Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42249073›Full record

ArticleAbdominal radiology (New York)2026

Liver regeneration after living donor liver transplantation (LDLT).

Annarita Pecchi, Francesca Camaione, Barbara Catellani, Martina Susi, Riccardo Cuoghi Costantini, Roberto D'Amico, Francesco Prampolini, Fabrizio Di Benedetto, Stefano Di Sandro, Pietro Torricelli

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Abdominal radiology (New York), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Annarita PecchiUniversity of Modena and Reggio Emilia, Modena, Italy. annarita.pecchi@unimore.it.
Francesca CamaioneUniversity of Modena and Reggio Emilia, Modena, Italy.
Barbara CatellaniUniversity of Modena and Reggio Emilia, Modena, Italy.
Martina SusiUniversity of Modena and Reggio Emilia, Modena, Italy.
Riccardo Cuoghi CostantiniUniversity of Modena and Reggio Emilia, Modena, Italy.
Roberto D'AmicoUniversity of Modena and Reggio Emilia, Modena, Italy.
Francesco PrampoliniPoliclinico di Modena, Modena, Italy.
Fabrizio Di BenedettoUniversity of Modena and Reggio Emilia, Modena, Italy.
Stefano Di SandroUniversity of Modena and Reggio Emilia, Modena, Italy.
Pietro TorricelliUniversity of Modena and Reggio Emilia, Modena, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose We aim to identify possible factors affecting liver regeneration in donors, liver graft hypertrophy and spleen shrinkage in recipients. We aim also to assess the differences between donors and recipients.Methods and methodsTwenty-seven donors and 27 recipients were included. We collected anthropometric and bio-humoral parameters considered in the preoperative setting, just after the surgery, after 7 days, and after 30 days from the surgery. We calculated liver regeneration rates (RR%), regeneration velocities (RV) and spleen reduction rates (SRR%) at 2-3 months, 12 months, and 24 months. Body composition parameters were calculated.ResultsIn right lobe donors we found a mean RR of 118,70%, 146,33% and 154,88%. The mean RV was 7,94 cc/s, 0,61 cc/s, and 0,24 cc/s.For right lobe recipients the mean RR was 72,61%, 68,31%, and 79,69%. The mean RV was 9,74 cc/s, 0,19 cc/s, and 0,16 cc/s. The mean spleen reduction rate was 1,38%, 11,36%, and 10,80%.The regeneration rates were higher in donors with statistically significant differences. The recipients have a growth peak within 2-3 months, while donors at 12 months.In donors, the residual liver volume after transplantation and pre-transplant liver function are negatively correlated with regeneration. In recipients, we observed negative correlations with hematological and nutritional parameters. Liver regeneration goes parallel with the volumetric reduction of the spleen. A greater muscle mass and improved muscle quality are major stimuli to the regeneration process.ConclusionThis study emphasizes how sophisticated and versatile liver regeneration is, influenced not only by the remaining liver or graft, but also by the metabolic environment of the host.

Indexed as

Body compositionLDLTLiver regeneration rateRegeneration velocitySpleen reduction rate

Identifiers

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.