Copyright
©The Author(s) 2015.
World J Gastroenterol. Jan 21, 2015; 21(3): 988-996
Published online Jan 21, 2015. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v21.i3.988
Published online Jan 21, 2015. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v21.i3.988
Table 1 Interobserver variability of each liver lobe volume parameter between two observers’ measurements in cirrhotic patients with hepatitis B
Liver lobe volume parameters | Mean coefficient of variation (range) | ≤ 10% (n) | > 10% (n) |
RV | 7.5% (2%-14%) | 59 | 12 |
LMV | 8.6% (3%-15%) | 61 | 10 |
LLV | 8.2% (3%-13%) | 63 | 8 |
CV | 6.0% (2%-11%) | 69 | 2 |
RV/ALB | 5.5% (1%-11%) | 70 | 1 |
LMV/ALB | 6.4% (1%-10%) | 71 | 0 |
LLV/ALB | 6.2% (2%-10%) | 71 | 0 |
CV/ALB | 4.0% (2%-9%) | 71 | 0 |
Table 2 Main clinical data of the healthy volunteers and patients with cirrhosis in different Child-Pugh classes
No cirrhosis | Child-Pugh class of cirrhosis | |||
(n = 21) | Class A (n = 27) | Class B (n = 28) | Class C (n = 16) | |
Gender (M/F) | 12/9 | 12/15 | 13/15 | 11/5 |
Age | 56.23 ± 13.02 | 59.43 ± 12.93 | 54.57 ± 12.59 | 53.56 ± 16.13 |
Body weight (kg) | 65.42 ± 5.34 | 60.53 ± 3.20 | 57.61 ± 2.05 | 55.33 ± 1.53 |
BMI (kg/m2) | 23.15 ± 0.54 | 22.42 ± 0.45 | 21.25 ± 0.31 | 19.41 ± 0.24 |
RV (mm3) | 806.45 ± 198.891 | 649.60 ± 123.46 | 586.98 ± 137.283 | 470.58 ± 46.034 |
LMV (mm3) | 234.29 ± 70.341 | 193.23 ± 47.052 | 161.27 ± 43.04 | 147.47 ± 83.754 |
LLV (mm3) | 215.51 ± 133.63 | 279.60 ± 95.332 | 218.69 ± 35.47 | 208.49 ± 36.174 |
CV (mm3) | 20.28 ± 9.351 | 34.36 ± 10.46 | 29.15 ± 12.23 | 22.41 ± 10.944 |
ALB (g/L) | 45.27 ± 3.46 | 37.82 ± 4.07 | 33.24 ± 2.56 | 26.76 ± 3.23 |
RV/ALB | 17.59 ± 4.31 | 16.98 ± 3.03 | 18.61 ± 4.12 | 20.45 ± 3.554 |
LMV/ALB | 5.52 ± 1.73 | 5.16 ± 1.39 | 5.15 ± 1.45 | 6.43 ± 3.81 |
LLV/ALB | 5.14 ± 3.411 | 7.29 ± 2.95 | 7.08 ± 1.263 | 9.19 ± 1.404 |
CV/ALB | 0.48 ± 0.241 | 0.87 ± 0.28 | 0.95 ± 0.43 | 0.96 ± 0.45 |
Table 3 Comparison of liver lobe volume parameters between patients with and without esophageal varices
Parameters | Esophageal varices | |
No (n = 46) | Yes (n = 25) | |
RV (mm3) | 687.85 ± 175.731 | 534.87 ± 85.86 |
LMV (mm3) | 190.01 ± 63.70 | 167.18 ± 66.70 |
LLV (mm3) | 544.26 ± 98.74 | 216.05 ± 39.04 |
CV (mm3) | 27.52 ± 12.83 | 27.61 ± 8.54 |
RV/ALB | 16.98 ± 3.361 | 21.26 ± 3.01 |
LMV/ALB | 5.26 ± 1.68 | 5.96 ± 2.96 |
LLV/ALB | 6.91 ± 2.77 | 7.78 ± 1.92 |
CV/ALB | 0.78 ± 0.411 | 0.97 ± 0.31 |
Table 4 Volume parameters of each liver lobe in determining the presence and Child-Pugh class of liver cirrhosis, and predicting the presence of esophageal varices
Parameters | Cut-off | Differentiations | AUC | Sensitivity | Specificity |
RV (mm3) | 692.3 | No cirrhosis vs cirrhosis | 0.816 | 70.6% | 75% |
508.9 | Class A vs C | 0.900 | 90.3% | 84.5% | |
522.2 | Class B vs C | 0.803 | 70.0% | 88% | |
579.45 | No varices vs varices | 0.780 | 71.4% | 70.0% | |
LMV (mm3) | 201.3 | No cirrhosis vs cirrhosis | 0.754 | 70.6% | 77.0% |
181.1 | Class A vs B | 0.728 | 68.0% | 71.0% | |
155.4 | Class A vs C | 0.751 | 82.1% | 75.0% | |
LLV (mm3) | 233.2 | Class A vs B | 0.761 | 74.4% | 73.1% |
224.9 | Class A vs C | 0.792 | 82.1% | 75.0% | |
CV (mm3) | 23.8 | No cirrhosis vs cirrhosis | 0.756 | 69.0% | 65.0% |
25.1 | Class A vs C | 0.806 | 85.7% | 69.0% | |
RV/ALB | 19.9 | Class A vs C | 0.801 | 68.8% | 79.6% |
20.46 | No varices vs varices | 0.890 | 80.0% | 83.5% | |
LLV/ALB | 0.9 | No cirrhosis vs cirrhosis | 0.763 | 70.6% | 71.0% |
8.3 | Class A vs C | 0.752 | 68.8% | 65.5% | |
7.5 | Class B vs C | 0.900 | 93.8% | 81.5% | |
CV/ALB | 0.6 | No cirrhosis vs cirrhosis | 0.860 | 82.0% | 83.0% |
0.825 | No varices vs varices | 0.673 | 64.0% | 67.0% |
Table 5 Volume parameters of liver lobes for best identifying the presence and Child-Pugh class of liver cirrhosis, and predicting the presence of esophageal varices
Parameter | Cut-off | Differentiations | Sensitivity | Specificity |
CV/ALB | 0.6 | No cirrhosis vs cirrhosis | 82.0% | 83.00% |
RV (mm3) | 508.9 | Class A vs C | 90.3% | 84.5% |
LLV/ALB | 7.5 | Class B vs C | 93.8% | 81.5% |
LLV (mm3) | 233.2 | Class A vs B | 74.4% | 73.1% |
RV/ALB (mm3) | 20.46 | No varices vs varices | 80.0% | 83.5% |
- Citation: Li H, Chen TW, Li ZL, Zhang XM, Li CJ, Chen XL, Chen GW, Hu JN, Ye YQ. Albumin and magnetic resonance imaging-liver volume to identify hepatitis B-related cirrhosis and esophageal varices. World J Gastroenterol 2015; 21(3): 988-996
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/1007-9327/full/v21/i3/988.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v21.i3.988