BACKGROUND: Previous studies have shown that liver function is inhomogeneously distributed in diseased livers, and this uneven distribution cannot be compensated for if a global liver function test is used for the prediction of post-operative remnant liver function. Dynamic Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) can assess segmental liver function, thus offering the possibility to overcome this problem. METHODS: In 10 patients with liver cirrhosis and 10 normal volunteers, the contribution of individual liver segments to total liver function and volume was calculated using dynamic Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced MRI. Remnant liver function predictions using a segmental method and global assessment were compared for a simulated left hemihepatectomy. For the prediction based on segmental functional MRI assessment, the estimated function of the remnant liver segments was added. RESULTS: Global liver function assessment overestimated the remnant liver function in 9 out of 10 patients by as much as 9.3% [median -3.5% (-9.3-3.5%)]. In the normal volunteers there was a slight underestimation of remnant function in 9 out of 10 cases [median 1.07% (-0.7-2.5%)]. DISCUSSION: The present study underlines the necessity of a segmental liver function test able to compensate for the non-homogeneous nature of liver function, if the prediction of post-operative remnant liver function is to be improved.
BACKGROUND: Previous studies have shown that liver function is inhomogeneously distributed in diseased livers, and this uneven distribution cannot be compensated for if a global liver function test is used for the prediction of post-operative remnant liver function. Dynamic Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) can assess segmental liver function, thus offering the possibility to overcome this problem. METHODS: In 10 patients with liver cirrhosis and 10 normal volunteers, the contribution of individual liver segments to total liver function and volume was calculated using dynamic Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced MRI. Remnant liver function predictions using a segmental method and global assessment were compared for a simulated left hemihepatectomy. For the prediction based on segmental functional MRI assessment, the estimated function of the remnant liver segments was added. RESULTS: Global liver function assessment overestimated the remnant liver function in 9 out of 10 patients by as much as 9.3% [median -3.5% (-9.3-3.5%)]. In the normal volunteers there was a slight underestimation of remnant function in 9 out of 10 cases [median 1.07% (-0.7-2.5%)]. DISCUSSION: The present study underlines the necessity of a segmental liver function test able to compensate for the non-homogeneous nature of liver function, if the prediction of post-operative remnant liver function is to be improved.
Authors: J N Vauthey; A Chaoui; K A Do; M M Bilimoria; M J Fenstermacher; C Charnsangavej; M Hicks; G Alsfasser; G Lauwers; I F Hawkins; J Caridi Journal: Surgery Date: 2000-05 Impact factor: 3.982
Authors: Henrik Nilsson; Lennart Blomqvist; Lena Douglas; Anders Nordell; Hans Jacobsson; Karin Hagen; Annika Bergquist; Eduard Jonas Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2013-10-10 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: N Verloh; M Haimerl; F Zeman; M Schlabeck; A Barreiros; M Loss; A G Schreyer; C Stroszczynski; C Fellner; P Wiggermann Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2014-02-16 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: John T Mullen; Dario Ribero; Srinevas K Reddy; Matteo Donadon; Daria Zorzi; Shiva Gautam; Eddie K Abdalla; Steven A Curley; Lorenzo Capussotti; Bryan M Clary; Jean-Nicolas Vauthey Journal: J Am Coll Surg Date: 2007-02-15 Impact factor: 6.113
Authors: Alexander Huppertz; Thomas Balzer; Anthony Blakeborough; Josy Breuer; Andrea Giovagnoni; Gertraud Heinz-Peer; Michael Laniado; Riccardo M Manfredi; Didier G Mathieu; Dieter Mueller; Peter Reimer; Philip J Robinson; Michael Strotzer; Matthias Taupitz; Thomas J Vogl Journal: Radiology Date: 2004-01 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Krishna Juluru; Andrew H Talal; Rhonda K Yantiss; Pascal Spincemaille; Elizabeth K Weidman; Ashley E Giambrone; Sadaf Jalili; Steven P Sourbron; Jonathan P Dyke Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2016-08-16 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Yan-Yan Zhang; Chao-Xu Zhang; Yu Li; Xuan Jiang; Yong-Fang Wang; Yang Sun; Jun Wang; Wan-Ying Ji; Yi Liu Journal: World J Gastroenterol Date: 2018-11-28 Impact factor: 5.742
Authors: Mohamed Elsharif; Matthew Roche; Daniel Wilson; Susmita Basak; Ian Rowe; Dhakshina Vijayanand; Richard Feltbower; Darren Treanor; Lee Roberts; Ashley Guthrie; Raj Prasad; Mark S Gilthorpe; Magdy Attia; Steven Sourbron Journal: BMC Cancer Date: 2021-10-23 Impact factor: 4.430
Authors: Ulrika Asenbaum; Klaus Kaczirek; Ahmed Ba-Ssalamah; Helmut Ringl; Christoph Schwarz; Fredrik Waneck; Fabian Fitschek; Christian Loewe; Richard Nolz Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2018-05-16 Impact factor: 5.315