Skip to main content
. 2021 Oct;11(10):4258–4268. doi: 10.21037/qims-21-178

Table 3. Changes in density of adipose tissue between non-enhanced and contrast-enhanced scans in 2D- and 3D-segmentation.

Variables Change 2D (HU) Change 3D (HU) (20) Difference (HU) P 95% CI (HU) NRMSE2D NRMSE3D Difference
NES vs. ART (n=23)
   TAT +1.5±1.4 +0.9±1.1 −0.6±1.3 0.03 −1.1, −0.1 0.101 0.101 0.000
   VAT +2.5±1.8 +1.8±1.6 −0.7±1.9 0.12 −1.5, 0.2 0.146 0.137 −0.009
   SAT +0.9±2.2 +0.4±1.5 −0.4±2.1 0.33 −1.3, 0.5 0.137 0.118 −0.019
NES vs. PVN (n=10)
   TAT +4.1±3.5 +3.2±1.7 −0.9±2.5 0.27 −2.7, 0.9 0.303 0.169 −0.134
   VAT +5.6±2.4 +4.4±1.7 −1.2±1.5 0.03 −2.3, −0.1 0.211 0.155 −0.056
   SAT +3.8±4.0 +2.9±1.6 −0.8±3.2 0.44 −3.1, 1.5 0.305 0.166 −0.139
NES vs. VEN (n=31)
   TAT +4.1±2.6 +3.1±2.3 −1.1±1.8 0.002 −1.7, −0.4 0.185 0.192 +0.007
   VAT +4.9±4.9 +3.8±3.9 −1.1±5.1 0.24 −3.0, 0.8 0.379 0.317 −0.062
   SAT +3.7±5.3 +2.8±2.2 −0.9±4.6 0.27 −2.6, 0.8 0.329 0.172 −0.157

Data are mean ± standard deviation in HU. ART, arterial scan; CES, contrast-enhanced scan; CI, confidence interval; NES, non-enhanced scan; PVN, portal-venous scan; NRMSE, normalized root-mean-square error; SAT, subcutaneous adipose tissue; TAT, total adipose tissue; VAT, visceral adipose tissue; VEN, venous scan. The P value (and 95% CI) corresponds to the difference of the changes between 2D- and 3D-segmentation.