Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27317953›Full record

ArticleHPB : the official journal of the International Hepato Pancreato Biliary Association2016

Future remnant liver function estimated by combining liver volumetry on magnetic resonance imaging with total liver function on (99m)Tc-mebrofenin hepatobiliary scintigraphy: can this tool predict post-hepatectomy liver failure?

Thiery Chapelle, Bart Op De Beeck, Ivan Huyghe, Sven Francque, Ann Driessen, Geert Roeyen, Dirk Ysebaert, Kathleen De Greef

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in HPB : the official journal of the International Hepato Pancreato Biliary Association, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 43 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
43citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
5.6field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

43 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 103 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Assessment of liver function before major hepatectomy.The British journal of surgery · 2023
    Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Thiery ChapelleHepatobiliary, Endocrine and Transplantation Surgery, University Hospital Antwerp, University Antwerp, Belgium. Electronic address: thiery.chapelle@uza.be.
Bart Op De BeeckRadiology, University Hospital Antwerp, University Antwerp, Belgium.
Ivan HuygheNuclear Medicine, University Hospital Antwerp, University Antwerp, Belgium.
Sven FrancqueHepatology, University Hospital Antwerp, University Antwerp, Belgium.
Ann DriessenPathology, University Hospital Antwerp, University Antwerp, Belgium.
Geert RoeyenHepatobiliary, Endocrine and Transplantation Surgery, University Hospital Antwerp, University Antwerp, Belgium.
Dirk YsebaertHepatobiliary, Endocrine and Transplantation Surgery, University Hospital Antwerp, University Antwerp, Belgium.
Kathleen De GreefHepatobiliary, Endocrine and Transplantation Surgery, University Hospital Antwerp, University Antwerp, Belgium.
Antwerp University Hospital · BE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionPosthepatectomy liver failure (PHLF) is a major complication after hepatectomy with a high mortality rate and is likely to happen in insufficient liver remnant. We hypothesize that assessment of the estimated future liver remnant function (eFLRF), combining future remnant liver volume (FLRV) with total liver function (TLF), is an accurate formula for prediction of PHLF.

methods88 patients undergoing hepatectomy were included. The ratio of the future liver remnant volume (FLRV%) was measured on MRI. TLF was estimated by liver clearance of (99m)Technetium (Tc)-mebrofenin on hepatobiliary scintigraphy (HBS). eFLRF was calculated by multiplying FLRV% by TLF. Cut-off values of FLRV% and eFLRF predicting PHLF, were defined by receiver-operating-characteristic (ROC) analysis.

resultsPHLF occurred in 12 patients (13%). Perioperative mortality was 5/12 (41%). Multivariate analysis showed that FLRV% cut off at 40% was not an independent predictive factor. eFLRF cut off at 2.3%/min/m(2) was the only independent predictive factor for PHLF. For FLRV% vs. eFLRF, positive predictive value was 41% vs. 92% and Odds Ratio 26 vs. 836.

conclusionFRLF measured by combining FLRV% and TLF is a more valuable tool to predict PHLF than FLRV% alone. The cutoff of eFLRF can be used in clinical decision making.

Indexed as

Magnetic Resonance ImagingAgedAniline CompoundsArea Under CurveFemaleGlycineHepatectomyHumansImino AcidsLiverLiver FailureLiver Function TestsLogistic ModelsMaleMiddle AgedMultivariate AnalysisAniline CompoundsGlycineImino AcidsOrganotechnetium CompoundsRadiopharmaceuticalstechnetium Tc 99m mebrofenin

Identifiers

PMID27317953
PMCPMC4913132
OpenAlexW2310782156

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.