Fig 1.
Disposition of Subjects.
Table 1.
Subject characteristics.
Table 2.
Comparison of the CT-measured parameters between the non-COPD and COPD groups.
Table 3.
Spearman’s rank correlation coefficients (ρ/p value) for LAV% and √Aaw at Pi10 in COPD patients.
Fig 2.
Correlation between adipose tissue and quantitative CT parameters in COPD patients.
Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient was used to evaluate these relationships. The EAT area was positively associated with the √Aaw at Pi10 (A) and inversely associated with the LAV% (B). The SFA was inversely associated with the LAV% (D) but not with the √Aaw at Pi10 (C).
Table 4.
Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient (ρ/p value) for EAT area in COPD patients.
Table 5.
Multiple regression analyses for predictors of EAT area.
Fig 3.
Comparison of EAT area and CAC score between COPD patients with and without CVD.
The EAT area (A) was measured using ImageJ software Ver.1.47, and the CAC score (B) was evaluated using the Agatston method. The EAT areas and CAC scores were higher in the COPD patients (p < 0.001).
Fig 4.
Relationship between √Aaw at Pi10 and the LAV% in 105 COPD patients.
The horizontal line shows the third quartile of the LAV% of the non-COPD smokers. The vertical line shows the third quartile of the √Aaw at Pi10 of the non-COPD smokers. Using these cut-off values, the COPD patients can be divided into 4 phenotypes; normal by CT (NCT; low LAV% and low √Aaw at Pi10), airway-dominant (AD; low LAV% and high √Aaw at Pi10), emphysema-dominant (ED; high LAV% and low √Aaw at Pi10) and mixed (Mixed; high LAV% and high √Aaw at Pi10) phenotypes.
Table 6.
Classification by CT phenotypes in the COPD patients.
Fig 5.
Association of EAT area with the CT phenotypes in COPD patients.
The Wilcoxon Rank-Sum test was used to compare groups. The subjects with the AD and Mixed phenotypes had greater EAT areas than those with the NCT and ED phenotypes.