PURPOSE: We aimed to evaluate the relationship between gastrectomy and the volume of liver segments II and III in patients with gastric cancer. METHODS: Computed tomography images of 54 patients who underwent curative gastrectomy for gastric adenocarcinoma were retrospectively evaluated by two blinded observers. Volumes of the total liver and segments II and III were measured. The difference between preoperative and postoperative volume measurements was compared. RESULTS: Total liver volumes measured by both observers in the preoperative and postoperative scans were similar (P > 0.05). High correlation was found between both observers (preoperative r=0.99; postoperative r=0.98). Total liver volumes showed a mean reduction of 13.4% after gastrectomy (P = 0.977). The mean volume of segments II and III showed similar decrease in measurements of both observers (38.4% vs. 36.4%, P = 0.363); the correlation between the observers were high (preoperative r=0.97, P < 0.001; postoperative r=0.99, P < 0.001). Volume decrease in the rest of the liver was not different between the observers (8.2% vs. 9.1%, P = 0.388). Time had poor correlation with volume change of segments II and III and the total liver for each observer (observer 1, rseg2/3=0.32, rtotal=0.13; observer 2, rseg2/3=0.37, rtotal=0.16). CONCLUSION: Segments II and III of the liver showed significant atrophy compared with the rest of the liver and the total liver after gastrectomy. Volume reduction had poor correlation with time.
PURPOSE: We aimed to evaluate the relationship between gastrectomy and the volume of liver segments II and III in patients with gastric cancer. METHODS: Computed tomography images of 54 patients who underwent curative gastrectomy for gastric adenocarcinoma were retrospectively evaluated by two blinded observers. Volumes of the total liver and segments II and III were measured. The difference between preoperative and postoperative volume measurements was compared. RESULTS: Total liver volumes measured by both observers in the preoperative and postoperative scans were similar (P > 0.05). High correlation was found between both observers (preoperative r=0.99; postoperative r=0.98). Total liver volumes showed a mean reduction of 13.4% after gastrectomy (P = 0.977). The mean volume of segments II and III showed similar decrease in measurements of both observers (38.4% vs. 36.4%, P = 0.363); the correlation between the observers were high (preoperative r=0.97, P < 0.001; postoperative r=0.99, P < 0.001). Volume decrease in the rest of the liver was not different between the observers (8.2% vs. 9.1%, P = 0.388). Time had poor correlation with volume change of segments II and III and the total liver for each observer (observer 1, rseg2/3=0.32, rtotal=0.13; observer 2, rseg2/3=0.37, rtotal=0.16). CONCLUSION: Segments II and III of the liver showed significant atrophy compared with the rest of the liver and the total liver after gastrectomy. Volume reduction had poor correlation with time.
Authors: Kenji Suzuki; Mark L Epstein; Ryan Kohlbrenner; Shailesh Garg; Masatoshi Hori; Aytekin Oto; Richard L Baron Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2011-10 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: Laurent Hermoye; Ismael Laamari-Azjal; Zhujiang Cao; Laurence Annet; Jan Lerut; Benoit M Dawant; Bernard E Van Beers Journal: Radiology Date: 2004-11-24 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: David J Breen; Elizabeth E Rutherford; Brian Stedman; Catherine Lee-Elliott; C Nigel Hacking Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2004-06-12 Impact factor: 5.315