Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29249974›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in physiology2017

Computational Modeling in Liver Surgery.

Bruno Christ, Uta Dahmen, Karl-Heinz Herrmann, Matthias König, Jürgen R Reichenbach, Tim Ricken, Jana Schleicher, Lars Ole Schwen, Sebastian Vlaic, Navina Waschinsky

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in physiology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 14% 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 38 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 7 institutions in 1 country.

Bruno ChristMolecular Hepatology Lab, Clinics of Visceral, Transplantation, Thoracic and Vascular Surgery, University Hospital Leipzig, University of Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany.
Uta DahmenExperimental Transplantation Surgery, Department of General, Visceral and Vascular Surgery, University Hospital Jena, Jena, Germany.
Karl-Heinz HerrmannMedical Physics Group, Institute for Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Jena, Friedrich Schiller University Jena, Jena, Germany.
Matthias KönigDepartment of Biology, Institute for Theoretical Biology, Humboldt University of Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Jürgen R ReichenbachMedical Physics Group, Institute for Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Jena, Friedrich Schiller University Jena, Jena, Germany.
Tim RickenMechanics, Structural Analysis, and Dynamics, TU Dortmund University, Dortmund, Germany.
Jana SchleicherExperimental Transplantation Surgery, Department of General, Visceral and Vascular Surgery, University Hospital Jena, Jena, Germany.
Lars Ole SchwenFraunhofer MEVIS, Bremen, Germany.
Sebastian VlaicLeibniz Institute for Natural Product Research and Infection Biology, Hans Knöll Institute, Jena, Germany.
Navina WaschinskyMechanics, Structural Analysis, and Dynamics, TU Dortmund University, Dortmund, Germany.
Friedrich Schiller University Jena · DETU Dortmund University · DEFraunhofer Institute for Digital Medicine · DEHumboldt-Universität zu Berlin · DEJena University Hospital · DELeibniz-Institut für Naturstoff-Forschung und Infektionsbiologie e. V. - Hans-Knöll-Institut (HKI) · DEUniversity Hospital Leipzig · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The need for extended liver resection is increasing due to the growing incidence of liver tumors in aging societies. Individualized surgical planning is the key for identifying the optimal resection strategy and to minimize the risk of postoperative liver failure and tumor recurrence. Current computational tools provide virtual planning of liver resection by taking into account the spatial relationship between the tumor and the hepatic vascular trees, as well as the size of the future liver remnant. However, size and function of the liver are not necessarily equivalent. Hence, determining the future liver volume might misestimate the future liver function, especially in cases of hepatic comorbidities such as hepatic steatosis. A systems medicine approach could be applied, including biological, medical, and surgical aspects, by integrating all available anatomical and functional information of the individual patient. Such an approach holds promise for better prediction of postoperative liver function and hence improved risk assessment. This review provides an overview of mathematical models related to the liver and its function and explores their potential relevance for computational liver surgery. We first summarize key facts of hepatic anatomy, physiology, and pathology relevant for hepatic surgery, followed by a description of the computational tools currently used in liver surgical planning. Then we present selected state-of-the-art computational liver models potentially useful to support liver surgery. Finally, we discuss the main challenges that will need to be addressed when developing advanced computational planning tools in the context of liver surgery.

Indexed as

function predictionliver metabolismliver regenerationLiver resectionliver surgical planningmulti-scale modelingrisk assessmentsystems medicine

Identifiers

PMID29249974
PMCPMC5715340
OpenAlexW2770990707

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.