BACKGROUND: The purpose of this article was to evaluate the accuracy and reproducibility of spiral computed tomography (CT) and the curved line and cubic spline algorithms in measuring liver volume. METHODS: Spiral CT was performed in phantoms, cadaveric liver specimens, and 35 live human subjects (19 healthy volunteers and 16 patients). Images were transferred to a workstation, and volumes were measured by two observers. One observer repeated the measurements at a separate sitting. RESULTS: The correlation between the CT measurement and the gold standard measurement of the cadaveric livers was very strong (r = 0.94). For the live human subjects, the intraobserver and interobserver correlations were extremely high (r = 0.999 and 0.997, respectively). The mean difference in liver volume measurements between the separate observations was 1%. CONCLUSION: The accuracy and reproducibility of this method of assessing liver volume are very high.
BACKGROUND: The purpose of this article was to evaluate the accuracy and reproducibility of spiral computed tomography (CT) and the curved line and cubic spline algorithms in measuring liver volume. METHODS: Spiral CT was performed in phantoms, cadaveric liver specimens, and 35 live human subjects (19 healthy volunteers and 16 patients). Images were transferred to a workstation, and volumes were measured by two observers. One observer repeated the measurements at a separate sitting. RESULTS: The correlation between the CT measurement and the gold standard measurement of the cadaveric livers was very strong (r = 0.94). For the live human subjects, the intraobserver and interobserver correlations were extremely high (r = 0.999 and 0.997, respectively). The mean difference in liver volume measurements between the separate observations was 1%. CONCLUSION: The accuracy and reproducibility of this method of assessing liver volume are very high.
Authors: Bernd B Frericks; Franco C Caldarone; Björn Nashan; Dagmar Högemann Savellano; Georg Stamm; Timm D Kirchhoff; Hoen-Oh Shin; Andrea Schenk; Dirk Selle; Wolf Spindler; Jürgen Klempnauer; Heinz-Otto Peitgen; Michael Galanski Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2003-12-10 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Kenji Suzuki; Ryan Kohlbrenner; Mark L Epstein; Ademola M Obajuluwa; Jianwu Xu; Masatoshi Hori Journal: Med Phys Date: 2010-05 Impact factor: 4.071
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: Loes van Keimpema; Jelle P Ruurda; Miranda F Ernst; Hendrikus J A A van Geffen; Joost P H Drenth Journal: J Gastrointest Surg Date: 2007-10-24 Impact factor: 3.452