Departments of 1Internal Medicine and 2Radiology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Kufa, Najaf, Iraq; 3Department of Radiology, Almustansyria University, Baghdad, Iraq; 4Department of Clinical Pharmacy, Najaf Health Bureau, Najaf, Iraq *Corresponding Author e-mail: husseinaf.alnaffakh@uokufa.edu.iq تأثري دليل كتلة اجلسم على تكلس األوعية الدموية وحجم الدهون يف غشاء التامور بني املرضى الذين يوجد لديهم اشتباه مرض الشريان التاجي ح�صني نفاخي، عبد االمري املو�صوي، حيدر قا�صم الوايل، ح�صن النفاخ، رعد توفيق، احمد نفاخي abstract: Objectives: This study aimed to assess the effect of body mass index (BMI) on the relationship between pericardial fat volume (PFV), aortic root calcification (ARC) and coronary artery calcification (CAC) among patients with suspected coronary artery disease (CAD). Methods: This cross-sectional study took place between January and December 2014 at the Kufa University Teaching Hospital, Najaf, Iraq. A total of 130 consecutive patients with an intermediate pretest probability of ischaemic heart disease who underwent 64-slice multidetector computed tomography (CT) angiography during the study period were recruited. Of these, 111 were included in the study and divided into groups according to BMI. Imaging markers were measured on CT angiography. Results: A total of 28 patients were obese, while 42 and 41 were overweight and normal weight, respectively. The median PFV, CAC and ARC was 109 cm3 (interquartile range [IQR]: 52–176 cm3), 0 Agatston score (IQR: 0–52 Agatston score) and 0 Agatston score (IQR: 0–15 Agatston score), respectively, in the normal weight group in comparison to 79 cm3 (IQR: 43–138 cm3), 0 Agatston score (IQR: 0–54 Agatston score) and 0 Agatston score (IQR: 0–0 Agatston score), respectively, in the obese group. Significant correlations were observed between PFV and CAC (r2 = 0.22; P = 0.002) and ARC and CAC (r2 = 0.37; P <0.001) in the normal weight group. However, no significant correlations were observed for obese and overweight patients. Conclusion: These findings indicate that BMI may not be an accurate tool for measuring adiposity or assessing subclinical coronary atherosclerosis in patients with suspected CAD. Keywords: Body Mass Index; Obesity; Pericardium; Coronary Vessels; Vascular Calcification; Atherosclerosis; Coronary Angiography. امللخ�ص: اأهداف: هدفت هذه الدرا�صة اإىل تقييم تاأثري دليل كتلة اجل�صم )BMI( على العالقة بني حجم الدهون يف التامور )PFV( مع تكل�ض .)CAD( التاجي ال�رضيان مر�ض ا�صتباه من يعانون الذين املر�صى بني )CAC( التاجي ال�رضيان وتكل�ض )ARC( االأبهر ال�رضيان جذر منهجية: اأجريت هذه الدرا�صة امل�صحية يف الفرتة ما بني يناير ودي�صمرب 2014م يف امل�صت�صفى التعليمي جلامعة الكوفة يف النجف، العراق، خالل فرتة الدرا�صة مت ح�رض ما جمموعه 130 مري�صًا على التوايل من بني امل�صتبه باإ�صابتهم مبر�ض نق�ض تروية القلب وخ�صعوا للفح�ض 130 جمموع من مري�ض، لكل اإ�صعاعي مقطع 64 وت�صوير )CT( املحو�صب املقطعي الك�صف متعدد الدموية االأوعية ت�صوير جهاز يف مري�صا،ً مت اإدراج 111 منهم يف الدرا�صة وتق�صيمهم اإىل جمموعات وفقًا لدليل كتلة اجل�صم. نتائج: كان هناك 28 مري�صًا يعانون من ال�صمنة و 42 من فرط يف الوزن، بينما كان 41 مري�صًا الباقني ذو وزن طبيعي، بلغ متو�صط حجم الدهون يف التامور وتكل�ض ال�رضيان التاجي و تكل�ض جذر ال�رضيان االأبهر 109 �صم مكعب )مدى املعدل الرباعي من 176–52 �صم مكعب(، نتيجة اأجات�صون 0 )مدى رباعي 52-0(ونتيجة اأجات�صون 0 )مدى رباعي 15–0( على التوايل يف حاالت الوزن الطبيعي، مقارنًة مبعدل متو�صط 79 �صم مكعب )مدى رباعي 138-43 �صم املر�صى جمموعة يف التوايل على النتيجة( من 0–0 رباعي )مدى 0 اأجات�صون ونتيجة )0-54 رباعي )مدى 0 اأجات�صون نتيجة مكعب(، )r2 = 0.22; P = 0.002( ذوي ال�صمنة، لوحظ وجود ارتباط ذو داللة اإح�صائية بني حجم الدهون يف غ�صاء التامور وتكل�ض ال�رضيان التاجي و بني تكل�ض ال�رضيان التاجي وتكل�ض جذر ال�رضيان االأبهر )r2 = 0.37; P >0.001( يف جمموعة املر�صى ذوي الوزن الطبيعي، يف حني مل يالحظ اأي ارتباط ملمو�ض بني هذه املوؤ�رضات يف الذين يعانون من ال�صمنة وفرط الوزن. خامتة: ت�صري هذه النتائج اإىل اأن دليل كتلة اجل�صم قد ال يكون اأداة دقيقة لقيا�ض ال�صمنة اأو تقييم وجود ت�صلب ال�رضايني التاجية حتت ال�رضيري يف املر�صى الذين يعانون من ا�صتباه مر�ض ال�رضيان التاجي. كلمات مفتاحية: دليل كتلة اجل�صم؛ ال�صمنة؛ غ�صاء التامور؛ االوعية التاجية؛ تكل�ض وعائي؛ ت�صلب ع�صيدي؛ ت�صوير االوعية التاجية. Impact of Body Mass Index on Vascular Calcification and Pericardial Fat Volume Among Patients with Suspected Coronary Artery Disease *Hussein Nafakhi,1 Abdulameer Al-Mosawi,2 Hayder Elwali,2 Hasan Al-Nafakh,2 Raad Tawfeq,3 Ahmed Nafakhi4 clinical & basic research Sultan Qaboos University Med J, August 2016, Vol. 16, Iss. 3, pp. e310–316, Epub. 19 Aug 16 Submitted 1 Nov 15 Revisions Req. 3 Jan, 4 Feb, 24 Feb & 14 Mar 16; Revisions Recd. 25 Jan, 14 Feb, 28 Feb & 23 Mar 16 Accepted 7 Apr 16 doi: 10.18295/squmj.2016.16.03.008 Advances in Knowledge - This study examines the role of emerging imaging markers—coronary artery calcification, aortic root calcification and pericardial fat volume (PFV)—in coronary atherosclerosis among patients with different body mass indexes (BMIs). - The results of this study suggest that BMI does not accurately predict the role and distribution of adipose tissue in patients with cardiovascular disease. Hussein Nafakhi, Abdulameer Al-Mosawi, Hayder Elwali, Hasan Al-Nafakh, Raad Tawfeq and Ahmed Nafakhi Clinical and Basic Research | e311 Over the last few decades, the global prevalence of obesity has increased drama-tically; this is concerning due to the crucial role that obesity plays in metabolic disorders and in increasing the risk of cardiovascular disease.1 Several non-invasive measurement-based techniques have been used to define obesity, including body mass index (BMI), waist circumference, waist-to-hip ratio and abdominal wall thickness. However, there is as yet no optimal method for accurately assessing the burden and distribution of adipose tissue believed to be involved in coronary and vascular atherosclerosis.2 As a marker of subclinical coronary atherosclerosis, coronary artery calcification (CAC) has an incremental prognostic role which differs to traditional cardiac risk factors and is associated with a higher cardiovascular burden and improved coronary risk stratification.3 Research has shown that CAC is a more effective predictor of cardiovascular events and assessment of atherosclerosis burden.4 However, little is known regarding the relation of aortic root calcification (ARC) to coronary atherosclerosis and obesity. Pericardial fat is a local fat deposit that covers 80% of the surface of the heart, with a close anatomical proximity to the epicardial coronary arteries; pericardial fat volume (PFV) is an emerging imaging marker that has been reported to be involved in coronary atherosclerosis.5–8 The main aim of this study was to assess the impact of BMI on emerging radiological markers of coronary atherosclerosis (CAC, ARC and PFV) in patients with suspected coronary artery disease (CAD). Methods This cross-sectional study was carried out between January and December 2014 at the Cardiology Center of the Kufa University Teaching Hospital, Najaf, Iraq. A total of 130 consecutive Iraqi patients with suspected CAD based on age, gender and the presence of cardiac symptoms who had undergone 64-slice multi-detector computed tomography (MDCT) angiography for assessment of CAD during the study period were recruited. The exclusion criteria for a MDCT exam- ination included haemodynamic instability, a history of cardiac surgery, iodine-based contrast allergies, renal failure (creatinine levels of ≥1.5 mg/dL), atrial fibrillation or other unstable heart rhythms, an inability to perform breath-holding, the presence of intracardiac devices (e.g. pacemakers), pregnancy or contraindications for the use of β-blockers.6 Of those recruited, 19 patients were subsequently disqualified due to poor imaging technique or motion artifacts (n = 8), aortic root anomalies or dissections (n = 2), difficulties in accurate PFV calculation or segmentation of fat (n = 6) or missing data (n = 3). A total of 111 patients were hence included in the study and divided into obese (BMI of ≥30 kg/m2), overweight (BMI of 25–29.9 kg/m2) or normal weight (BMI of <25 kg/m2) groups. Non-contrast multidetector computed tomo- graphy (CT) was performed on all patients with suspected CAD using a sequence scan with a slice thickness of 3 mm. Total heart calcium levels were measured according to the Agatston method.6 Thereafter, 64-slice CT coronary angiography was performed (Aquilion™ 64, Version 4.51 ER 010, Toshiba Medical Systems Corp., Otawara, Japan) according to previously defined methods.9,10 The scan was obtained from the aortic arch to the level of the diaphragm during a single breath-hold. Retrospective electrocardiograph (ECG)-gating and ECG-dependent tube current modulation was performed using defined parameters.9 Following this, CT images were reconstructed using a smooth kernel (B25f ) with a slice thickness of 0.5 mm (increment of 0.3 mm) and data sets were transferred to a VitreaWorkstation™ (Vital Images Inc., Minnetonka, Minnesota, USA) for image analysis.6 Figure 1: Multi-detector computed tomography showing the calculation of aortic root calcification. LM = left main artery; RCA = right coronary artery; LAD = left anterior descending artery; CX = left circumflex coronary artery; PDA = posterior descending artery. Application to Patient Care - The utilisation of BMI as a measurement of obesity may result in the inaccurate classification of adiposity among patients. - As an imaging marker, PFV may be the optimal tool for the assessment of body adiposity. Impact of Body Mass Index on Vascular Calcification and Pericardial Fat Volume Among Patients with Suspected Coronary Artery Disease e312 | SQU Medical Journal, August 2016, Volume 16, Issue 3 A minimum of three contiguous voxels with a CT density of >130 Hounsfield units (HU) was considered to define the CAC area. Coronary artery stenosis severity was classified visually according to mean lumen diameter as normal, non-obstructed (reduction of <50%) or obstructive (reduction of ≥50% in a single vessel) by comparing the narrowest segment of the lumen diameter with the more proximal or distal normal segment in two orthogonal projections.9 The part of the aorta lying within 3 cm of the caudal aspect of the aortic annulus containing the sinuses of Valsalva and the sinotubular junction was defined as the aortic root. According to this definition, total ARC was measured using the Agatston method [Figure 1].3 Areas in the aortic root with an attenuation of >130 HU and an area of >1 mm2 were considered to be calcified lesions.3,10 Any adipose tissue located within the pericardial sac was considered to denote pericardial fat; this was measured three-dimensionally with a contrast-enhanced phase [Figure 2]. The pericardial layer was manually traced and a three-dimensional (3D) image of the heart constructed.9 The PFV was then estimated using a 3D workstation by measuring the total volume of pericardial tissue with a CT density between -250 and -20 HU. All MDCT data sets were evaluated by two independent radiologists with more than five years of experience in MDCT angiography data analysis.9 Significant differences between ARC, CAC and PFV markers among the BMI groups were analysed. Subsequently, the relationships between ARC, CAC and PFV in each group was analysed. The presence of conventional cardiac risk factors for CAD was obtained from each patient at the time of the coronary MDCT angiography examination during clinical history-taking. Conventional cardiac risk factors included the following: positive family history of early CAD occurring before 55 years of age in men and 65 years of age in women; current smoking status and history defined as more than 10 cigarettes per day in the last year; history of hypertension or use of anti-hypertension medications; hyperlipidaemia (total cholesterol ≥200 mg/dL, triglyceride levels ≥150 mg/dL or use of lipid-lowering drugs); history of diabetes mellitus or use of antidiabetic or insulin-lowering drugs; and obesity (BMI of ≥30 kg/m2). Patients with two or more of these risk factors apart from obesity were considered to have multiple CAD risk factors.3,6 Data were analysed using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS), Version 13.0 (IBM Corp., Chicago, Illinois, USA). Results were presented as interquartile ranges (IQRs) or percentages, as appro- priate. Categorical data were expressed as frequencies and group comparisons were performed using Pearson’s Chi-squared test. Continuous variables were presented as median values and IQRs and were compared using the Student’s t-test, analysis of variance or non-parametric Mann-Whitney U test, as appropriate. Correlations between PFV, ARC and CAC were examined using Pearson’s correlation coefficient or Spearman’s rank correlation for nonparametric data. A multiple regression analysis was used to analyse correlations between the dependent variables (CAC, PFV and ARC) and the independent variable (BMI) after multivariate adjustment for age, gender, hypertension, smoking, diabetes, family history of premature CAD and hyperlipidaemia. A P value of <0.050 was considered statistically significant. This study was approved by the ethical committee of the Faculty of Medicine, University of Kufa. Inform- ed consent was obtained from all patients included in the study. Figure 2 A & B: Multi-detector computed tomography showing the measurement of pericardial fat volume (green shading) in the (A) axial and (B) coronal sections of the heart. Hussein Nafakhi, Abdulameer Al-Mosawi, Hayder Elwali, Hasan Al-Nafakh, Raad Tawfeq and Ahmed Nafakhi Clinical and Basic Research | e313 Results Of the 111 patients included in the study, 54 were male (49%). The mean age of the total sample was 54.2 ± 10.3 years. According to BMI category, 28 patients were obese (25%), 42 were overweight (38%) and 41 were of normal weight (37%), with mean ages of 51.3 ± 9.5 years, 56.8 ± 10.3 years and 54.7 ± 10.2 years, respectively. Median PFV (109 cm3; IQR: 52–176 cm3 versus 97 cm3; IQR: 43–138 cm3) and ARC (0 Agatston score; IQR: 0–15 Agatston score versus 0 Agatston score; IQR: 0–0 Agatston score) values were highest in the normal weight group and lowest in the obese group, respectively. In comparison, median CAC values were highest in the obese group and lowest in the normal weight group (0 Agatston score; IQR: 0–54 Agatston score versus 0 Agatston score; IQR: 0–52 Agatston score). In the overweight group, the median PFV, ARC and CAC scores were 87 cm3 (IQR: 69–130 cm3), 0 Agatston score (IQR: 0–2 Agatston score) and 0 Agatston score (IQR: 0–53 Agatston score), respectively. Differences in PFV, CAC and ARC scores among the patient groups were not statistically significant (P = 0.419, 0.871 and 0.631, respectively). Additionally, there was no significant difference in the distribution of obstructive coronary stenosis among the groups (P = 0.121). The presence of CAD risk factors was also similar among the groups, except that there were more patients with multiple risk factors in the normal weight group compared to the obese and overweight groups (P = 0.032) [Table 1]. For the obese patients, no significant correlations were observed between PFV and CAC (r2 = 0.01; P = 0.167), obstructive coronary artery stenosis (r2 <0.01; P = 0.338) or ARC (r2 = 0.02; P = 0.266). Also, ARC showed no significant correlation with CAC (r2 = 0.04; P = 0.541) or obstructive coronary stenosis (r2 = 0.04; P = 0.335). In the overweight group, no significant correlation was observed between PFV and CAC (r2 = 0.03; P = 0.521), obstructive coronary stenosis (r2 <0.01; P = 0.611) or ARC (r2 = 0.01; P = 0.745); additionally, ARC showed no significant correlation with CAC (r2 = 0.03; P = 0.244) or obstructive coronary stenosis (r2 = 0.02; P = 0.322). In the normal weight group, a significant correlation was observed between PFV and CAC (r2 = 0.22; P = 0.002) and obstructive coronary stenosis (r2 = 0.18; P = 0.004), Table 1: Demographic and imaging characteristics and presence of risks factors among patients with suspected coronary artery disease (N = 111) Characteristic n (%) P value Obese group (n = 28) Overweight group (n = 42) Normal weight group (n = 41) Mean age ± SD 51.3 ± 9.5 56.8 ± 10.3 54.7 ± 10.2 0.217 Gender Male 9(32) 23 (55) 22 (54) 0.156 Female 19 (68) 19 (45) 19 (46) 0.138 CAD risk factors Hypertension 12 (43) 16 (38) 23 (56) 0.211 Smoking 6 (21) 10 (24) 13 (32) 0.510 Hyperlipidaemia 5 (18) 6 (14) 6 (15) 0.982 Diabetes 2 (7) 3 (7) 3 (7) 0.954 Family history of premature CAD 5 (18) 2 (5) 4 (10) 0.150 Multiple* 4 (14) 10 (24) 17 (41) 0.032 Imaging marker scores Median CAC score (IQR) in Agatston 0 (0–54) 0 (0–53) 0 (0–52) 0.832 Median ARC score (IQR) in Agatston 0 (0–0) 0 (0–2) 0 (0–15) 0.632 Median PFV (IQR) in cm3 79 (43–138) 87 (69–130) 109 (52–176) 0.419 Obstructive coronary stenosis† 5 (18) 9 (21) 7 (17) 0.871 SD = standard deviation; CAD = coronary artery disease; CAC = coronary artery calcification; IQR = interquartile range; ARC = aortic root calcification; PFV = pericardial fat volume. *Presence of two or more risk factors in the same patient. †Luminal stenosis ≥50%. Impact of Body Mass Index on Vascular Calcification and Pericardial Fat Volume Among Patients with Suspected Coronary Artery Disease e314 | SQU Medical Journal, August 2016, Volume 16, Issue 3 although there was no significant correlation between PFV and ARC (r2 = 0.04; P = 0.113). The correlations between PFV and CAC (P = 0.003; confidence interval [CI] = 0.218–1.012) and between PFC and obstructive coronary stenosis (P = 0.03; CI = 6.441–137.517) persisted after multivariate adjustment for age, gender, ARC and conventional CAD risk factors. Furthermore, ARC showed a significant correlation with CAC (r2 = 0.37; P <0.001) and obstructive coronary stenosis (r2 = 0.23; P = 0.001); these correla- tions persisted after multivariate adjustment for age, gender, PFV and conventional CAD risk factors (P <0.001; CI = 0.342–0.870 and P = 0.003; CI = 6.742–29.445, respectively). Multiple regression analysis was performed to assess the relationship of BMI with CAC, ARC and PFV in the sample after adjustment for age, gender and conventional CAD risk factors [Table 2]. No significant correlation was observed between BMI and any of these markers, including PFV [Figure 3]. Discussion The use of BMI as a method for identifying obesity has several limitations. For example, BMI calculations do not usually take into consideration age, gender, bone structure, muscle mass or the time relationship between obesity and the clinical outcome being measured.7 Furthermore, BMI measurements do not differentiate between body weight due to muscle mass and weight due to adipose mass; the latter is now considered a key factor involved in various metabolic and cardiovascular disorders.1 Moreover, the relationship between BMI and percentage of adipose tissue is not linear and differs between men and women.7 In recent years, the results of several studies have suggested that obesity as determined by BMI is not necessarily equivalent to poor metabolic health or adverse cardiovascular outcomes; these findings have led to the generation of a new term— metabolically healthy obesity—which refers to obese subjects who satisfy the current definition of obesity without being metabolically unhealthy.11–13 Interestingly, ‘U’- or ‘J’-shaped associations between BMI and cardiovascular outcomes or mortality have been identified, in which obese patients show better outcomes in terms of cardiovascular morbidity and total mortality compared to patients of a normal weight.1,13 This inverse relationship between BMI and morbidity or mortality rates has been referred to as the “obesity paradox”.1,13 In a meta-analysis of data from 89 studies including 1,300,794 patients, Wang et al. reported a ‘J’-shaped relationship between prognosis Table 2: Multiple regression analysis of imaging markers with body mass index and risk factors among patients with suspected coronary artery disease (N = 111) CAD risk factor ARC PFV CAC RC SE P value RC SE P value RC SE P value BMI 0.59 0.9 0.521 0.04 0.6 0.993 1.63 0.9 0.933 HTN 18.82 27.1 0.434 2.21 16.7 0.863 152.21 113.3 0.112 Smoking 21.45 30.0 0.453 13.62 18.2 0.423 18.00 29.1 0.500 Diabetes 3.14 12.1 0.853 1.21 7.9 0.813 5.22 12.5 0.643 Hyperlipidaemia 21.54 33.4 0.514 11.13 20.6 0.552 9.10 32.6 0.752 Family history 11.62 43.5 0.723 12.53 26.8 0.612 7.42 42.1 0.825 Age 2.83 1.1 0.012 0.34 0.7 0.544 3.62 1.1 0.002 Male gender 53.31 25.6 0.031 15.72 15.8 0.311 22.43 25.4 0.362 CAD = coronary artery disease; ARC = aortic root calcification; PFV = pericardial fat volume; CAC = coronary artery calcification; RC = regression coefficient; SE = standard error; BMI = body mass index; HTN = hypertension. Figure 3: Non-significant correlation between body mass index and pericardial fat volume among patients with suspected coronary artery disease (N = 111). PFV = pericardial fat volume; BMI = body mass index. Hussein Nafakhi, Abdulameer Al-Mosawi, Hayder Elwali, Hasan Al-Nafakh, Raad Tawfeq and Ahmed Nafakhi Clinical and Basic Research | e315 and BMI in patients with CAD.14 Thus, the use of BMI as a measure of obesity may lead to bias in assessing relationships between obesity and cardiovascular health and outcomes.6 An inconsistent and complex relationship between obesity and vascular calcification has been described in the literature. Several studies have suggested that obesity is associated with increased CAC and calcification of the aorta; however, these studies were performed in relatively young populations or among individuals without known CAD or clinically significant coronary disease.15–18 On the other hand, an inverse relationship between vascular calcification and reduced bone density among the elderly has been suggested in more recent studies, whereby low BMI was independently associated with decreased bone mineral density which, in turn, was associated with increased vascular calcification.19,20 Rhee et al. compared CAC scores assessed by MDCT among 24,000 participants with different metabolic health and obesity statuses; CAC levels were similar for both non-obese but metabolically unhealthy individuals and metabolically unhealthy obese paticipants.12 This finding suggests that metabolic health is more closely associated with CAC than obesity via a complex pathway.12 Recently, after studying the CT scans of 276 participants scoring multiple arteries, including the coronary arteries and aorta, Takx et al. reported the systemic nature of cardiovascular calcifications, with a weak link between BMI and cardiovascular calcifications among different arterial beds.21 With regards to the relationship between PFV, vascular calcification and obesity, considerable evid- ence supports the vital role of pericardial fat accumulation in the coronary atherosclerosis process via the secretion of hormones and cytokines that modulate coronary artery haemostasis.6 The concept of normal weight obesity—defined as a normal BMI and excess body fat percentage—has been recently reported as an important risk factor for cardiovascular disease and metabolic dysregulation; higher amounts of visceral fat even with a normal BMI carry an elevated cardiovascular risk.22,23 Kim et al. reported that patients with normal weight obesity have a higher subclinical atherosclerosis incidence than normal weight lean patients due to a higher amount of visceral fat, regardless of other clinical risk factors for atherosclerosis.23 A recent systematic review and meta-analysis of 38 studies examining the relationship between epicardial fat and generalised obesity, central or visceral adipose tissue and the components of metabolic syndrome found a highly significant correlation between epicardial fat and BMI.24 Two CT-based studies found that increased cardiac fat was associated with CAD in non-obese patients and with metabolic syndrome regardless of BMI status.25,26 Additionally, a magnetic resonance imaging-based study reported that cardiac fat deposits were associated with a worse cardiometabolic profile in non-obese persons.27 Nevertheless, it is important to note that there is significant heterogeneity between echocardiography- based and CT-based studies in the assessment of cardiac fat deposits, whereby the volumetric quantification of cardiac fat using MDCT is highly reproducible compared to more simple measurements of thickness and area using echocardiography. Two- dimensional echocardiographic measurements may not be accurate enough to assess the 3D-distribution of pericardial fat deposits.28 Moreover, the differences in anatomical description (pericardial versus epicardial fat) and discrepancies and ambiguities in the definition and nomenclature of fat deposits around the heart can attenuate the strength of reported associations between cardiac fat deposits and obesity.6 In the present study, significant correlations were observed between ARC and PFV with CAC in the normal weight group, while ARC, CAC and PFV showed no significant correlations in the overweight and obese groups. The assessment of different markers of coronary atherosclerosis through an automated (CAC and ARC) or semi-automated (PFV) scoring system using MDCT was a strength of the current study. However, there were several limitations. First, the patients were not randomly selected and only those patients with suspected CAD from a single centre were included, potentially resulting in selection bias which may limit generalisation of the results. Second, the sample size was relatively small. Third, causal relationships between PFV, ARC and CAC could not be inferred due to the cross-sectional design of the study. Fourth, the progression of CAC and ARC was not assessed; hence, obesity may have been associated with arterial calcification progression. Finally, a high BMI at the time of the MDCT examination may not necessarily reflect long-term obesity. Conclusion In the present study, PFV and ARC showed a significant correlation with subclinical coronary atherosclerosis (CAC and obstructive coronary stenosis) in normal weight patients. However, no significant correlations were observed for obese and overweight patients. These results suggest that BMI may not be an accurate tool for the measurement of adipose tissue or the assessment of arterial calcification burden among patients with suspected CAD. Impact of Body Mass Index on Vascular Calcification and Pericardial Fat Volume Among Patients with Suspected Coronary Artery Disease e316 | SQU Medical Journal, August 2016, Volume 16, Issue 3 c o n f l i c t o f i n t e r e s t The authors declare no conflicts of interest. f u n d i n g No funding was received for this study. References 1. Bastien M, Poirier P, Lemieux I, Després JP. Overview of epidemiology and contribution of obesity to cardiovascular disease. Prog Cardiovasc Dis 2014; 56:369–81. doi: 10.1016/j. pcad.2013.10.016. 2. Edston E. A correlation between the weight of visceral adipose tissue and selected anthropometric indices: An autopsy study. Clin Obes 2013; 3:84–9. doi: 10.1111/cob.12021. 3. Nafakhi H, Al-Nafakh H, Al-Mosawi A. Impact of obesity on aortic root calcification and coronary calcification using multi-detector CT. Artery Res 2015; 9:27–32. doi: 10.1016/j. artres.2014.12.001. 4. Greenland P, LaBree L, Azen SP, Doherty TM, Detrano RC. Coronary artery calcium score combined with Framingham score for risk prediction in asymptomatic individuals. JAMA 2004; 291:210–15. doi: 10.1001/jama.291.2.210. 5. Rabkin SW. Epicardial fat: Properties, function and relationship to obesity. Obes Rev 2007; 8:253–61. doi: 10.1111/j.1467- 789X.2006.00293.x. 6. Nafakhi H, Al-Mosawi A, Al-Nafakh H, Tawfeeq N. Association of pericardial fat volume with coronary atherosclerotic disease assessed by CT angiography. Br J Radiol 2014; 87:20130713. doi: 10.1259/bjr.20130713. 7. Rothman KJ. BMI-related errors in the measurement of obesity. Int J Obes (Lond) 2008; 32:S56–9. doi: 10.1038/ijo.2008.87. 8. Spearman JV, Renker M, Schoepf UJ, Krazinski AW, Herbert TL, De Cecco CN, et al. Prognostic value of epicardial fat volume measurements by computed tomography: A systematic review of the literature. Eur Radiol 2015; 25:3372–81. doi: 10.1007/ s00330-015-3765-5. 9. Nafakhi H, Al-Nafakh HA, Al-Mosawi AA. ABO blood group differences relationship with coronary atherosclerotic markers. Artery Res 2016; 14:36–40. doi: 10.1016/j.artres.2016.03.001. 10. Al-Nafakh HA, Nafakhi H, Al-Jiboori MA, Al-Mosawi AA, Tawfeq RH. Aortic root calcification and cardiac risk factors in patients with coronary calcium score greater than zero using multidetector computed tomography. Artery Res 2015; 10:27–31. doi: 10.1016/j.artres.2015.02.002. 11. Dobson R, Burgess MI, Sprung VS, Irwin A, Hamer M, Jones J, et al. Metabolically healthy and unhealthy obesity: Differential effects on myocardial function according to metabolic syn- drome, rather than obesity. Int J Obes (Lond) 2016; 40:153–61. doi: 10.1038/ijo.2015.151. 12. Rhee EJ, Lee MK, Kim JD, Jeon WS, Bae JC, Park SE, et al. Metabolic health is a more important determinant for diabetes development than simple obesity: A 4-year retrospective longitudinal study. PLoS One 2014; 9:e98369. doi: 10.1371/ journal.pone.0098369. 13. Romero-Corral A, Montori VM, Somers VK, Korinek J, Thomas RJ, Allison TG, et al. Association of bodyweight with total mortality and with cardiovascular events in coronary artery disease: A systematic review of cohort studies. Lancet 2006; 368:666–78. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(06)69251-9. 14. Wang ZJ, Zhou YJ, Galper BZ, Gao F, Yeh RW, Mauri L. Association of body mass index with mortality and cardiovascular events for patients with coronary artery disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Heart 2015; 101:1631–8. doi: 10.1136/heartjnl-2014-307119. 15. Kronmal RA, McClelland RL, Detrano R, Shea S, Lima JA, Cushman M, et al. Risk factors for the progression of coronary artery calcification in asymptomatic subjects: Results from the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (MESA). Circulation 2007; 115:2722–30. doi: 10.1161/CIRCU LATIONAHA.106.674143. 16. Lee CD, Jacobs DR Jr, Schreiner PJ, Iribarren C, Hankinson A. Abdominal obesity and coronary artery calcification in young adults: The Coronary Artery Risk Development in Young Adults (CARDIA) Study. Am J Clin Nutr 2007; 86:48–54. 17. See R, Abdullah SM, McGuire DK, Khera A, Patel MJ, Lindsey JB, et al. The association of differing measures of overweight and obesity with prevalent atherosclerosis: The Dallas Heart Study. J Am Coll Cardiol 2007; 50:752–9. doi: 10.1016/j. jacc.2007.04.066. 18. Siviero-Miachon AA, Spinola-Castro AM, de Martino Lee ML, de Castro Monteiro CM, de Camargo Carvalho AC, Calixto AR, et al. Subcutaneous adipose tissue plays a beneficial effect on subclinical atherosclerosis in young survivors of acute lymphocytic leukemia. Vasc Health Risk Manag 2015; 11:479–88. doi: 10.2147/VHRM.S86883. 19. Kovacic JC, Lee P, Baber U, Karajgikar R, Evrard SM, Moreno P, et al. Inverse relationship between body mass index and coronary artery calcification in patients with clinically significant coronary lesions. Atherosclerosis 2012; 221:176–82. doi: 10.1016/j.atherosclerosis.2011.11.020. 20. Dangas GD, Maehara A, Evrard SM, Sartori S, Li JR, Chirumamilla AP, et al. Coronary artery calcification is inversely related to body morphology in patients with significant coronary artery disease: A three-dimensional intravascular ultrasound study. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging 2014; 15:201–9. doi: 10.1093/ehjci/jet139. 21. Takx RA, Zanen P, Leiner T, van der Graaf Y, de Jong PA; SMART study group. The interdependence between cardio- vascular calcifications in different arterial beds and vascular risk factors in patients at high cardiovascular risk. Atherosclerosis 2015; 238:140–6. doi: 10.1016/j.atherosclerosis.2014.11.024. 22. Jean N, Somers VK, Sochor O, Medina-Inojosa J, Llano EM, Lopez-Jimenez F. Normal-weight obesity: Implications for cardiovascular health. Curr Atheroscler Rep 2014; 16:464. doi: 10.1007/s11883-014-0464-7. 23. Kim S, Kyung C, Park JS, Lee SP, Kim HK, Ahn CW, et al. Normal-weight obesity is associated with increased risk of subclinical atherosclerosis. Cardiovasc Diabetol 2015; 14:58. doi: 10.1186/s12933-015-0220-5. 24. Rabkin SW. The relationship between epicardial fat and indices of obesity and the metabolic syndrome: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Metab Syndr Relat Disord 2014; 12:31–42. doi: 10.1089/met.2013.0107. 25. Shah RV, Murthy VL, Abbasi SA, Blankstein R, Kwong RY, Goldfine AB, et al. Visceral adiposity and the risk of metabolic syndrome across body mass index: The MESA Study. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 2014; 7:1221–35. doi: 10.1016/j. jcmg.2014.07.017. 26. Okada K, Ohshima S, Isobe S, Harada K, Hirashiki A, Funahashi H, et al. Epicardial fat volume correlates with severity of coronary artery disease in nonobese patients. J Cardiovasc Med (Hagerstown) 2014; 15:384–90. doi: 10.2459/ JCM.0b013e32836094da. 27. De Larochellière E, Côté J, Gilbert G, Bibeau K, Ross MK, Dion-Roy V, et al. Visceral/epicardial adiposity in nonobese and apparently healthy young adults: Association with the cardiometabolic profile. Atherosclerosis 2014; 234:23–9. doi: 10.1016/j.atherosclerosis.2014.01.053. 28. Gorter PM, van Lindert AS, de Vos AM, Meijs MF, van der Graaf Y, Doevendans PA, et al. Quantification of epicardial and peri-coronary fat using cardiac computed tomography: Reproducibility and relation with obesity and metabolic syndrome in patients suspected of coronary artery disease. Atherosclerosis 2008; 197:896–903. doi: 10.1016/j. atherosclerosis.2007.08.016. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.pcad.2013.10.016 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.pcad.2013.10.016 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/cob.12021 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.artres.2014.12.001 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.artres.2014.12.001 http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/jama.291.2.210 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-789X.2006.00293.x http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-789X.2006.00293.x http://dx.doi.org/10.1259/bjr.20130713 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/ijo.2008.87 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00330-015-3765-5 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00330-015-3765-5 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.artres.2016.03.001 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.artres.2015.02.002 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/ijo.2015.151 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0098369 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0098369 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736%2806%2969251-9 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/heartjnl-2014-307119 http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.106.674143 http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.106.674143 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2007.04.066 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2007.04.066 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/VHRM.S86883 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.atherosclerosis.2011.11.020 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ehjci/jet139 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.atherosclerosis.2014.11.024 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11883-014-0464-7 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12933-015-0220-5 http://dx.doi.org/10.1089/met.2013.0107 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcmg.2014.07.017 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcmg.2014.07.017 http://dx.doi.org/10.2459/JCM.0b013e32836094da http://dx.doi.org/10.2459/JCM.0b013e32836094da http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.atherosclerosis.2014.01.053 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.atherosclerosis.2007.08.016 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.atherosclerosis.2007.08.016