File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: Effects of the liver volume and donor steatosis on errors in the estimated standard liver volume

TitleEffects of the liver volume and donor steatosis on errors in the estimated standard liver volume
Authors
Issue Date2011
PublisherJohn Wiley & Sons, Inc. The Journal's web site is located at http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/jtoc/106570021
Citation
Liver Transplantation, 2011, v. 17 n. 12, p. 1437-1442 How to Cite?
AbstractAn accurate assessment of donor and recipient liver volumes is essential in living donor liver transplantation. Many liver donors are affected by mild to moderate steatosis, and steatotic livers are known to have larger volumes. This study analyzes errors in liver volume estimation by commonly used formulas and the effects of donor steatosis on these errors. Three hundred twenty-five Asian donors who underwent right lobe donor hepatectomy were the subjects of this study. The percentage differences between the liver volumes from computed tomography (CT) and the liver volumes estimated with each formula (ie, the error percentages) were calculated. Five popular formulas were tested. The degrees of steatosis were categorized as follows: no steatosis [n = 178 (54.8%)], ≤10% steatosis [n = 128 (39.4%)], and >10% to 20% steatosis [n = 19 (5.8%)]. The median errors ranged from 0.6% (7 mL) to 24.6% (360 mL). The lowest was seen with the locally derived formula. All the formulas showed a significant association between the error percentage and the CT liver volume (P < 0.001). Overestimation was seen with smaller liver volumes, whereas underestimation was seen with larger volumes. The locally derived formula was most accurate when the liver volume was 1001 to 1250 mL. A multivariate analysis showed that the estimation error was dependent on the liver volume (P = 0.001) and the anthropometric measurement that was used in the calculation (P < 0.001) rather than steatosis (P a○cyen 0.07). In conclusion, all the formulas have a similar pattern of error that is possibly related to the anthropometric measurement. Clinicians should be aware of this pattern of error and the liver volume with which their formula is most accurate. Copyright © 2011 American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/144593
ISSN
2015 Impact Factor: 3.951
2015 SCImago Journal Rankings: 1.763
ISI Accession Number ID
References

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorSiriwardana, RCen_HK
dc.contributor.authorChan, SCen_HK
dc.contributor.authorChok, KSHen_HK
dc.contributor.authorLo, CMen_HK
dc.contributor.authorFan, STen_HK
dc.date.accessioned2012-02-03T06:15:07Z-
dc.date.available2012-02-03T06:15:07Z-
dc.date.issued2011en_HK
dc.identifier.citationLiver Transplantation, 2011, v. 17 n. 12, p. 1437-1442en_HK
dc.identifier.issn1527-6465en_HK
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/144593-
dc.description.abstractAn accurate assessment of donor and recipient liver volumes is essential in living donor liver transplantation. Many liver donors are affected by mild to moderate steatosis, and steatotic livers are known to have larger volumes. This study analyzes errors in liver volume estimation by commonly used formulas and the effects of donor steatosis on these errors. Three hundred twenty-five Asian donors who underwent right lobe donor hepatectomy were the subjects of this study. The percentage differences between the liver volumes from computed tomography (CT) and the liver volumes estimated with each formula (ie, the error percentages) were calculated. Five popular formulas were tested. The degrees of steatosis were categorized as follows: no steatosis [n = 178 (54.8%)], ≤10% steatosis [n = 128 (39.4%)], and >10% to 20% steatosis [n = 19 (5.8%)]. The median errors ranged from 0.6% (7 mL) to 24.6% (360 mL). The lowest was seen with the locally derived formula. All the formulas showed a significant association between the error percentage and the CT liver volume (P < 0.001). Overestimation was seen with smaller liver volumes, whereas underestimation was seen with larger volumes. The locally derived formula was most accurate when the liver volume was 1001 to 1250 mL. A multivariate analysis showed that the estimation error was dependent on the liver volume (P = 0.001) and the anthropometric measurement that was used in the calculation (P < 0.001) rather than steatosis (P a○cyen 0.07). In conclusion, all the formulas have a similar pattern of error that is possibly related to the anthropometric measurement. Clinicians should be aware of this pattern of error and the liver volume with which their formula is most accurate. Copyright © 2011 American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases.en_HK
dc.languageengen_US
dc.publisherJohn Wiley & Sons, Inc. The Journal's web site is located at http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/jtoc/106570021en_HK
dc.relation.ispartofLiver Transplantationen_HK
dc.rightsLiver Transplantation. Copyright © John Wiley & Sons, Inc.-
dc.subject.meshFatty Liver - pathology - radiography-
dc.subject.meshHepatectomy-
dc.subject.meshLiver - pathology - radiography - surgery-
dc.subject.meshLiver Transplantation-
dc.subject.meshLiving Donors-
dc.titleEffects of the liver volume and donor steatosis on errors in the estimated standard liver volumeen_HK
dc.typeArticleen_HK
dc.identifier.emailChan, SC: chanlsc@hkucc.hku.hken_HK
dc.identifier.emailLo, CM: chungmlo@hkucc.hku.hken_HK
dc.identifier.emailFan, ST: stfan@hku.hken_HK
dc.identifier.authorityChan, SC=rp01568en_HK
dc.identifier.authorityLo, CM=rp00412en_HK
dc.identifier.authorityFan, ST=rp00355en_HK
dc.description.naturelink_to_subscribed_fulltext-
dc.identifier.doi10.1002/lt.22430en_HK
dc.identifier.pmid22127780-
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-82455175734en_HK
dc.identifier.hkuros198346en_US
dc.relation.referenceshttp://www.scopus.com/mlt/select.url?eid=2-s2.0-82455175734&selection=ref&src=s&origin=recordpageen_HK
dc.identifier.volume17en_HK
dc.identifier.issue12en_HK
dc.identifier.spage1437en_HK
dc.identifier.epage1442en_HK
dc.identifier.isiWOS:000298040600010-
dc.publisher.placeUnited Statesen_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridSiriwardana, RC=35321203400en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridChan, SC=7404255575en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridChok, KSH=6508229426en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridLo, CM=7401771672en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridFan, ST=7402678224en_HK

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats