Limits...
Heterogeneous living donor hepatic fat distribution on MRI chemical shift imaging.

Choi Y, Lee JM, Yi NJ, Kim H, Park MS, Hong G, Yoo T, Suh SW, Lee HW, Lee KW, Suh KS - Ann Surg Treat Res (2015)

Bottom Line: Fat deposit amount in S1, S2, S3 and deep regions of S4-S8 were significantly different from one another (F [4.003, 58.032] = 8.684, P < 0.001), while there were no differences among the peripheral regions of S4-S8 (F [2.9, 5.3] = 1.3, P = 0.272) by repeated measure analysis of variance method.And regional differences of the amount of fat deposit in the whole liver increased as a peripheral fat fraction of S5 increased (R(2) = 0.428, P < 0.001).Multifocal fat measurements for the whole liver are needed because a small regional evaluation might not represent the remaining liver completely, especially in patients with severe hepatic steatosis.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Surgery, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seongnam, Korea.

ABSTRACT

Purpose: We evaluated the heterogeneity of steatosis in living donor livers to determine its regional differences.

Methods: Between June 2011 and February 2012, 81 liver donors were selected. Fat fraction was estimated using magnetic resonance triple-echo chemical shifting gradient imaging in 13 different regions: segment 1 (S1), S2, S3, and each peripheral and deep region of S4, S5, S6, S7, and S8.

Results: There were differences (range, 3.2%-5.3%) in fat fractions between each peripheral and deep region of S4, S6, S7, and S8 (P < 0.001, P = 0.004, P < 0.001, and P = 0.006). Fat deposit amount in S1, S2, S3 and deep regions of S4-S8 were significantly different from one another (F [4.003, 58.032] = 8.684, P < 0.001), while there were no differences among the peripheral regions of S4-S8 (F [2.9, 5.3] = 1.3, P = 0.272) by repeated measure analysis of variance method. And regional differences of the amount of fat deposit in the whole liver increased as a peripheral fat fraction of S5 increased (R(2) = 0.428, P < 0.001).

Conclusion: Multifocal fat measurements for the whole liver are needed because a small regional evaluation might not represent the remaining liver completely, especially in patients with severe hepatic steatosis.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

The range of the estimated fat fraction increased with the estimated fat fraction in the peripheral region of segment 5 (S5) on CSI (P < 0.001). CSI, magnetic resonance chemical shift imaging.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4481030&req=5

Figure 3: The range of the estimated fat fraction increased with the estimated fat fraction in the peripheral region of segment 5 (S5) on CSI (P < 0.001). CSI, magnetic resonance chemical shift imaging.

Mentions: Additionally, the range of the fat fraction in the whole liver increased as the value of the fat fraction in the peripheral region of S5 on CSI increased (Pearson correlation = 0.654, P < 0.001, R2 = 0.428) (Fig. 3).


Heterogeneous living donor hepatic fat distribution on MRI chemical shift imaging.

Choi Y, Lee JM, Yi NJ, Kim H, Park MS, Hong G, Yoo T, Suh SW, Lee HW, Lee KW, Suh KS - Ann Surg Treat Res (2015)

The range of the estimated fat fraction increased with the estimated fat fraction in the peripheral region of segment 5 (S5) on CSI (P < 0.001). CSI, magnetic resonance chemical shift imaging.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4481030&req=5

Figure 3: The range of the estimated fat fraction increased with the estimated fat fraction in the peripheral region of segment 5 (S5) on CSI (P < 0.001). CSI, magnetic resonance chemical shift imaging.
Mentions: Additionally, the range of the fat fraction in the whole liver increased as the value of the fat fraction in the peripheral region of S5 on CSI increased (Pearson correlation = 0.654, P < 0.001, R2 = 0.428) (Fig. 3).

Bottom Line: Fat deposit amount in S1, S2, S3 and deep regions of S4-S8 were significantly different from one another (F [4.003, 58.032] = 8.684, P < 0.001), while there were no differences among the peripheral regions of S4-S8 (F [2.9, 5.3] = 1.3, P = 0.272) by repeated measure analysis of variance method.And regional differences of the amount of fat deposit in the whole liver increased as a peripheral fat fraction of S5 increased (R(2) = 0.428, P < 0.001).Multifocal fat measurements for the whole liver are needed because a small regional evaluation might not represent the remaining liver completely, especially in patients with severe hepatic steatosis.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Surgery, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seongnam, Korea.

ABSTRACT

Purpose: We evaluated the heterogeneity of steatosis in living donor livers to determine its regional differences.

Methods: Between June 2011 and February 2012, 81 liver donors were selected. Fat fraction was estimated using magnetic resonance triple-echo chemical shifting gradient imaging in 13 different regions: segment 1 (S1), S2, S3, and each peripheral and deep region of S4, S5, S6, S7, and S8.

Results: There were differences (range, 3.2%-5.3%) in fat fractions between each peripheral and deep region of S4, S6, S7, and S8 (P < 0.001, P = 0.004, P < 0.001, and P = 0.006). Fat deposit amount in S1, S2, S3 and deep regions of S4-S8 were significantly different from one another (F [4.003, 58.032] = 8.684, P < 0.001), while there were no differences among the peripheral regions of S4-S8 (F [2.9, 5.3] = 1.3, P = 0.272) by repeated measure analysis of variance method. And regional differences of the amount of fat deposit in the whole liver increased as a peripheral fat fraction of S5 increased (R(2) = 0.428, P < 0.001).

Conclusion: Multifocal fat measurements for the whole liver are needed because a small regional evaluation might not represent the remaining liver completely, especially in patients with severe hepatic steatosis.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus