ArticleHPB surgery : a world journal of hepatic, pancreatic and biliary surgery2009
Cellular liver regeneration after extended hepatic resection in pigs.
Article in HPB surgery : a world journal of hepatic, pancreatic and biliary surgery, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- 2021 ISHEN guidelines on animal models of hepatic encephalopathy.Liver international : official journal of the International Association for the Study of the Liver · 2021Review
- Factors associated with contralateral liver hypertrophy after unilateral radioembolization for hepatocellular carcinoma.PloS one · 2017Article
- Laparoscopic left hepatectomy in swine: a safe and feasible technique.Journal of veterinary science · 2014Article
- A critical appraisal of the hemodynamic signal driving liver regeneration.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2012Review
- Increased sinusoidal flow is not the primary stimulus to liver regeneration.Comparative hepatology · 2010Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe liver has an enormous capacity to regenerate itself. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether the regeneration is due to hypertrophy or hyperplasia of the remnant liver after extended resection and whether a portosystemic shunt is beneficial. MATERIAL AND
methodsAn extended left hemihepatectomy was performed in 25 pigs, and in 14 after performing a portosystemic shunt. During follow up, liver regeneration was estimated by macroscopic markers such as liver volume and size of the portal fields [mm(2)] as well as the amount of hepatocytes per portal field and the amount of hepatocytes per mm(2).
resultsRegardless of the operation procedure, the volume of the remnant liver increased about 2.5 fold at the end of the first week after resection. The size of the portal fields increased significantly as well as the number of hepatocytes in the portal fields. Interestingly, the number of hepatocytes per mm(2) remained the same.
conclusionAfter extended resection, liver regeneration was achieved by an extensive and significant hyperplasia of hepatocytes within the preexisting portal fields and not by de novo synthesis of new portal fields. However, there was no difference in liver regeneration regarding the operation procedure performed with or without portosystemic shunt.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.