OBJECTIVE: The present research was conducted to establish the normal splenic volume in adults using a novel and fast technique. The relationship between splenic volume and age, gender, and anthropometric parameters was also examined. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The splenic volume was measured in 230 consecutive patients who underwent computed tomography (CT) scans for various indications. Patients with conditions that have known effect on the spleen size were not included in this study. A new technique using volumetric software to automatically contour the spleen in each CT slice and quickly calculate splenic volume was employed. Inter- and intra-observer variability were also examined. RESULTS: The average splenic volume of all the subjects was 127.4+/-62.9 cm(3), ranging from 22 to 417 cm(3). The splenic volume (S) correlated with age (A) (r=-0.33, p<0.0001), body weight (W) (r=0.35, p<0.0001), body mass index (r=0.24, p<0.0001) and body surface area (BSA) (r=0.31, p<0.0001). The age-adjusted splenic volume index correlated with gender (p=0.0089). The formulae S=W[6.47A(-0.31)] and S=BSA[278A(-0.36)] were derived and can be used to estimate the splenic volume. Inter- and intra-observer variability were 6.4+/-9.8% and 2.8+/-3.5% respectively. CONCLUSION: Of the anthropometric parameters, the splenic volume was most closely linked to body weight. The automatically contouring software as well as formulae can be used to obtain the volume of the spleen in regular practice. Copyright 2009 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.
OBJECTIVE: The present research was conducted to establish the normal splenic volume in adults using a novel and fast technique. The relationship between splenic volume and age, gender, and anthropometric parameters was also examined. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The splenic volume was measured in 230 consecutive patients who underwent computed tomography (CT) scans for various indications. Patients with conditions that have known effect on the spleen size were not included in this study. A new technique using volumetric software to automatically contour the spleen in each CT slice and quickly calculate splenic volume was employed. Inter- and intra-observer variability were also examined. RESULTS: The average splenic volume of all the subjects was 127.4+/-62.9 cm(3), ranging from 22 to 417 cm(3). The splenic volume (S) correlated with age (A) (r=-0.33, p<0.0001), body weight (W) (r=0.35, p<0.0001), body mass index (r=0.24, p<0.0001) and body surface area (BSA) (r=0.31, p<0.0001). The age-adjusted splenic volume index correlated with gender (p=0.0089). The formulae S=W[6.47A(-0.31)] and S=BSA[278A(-0.36)] were derived and can be used to estimate the splenic volume. Inter- and intra-observer variability were 6.4+/-9.8% and 2.8+/-3.5% respectively. CONCLUSION: Of the anthropometric parameters, the splenic volume was most closely linked to body weight. The automatically contouring software as well as formulae can be used to obtain the volume of the spleen in regular practice. Copyright 2009 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.
Authors: Srdan Verstovsek; Ruben A Mesa; Jason Gotlib; Richard S Levy; Vikas Gupta; John F DiPersio; John V Catalano; Michael Deininger; Carole Miller; Richard T Silver; Moshe Talpaz; Elliott F Winton; Jimmie H Harvey; Murat O Arcasoy; Elizabeth Hexner; Roger M Lyons; Ronald Paquette; Azra Raza; Kris Vaddi; Susan Erickson-Viitanen; Iphigenia L Koumenis; William Sun; Victor Sandor; Hagop M Kantarjian Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2012-03-01 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Matthew Lukies; Helen Kavnoudias; Adil Zia; Robin Lee; Julian J Bosco; Tim Joseph; Warren Clements Journal: Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol Date: 2020-09-01 Impact factor: 2.740
Authors: Amber L Simpson; Julie N Leal; Amudhan Pugalenthi; Peter J Allen; Ronald P DeMatteo; Yuman Fong; Mithat Gönen; William R Jarnagin; T Peter Kingham; Michael I Miga; Jinru Shia; Martin R Weiser; Michael I D'Angelica Journal: J Am Coll Surg Date: 2014-12-13 Impact factor: 6.113
Authors: Deni Hardiansyah; Christian Maass; Ali Asgar Attarwala; Berthold Müller; Peter Kletting; Felix M Mottaghy; Gerhard Glatting Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2015-11-18 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Gabriel E Humpire-Mamani; Joris Bukala; Ernst T Scholten; Mathias Prokop; Bram van Ginneken; Colin Jacobs Journal: Radiol Artif Intell Date: 2020-07-22