Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35075169›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2022

Simple diameter measurement as predictor of liver volume and liver parenchymal disease.

D Seppelt, T Ittermann, M L Kromrey, C Kolb, C vWahsen, P Heiss, H Völzke, R T Hoffmann, J P Kühn

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Observational
  6. Article
  7. 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

9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

D SeppeltInstitute and Policlinic for Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Carl-Gustav-Carus, TU Dresden, Dresden, Germany. danilo.seppelt@uniklinikum-dresden.de.
T IttermannInstitute for Community Medicine, University Medicine Greifswald, Greifswald, Germany.
M L KromreyDepartment of Diagnostic Radiology and Neuroradiology, University Medicine Greifswald, Greifswald, Germany.
C KolbInstitute and Policlinic for Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Carl-Gustav-Carus, TU Dresden, Dresden, Germany.
C vWahsenDepartment of Diagnostic Radiology, University Medical Center Regensburg, Regensburg, Germany.
P HeissDepartment of Diagnostic Radiology, University Medical Center Regensburg, Regensburg, Germany.
H VölzkeInstitute for Community Medicine, University Medicine Greifswald, Greifswald, Germany.
R T HoffmannInstitute and Policlinic for Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Carl-Gustav-Carus, TU Dresden, Dresden, Germany.
J P KühnInstitute and Policlinic for Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Carl-Gustav-Carus, TU Dresden, Dresden, Germany.
University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus · DEUniversitätsmedizin Greifswald · DEUniversity Hospital Regensburg · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

To investigate the accuracy of liver diameters for estimation of liver size and to evaluate their application as tool for assessment of parenchymal liver disease. In the course of a population-based study, (SHIP) one thousand nine hundred thirty-nine volunteers underwent magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the liver including 3D gradient echo MRI sequences. Maximum liver diameters were measured in cranio-caudal (CC), anterior-posterior (AP), medial-lateral (ML) orientation. Diameters were compared with true liver volume assessed by liver segmentation. Additionally, age-dependent reference values for diameters were defined. Finally, accuracy of liver diameters was assessed to discriminate volunteers with healthy livers and participants with parenchymal changes, measured by MRI and laboratory. Reference values of liver diameters within the healthy population (n = 886) were defined as follows (mean ± standard deviation, confidence interval CI in cm): CC 17.2 ± 2, CI 13.6/21.2; AP 15.8 ± 1.9, CI 12.6/19.8; ML 19.7 ± 2.3, CI 15.8/24.6. There was a poor correlation using linear regression between liver diameter and true liver volume; CC 0.393, AP 0.359; ML 0.137. The AP direction shows the best correlation to discriminate between healthy and pathologic liver changes; AUC 0.78; p < 0.001, CC AUC 0.53; p < 0.001 and ML AUC 0.52; p = 0.008. Measurement of liver diameter, especially in the anterior-posterior direction is a simple option to detect chronic liver disease but less suitable for prediction of liver volume.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAged, 80 and overFeasibility StudiesFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHealthy VolunteersHumansLiverLiver DiseasesMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleMiddle AgedOrgan SizeReference ValuesYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID35075169
PMCPMC8786943
OpenAlexW4206928661

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.