Precision in Liver Surgery: A Comparative Analysis of Volumetry Techniques
- PMID: 40402422
- DOI: 10.1245/s10434-025-17462-y
Precision in Liver Surgery: A Comparative Analysis of Volumetry Techniques
Abstract
Background: Future liver remnant volume (FLRV) is a critical determinant of safety for hepatectomy. This study assesses concordance between imaging-based measured FLRV (mFLRV), and body surface area (BSA)-based standardized FLRV (sFLRV), and their association with post-hepatectomy complications.
Materials and methods: All major hepatectomy between 1999 and 2021 were assessed for agreement between mFLRV and sFLRV using concordance correlation coefficient (CCC). Association between each method and major postoperative complications, post-hepatectomy liver failure (PHLF), or grade 4/5 morbidity was compared using logistic regression model and area under the receiver-operating characteristic (AUC) curve to evaluate the discriminatory power of each volumetry method separately.
Results: A total of 1749 patients were included, 49% were female, median age was 60 years, 70.2% had metastatic disease, and 49.7% received preoperative chemotherapy. Median sFLRV (41.3%) was higher than mFLRV (39.4%). Major complications were observed in 5.1% (n = 90). Concordance between mFLRV and sFLRV was moderate, CCC = 0.78 (95% CI 0.75-0.79) but was poor (CCC = 0.39; 95% CI 0.32-0.43) among patients with mFLRV ≤ 35% (n = 528). In this subset, sFLRV overestimated remnant volume in 63% (n = 333) with ≥ 5% overprediction in 145 patients (27.5%). Factors associated with ≥ 5% variation were lower weight (p = 0.003), lower BMI (p = 0.003), and lower BSA (p = 0.004). Both methods performed similarly in predicting major complications with AUC of 0.64 and 0.63 for sFLRV and mFLRV, respectively.
Conclusions: Imaging- and BSA-based volumetry are moderately correlated, with poor concordance among patients with smaller FLRV where sFLRV overestimated remnant volume. Both techniques can be safely used for volumetric assessment before major hepatectomy.
Keywords: Body surface area; Future liver remnant; Hepatectomy; Volumetry.
© 2025. Society of Surgical Oncology.
Conflict of interest statement
Disclosures: Dr. Drebin owns equity shares in Alnylam Pharmaceuticals, Inc and Ionis Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
References
-
- Shoup M, Gonen M, D’Angelica M, et al. Volumetric analysis predicts hepatic dysfunction in patients undergoing major liver resection. J Gastrointest Surg. 2003;7(3):325–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1091-255X(02)00370-0 . - DOI
-
- Schindl MJ, Redhead DN, Fearon KCH, Garden OJ, Wigmore SJ. The value of residual liver volume as a predictor of hepatic dysfunction and infection after major liver resection. Gut. 2005;54(2):289–96. https://doi.org/10.1136/gut.2004.046524 . - DOI
-
- Narita M, Oussoultzoglou E, Fuchshuber P, et al. What is a safe future liver remnant size in patients undergoing major hepatectomy for colorectal liver metastases and treated by intensive preoperative chemotherapy? Ann Surg Oncol. 2012;19(8):2526–38. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-012-2274-x . - DOI
-
- Kele PG, van der Jagt EJ, Gouw ASH, Lisman T, Porte RJ, de Boer MT. The impact of hepatic steatosis on liver regeneration after partial hepatectomy. Liver Int. 2013;33(3):469–75. https://doi.org/10.1111/liv.12089 . - DOI
-
- Dello SAWG, Kele PGS, Porte RJ, et al. Influence of preoperative chemotherapy on CT volumetric liver regeneration following right hemihepatectomy. World J Surg. 2014;38(2):497–504. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-013-2278-0 . - DOI
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical