CT- and MRI-based volumetry of resected liver specimen: Comparison to intraoperative volume and weight measurements and calculation of conversion factors

Karlo, Christoph; Reiner, Cäcilia S.; Stolzmann, Paul; Breitenstein, Stefan; Marinček, Borut; Weishaupt, Dominik; Frauenfelder, Thomas

doi:10.1016/j.ejrad.2009.09.005

Cited by 87 publications

(80 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The present study showed that after a short training liver volumetry could be performed adequately, even in inexperienced hands. Others already showed that CT based auto-segmentation of the TLV was also possible with Windows 4.4 framework ® , 8 Philips Intellispace Portal ® , 9 Voxar ® , 12 and CAD technologies ® . 13 Only two studies actually compared manual with automated volumetry with generally good correlations.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…4,6 With specialised software, auto-segmentation of organs is possible. [8][9][10][11][12][13][14] However, CT-based automated segmentation of the liver is challenging because organs with comparable density surround the liver. Automated future remnant liver volumetric analysis has not yet been validated by comparing it with manual slice-by-slice drawing of contours.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Fast and accurate liver volumetry prior to hepatectomy

Lodewick

Arnoldussen

Lahaye

et al. 2016

HPB

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Fast and accurate liver volumetry prior to hepatectomy

Lodewick

Arnoldussen

Lahaye

et al. 2016

HPB

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Both CT and MRI volumetry have been attributed to the overestimation of intraoperative organ volume. The degree of overestimation may be higher using MR volumetry due to longer acquisition times, partial volume effects, and blurring artifacts [31]. Thus, absolute volumetric measurements of this study may be constantly greater than intraoperative organ volumes, and may differ between CT and MRI studies.…”

Section: Right Liver Donors Left Lateral Section (Ii Iii) Left Lobe mentioning

confidence: 91%

Liver Remnant Regeneration in Donors After Living Donor Liver Transplantation: Long-Term Follow-Up Using CT and MR Imaging

Klink

Simon

Knopp

et al. 2013

Fortschr Röntgenstr

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: To assess liver remnant volume regeneration and maintenance, and complications in the long-time follow-up of donors after living donor liver transplantation using CT and MRI. Materials and Methods: 47 donors with a mean age of 33.5 years who donated liver tissue for transplantation and who were available for follow-up imaging were included in this retrospective study. Contrast-enhanced CT and MR studies were acquired for routine follow-up.?Two observers evaluated pre- and postoperative images regarding anatomy and pathological findings. Volumes were manually measured on contrast-enhanced images in the portal venous phase, and potential postoperative complications were documented. Pre- and postoperative liver volumes were compared for evaluating liver remnant regeneration. Results: 47 preoperative and 89 follow-up studies covered a period of 22.4 months (range: 1???84). After right liver lobe (RLL) donation, the mean liver remnant volume was 522.0?ml (??144.0; 36.1?%; n?=?18), after left lateral section (LLS) donation 1,121.7?ml (??212.8; 79.9?%; n?=?24), and after left liver lobe (LLL) donation 1,181.5?ml (??279.5; 72.0?%; n?=?5). Twelve months after donation, the liver remnant volume were 87.3?% (RLL; ??11.8; n?=?11), 95.0?% (LS; ??11.6; n?=?18), and 80.1?% (LLL; ??2.0; n?=?2 LLL) of the preoperative total liver volume. Rapid initial regeneration and maintenance at 80?% of the preoperative liver volume were observed over the total follow-up period.?Minor postoperative complications were found early in 4 patients. No severe or late complications or mortality occurred. Conclusion: Rapid regeneration of liver remnant volumes in all donors and volume maintenance over the long-term follow-up period of up to 84 months without severe or late complications are important observations for assessing the safety of LDLT donors. Key Points: Liver remnant volumes of LDLT donors rapidly regenerated after donation and volumes were maintained over the long-term follow-up period of up to 84 months without severe or late complications. Citation Format: ??Klink T, Simon P, Knopp C et?al. Liver Remnant Regeneration in Donors After Living Donor Liver Transplantation: Long-Term Follow-Up Using CT and MR Imaging. Fortschr R?ntgenstr 2014; 186: 598???605

show abstract

“…2.10 -17.50 Colombo et al [13] Mass, m (kg) 0.118 -2.858 Karlo et al [14] Meanwhile, the parameters required to make FEM as a reference is only taken from previous studies. These parameters are Young Modulus, Poisson Ratio and population size [8], [15] as listed in Table 3.…”

Section: Parameter/coefficientsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Automatic tuning of liver tissue model using simulated annealing and genetic algorithm heuristic approaches

Sulaiman¹,

Bade²,

Lee³

et al. 2014

AIP Conference Proceedings

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Mass Spring Model (MSM) is a highly efficient model in terms of calculations and easy implementation. Mass, spring stiffness coefficient and damping constant are three major components of MSM. This paper focuses on identifying the coefficients of spring stiffness and damping constant using automated tuning method by optimization in generating human liver model capable of responding quickly. To achieve the objective two heuristic approaches are used, namely Simulated Annealing (SA) and Genetic Algorithm (GA) on the human liver model data set. The properties of the mechanical heart, which are taken into consideration, are anisotropy and viscoelasticity. Optimization results from SA and GA are then implemented into the MSM to model two human hearts, each with its SA or GA construction parameters. These techniques are implemented while making FEM construction parameters as benchmark.Step size response of both models are obtained after MSMs were solved using Fourth Order Runge-Kutta (RK4) to compare the elasticity response of both models. Remodelled time using manual calculation methods was compared against heuristic optimization methods of SA and GA in showing that model with automatic construction is more realistic in terms of realtime interaction response time. Liver models generated using SA and GA optimization techniques are compared with liver model from manual calculation. It shows that the reconstruction time required for 1000 repetitions of SA and GA is faster than the manual method. Meanwhile comparison between construction time of SA and GA model indicates that model SA is faster than GA with varying rates of time 0.110635 seconds/1000 repetitions. Real-time interaction of mechanical properties is dependent on rate of time and speed of remodelling process. Thus, the SA and GA have proven to be suitable in enhancing realism of simulated real-time interaction in liver remodelling.

show abstract

CT- and MRI-based volumetry of resected liver specimen: Comparison to intraoperative volume and weight measurements and calculation of conversion factors

Cited by 87 publications

References 18 publications

Fast and accurate liver volumetry prior to hepatectomy

Fast and accurate liver volumetry prior to hepatectomy

Liver Remnant Regeneration in Donors After Living Donor Liver Transplantation: Long-Term Follow-Up Using CT and MR Imaging

Automatic tuning of liver tissue model using simulated annealing and genetic algorithm heuristic approaches

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About