Correlation of blood-free graft weight and volumetric graft volume by an analysis of blood content in living donor liver grafts

Hwang, Shin; Lee, S.G; Kim, K.H; Park, K.M; Ahn, Curie; Moon, Deok Bog; Chu, Chong Woo; Lee, Y.J; Min, Pyung Chul

doi:10.1016/s0041-1345(02)03603-5

Cited by 55 publications

(53 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…They found that intraoperative blood loss is the main reason for overestimation. Hwang et al found a difference between CT measurement and blood-free water displacement volumetry of 20 % but only a difference of 4 % between blood-filled graft volume and CT volumetry [19]. In view of these results, overestimation of liver volume in the present study can be fully explained.…”

Section: Resected Liver Volumesupporting

confidence: 44%

Validating New Software for Semiautomated Liver Volumetry – Better than Manual Measurement?

Noschinski

Maiwald

Voigt

et al. 2015

Fortschr Röntgenstr

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

!Purpose: This prospective study compared a manual program for liver volumetry with semiautomated software. The hypothesis was that the semiautomated software would be faster, more accurate and less dependent on the evaluator's experience. Materials and Methods: Ten patients undergoing hemihepatectomy were included in this IRB approved study after written informed consent. All patients underwent a preoperative abdominal 3-phase CT scan, which was used for whole liver volumetry and volume prediction for the liver part to be resected. Two different types of software were used: 1) manual method: borders of the liver had to be defined per slice by the user; 2) semiautomated software: automatic identification of liver volume with manual assistance for definition of Couinaud segments. Measurements were done by six observers with different experience levels. Water displacement volumetry immediately after partial liver resection served as the gold standard. The resected part was examined with a CT scan after displacement volumetry. Results: Volumetry of the resected liver scan showed excellent correlation to water displacement volumetry (manual: ρ = 0.997; semiautomated software: ρ = 0.995). The difference between the predicted volume and the real volume was significantly smaller with the semiautomated software than with the manual method (33 % vs. 57 %, p = 0.002). The semiautomated software was almost four times faster for volumetry of the whole liver (manual: 6:59 ± 3:04min; semiautomated: 1:47 ± 1:11 min). Conclusion: Both methods for liver volumetry give an estimated liver volume close to the real one. The tested semiautomated software is faster, more accurate in predicting the volume of the resected liver part, gives more reproducible results and is less dependent on the user's experience.This document was downloaded for personal use only. Unauthorized distribution is strictly prohibited.

show abstract

Section: Resected Liver Volumesupporting

confidence: 44%

Validating New Software for Semiautomated Liver Volumetry – Better than Manual Measurement?

Noschinski

Maiwald

Voigt

et al. 2015

Fortschr Röntgenstr

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…calculation, inter-observer variations, deviation from the virtual preoperative cutting plane, variability of steatosis and level of hydration at the time of the scanning, gender related variation of liver density and finally difference when scanning a liver perfused with blood and when flushed with preservation solutions [17,18].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Altogether with difference in density and debatable one to one basis, other factors could contribute to the discrepancy between CT estimated graft volume and AGW including CT pitfalls, variations in CT machine and softwares of volume between CT volumetric measurement and AGW as close as feasible [17,20,21].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A novel formula for graft weight estimation from preoperative computed tomography volumetric measurement in living donor liver transplantation

Zakareya¹,

Abbasy²,

Abdel-Razek³

et al. 2017

Transplant Technol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Computed tomography (CT) is the current gold standard for preoperative assessment of graft volume in the context of living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) despite the commonly noted mismatch between CT estimated graft volume (CT-GV) and actual graft weight (AGW). Aim: to find a formula that correlates preoperative virtual CT graft volume with AGW measured on the back table. Methods: CT volumetric data as well as AGW of 125 consecutive living liver donors in the period between 2010 and 2016 were reviewed. Correlation between CT-GV and AGW was done. Formula for line of best fit was obtained by plotting CT-GV against AGW for right and left lobes using linear regression analysis. Results: One hundred and nineteen living donors had complete data allowing downstream analysis. Donors were mostly males (59.7%) with mean age of 28.4±6.7 years. Ninety-seven of them (81.5%) donated right lobe while 22 (18.5%) left lobe grafts. Mean CT-GV was 870.0±142.9 ml for right lobe grafts and 335.5±112.1 ml for left lobe grafts. Mean AGW was 851.7±162.9 g for right lobe grafts and 296.2±74.5 g for left lobe grafts. The following formulae were derived to calculate AGW (g): [0.92xCT-GV (ml)+51.48; R 2 =0.651, P<0.0001] and [0.53xCT-GV (ml)+120; R 2 =0.625, P<0.0001)] for the right and left lobe grafts respectively. Conclusion: We postulate reliable formulae to convert virtual CT-GV into AGW, to accurately correct the discrepancy between preoperative CT-GV and AGW in the setting of LDLT.

show abstract

“…One explanation for this may be the decreased blood content after graft resection compared to the physiologically perfused graft at the time of CT examination [46]. Hwang et al observed an average blood proportion in 12 right lobe grafts of about 30 ml/100 g [47]. However, a mismatch between the simulated and the actual resection line at the hepatectomy cannot be excluded and is difficult to measure.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Preoperative volume calculation of the hepatic venous draining areas with multi-detector row CT in adult living donor liver transplantation: impact on surgical procedure

et al. 2006

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Correlation of blood-free graft weight and volumetric graft volume by an analysis of blood content in living donor liver grafts

Cited by 55 publications

References 3 publications

Validating New Software for Semiautomated Liver Volumetry – Better than Manual Measurement?

Validating New Software for Semiautomated Liver Volumetry – Better than Manual Measurement?

A novel formula for graft weight estimation from preoperative computed tomography volumetric measurement in living donor liver transplantation

Preoperative volume calculation of the hepatic venous draining areas with multi-detector row CT in adult living donor liver transplantation: impact on surgical procedure

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About