P = 0.000 | P = 0.003 | |
LSdif | r = -0.297 | r = -0.330 | r = -0.210 |
P = 0.000 | P = 0.000 | P = 0.000 |
Table 3 Correlation between hepatic attenuation indices and body mass index, body weight, waist-hip ratio, triglyceride, and low-density lipoprotein
BMI | WT | WHR | TG | LDL | |
CTLP | r = -0.582 | r = -0.593 | r = -0.364 | r = -0.388 | r = -0.060 |
P = 0.000 | P = 0.000 | P = 0.000 | P = 0.000 | P = 0.300 | |
LS ratio | r = -0.331 | r = -0.405 | r = -0.219 | r = -0.314 | r = -0.036 |
P = 0.000 | P = 0.000 | P = 0.000 | P = 0.000 | P = 0.531 | |
LSdif | r = -0.392 | r = -0.454 | r = -0.257 | r = -0.341 | r = -0.036 |
P = 0.000 | P = 0.000 | P = 0.000 | P = 0.000 | P = 0.531 |
Table 4 Correlation between body mass index and abdominal fat volume
TF | VF | SF | |
BMI | r = 0.705 | r = 0.601 | r = 0.624 |
P = 0.000 | P = 0.000 | P = 0.000 |
Table 5 mean values of total fat, visceral fat, and subcutaneous fat among three different groups of hepatic fat infiltration
n | mean ± SD | Minimum | Maximum | |
TF (cm2) | ||||
Normal | 249 | 299.8 ± 133.3 | 68.8 | 869.6 |
Fatty liver | 57 | 409.8 ± 159.3 | 126.6 | 838.0 |
VF (cm2) | ||||
Normal | 249 | 110.1 ± 59.7 | 15.7 | 316.6 |
Fatty liver | 57 | 171.4 ± 79.8 | 46.5 | 377.2 |
SF (cm2) | ||||
Normal | 249 | 189.7 ± 92.8 | 12.9 | 571.3 |
Fatty liver | 57 | 238.4 ± 108.0 | 72.4 | 628.6 |
Table 6 mean values of total fat, visceral fat, and subcutaneous fat between men and women (mean ± SD)
Men (n) | Women (n) | P value | |
TF (cm2) | |||
Total | 309.5 ± 131.3 (116) | 326.9 ± 152.3 (190) | 0.0051 |
Normal | 292.6 ± 119.0 (89) | 303.9 ± 140.8 (160) | 0.0021 |
Fatty liver | 410.6 ± 160.2 (27) | 409.1 ± 161.2 (30) | 0.545 |
VF (cm2) | |||
Total | 145.9 ± 66.6 (116) | 106.7 ± 64.8 (190) | 0.914 |
Normal | 133.2 ± 54.3 (89) | 97.2 ± 58.8 (160) | 0.164 |
Fatty liver | 190.2 ± 74.2 (27) | 154.5 ± 82.1 (30) | 0.444 |
SF (cm2) | |||
Total | 163.6 ± 80.6 (116) | 220.3 ± 100.8 (190) | 0.0001 |
Normal | 159.3 ± 80.0 (89) | 206.6 ± 95.3 (160) | 0.0021 |
Fatty liver | 220.4 ± 116.9 (27) | 254.5 ± 98.5 (30) | 0.916 |
- Citation: Jang S, Lee CH, Choi KM, Lee J, Choi JW, Kim KA, Park CM. Correlation of fatty liver and abdominal fat distribution using a simple fat computed tomography protocol. World J Gastroenterol 2011; 17(28): 3335-3341
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/1007-9327/full/v17/i28/3335.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v17.i28.3335