The correlation between preoperative volumetry and real graft weight: comparison of two volumetry programs.
10.4174/astr.2017.92.4.214
- Author:
Nadiar MUSSIN
1
;
Marco SUMO
;
Kwang Woong LEE
;
YoungRok CHOI
;
Jin Yong CHOI
;
Sung Woo AHN
;
Kyung Chul YOON
;
Hyo Sin KIM
;
Suk Kyun HONG
;
Nam Joon YI
;
Kyung Suk SUH
Author Information
1. Department of Surgery, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea. kwleegs@gmail.com
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords:
Living donors;
Organ size;
Donor selection
- MeSH:
Donor Selection;
Humans;
Linear Models;
Liver;
Liver Transplantation;
Living Donors;
Organ Size;
Retrospective Studies;
Tissue Donors;
Tomography, X-Ray Computed;
Transplants*
- From:Annals of Surgical Treatment and Research
2017;92(4):214-220
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:English
-
Abstract:
PURPOSE: Liver volumetry is a vital component in living donor liver transplantation to determine an adequate graft volume that meets the metabolic demands of the recipient and at the same time ensures donor safety. Most institutions use preoperative contrast-enhanced CT image-based software programs to estimate graft volume. The objective of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of 2 liver volumetry programs (Rapidia vs. Dr. Liver) in preoperative right liver graft estimation compared with real graft weight. METHODS: Data from 215 consecutive right lobe living donors between October 2013 and August 2015 were retrospectively reviewed. One hundred seven patients were enrolled in Rapidia group and 108 patients were included in the Dr. Liver group. Estimated graft volumes generated by both software programs were compared with real graft weight measured during surgery, and further classified into minimal difference (≤15%) and big difference (>15%). Correlation coefficients and degree of difference were determined. Linear regressions were calculated and results depicted as scatterplots. RESULTS: Minimal difference was observed in 69.4% of cases from Dr. Liver group and big difference was seen in 44.9% of cases from Rapidia group (P = 0.035). Linear regression analysis showed positive correlation in both groups (P < 0.01). However, the correlation coefficient was better for the Dr. Liver group (R² = 0.719), than for the Rapidia group (R² = 0.688). CONCLUSION: Dr. Liver can accurately predict right liver graft size better and faster than Rapidia, and can facilitate preoperative planning in living donor liver transplantation.
