Cargando…

(99m)Tc-GSA scintigraphy for assessing the functional volume ratio of the future liver remnant in the routine practice of liver resection()

BACKGROUND: The significance of incorporating regional functional heterogeneity assessment by liver scintigraphy into the calculation of the future liver remnant has been reported. However, liver scintigraphy entails additional costs and radiation exposure. Nevertheless, studies describing when live...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Iida, Masatake, Yamamoto, Yuzo, Katoh, Hiroki, Taniguchi, Naoto, Abe, Yuki, Kumagai, Kenta, Uchinami, Hiroshi
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8857497/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35243282
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.sopen.2021.12.001
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: The significance of incorporating regional functional heterogeneity assessment by liver scintigraphy into the calculation of the future liver remnant has been reported. However, liver scintigraphy entails additional costs and radiation exposure. Nevertheless, studies describing when liver scintigraphy demonstrates an actual benefit over computed tomography liver volumetry are lacking. Thus, we evaluated the degree of agreement between future liver remnant % values calculated by technetium (99m)Tc diethylenetriaminepentaacetic acid-galactosyl human serum albumin scintigraphy (galactosyl human serum albumin–based future liver remnant %) and those by computed tomography volumetry and investigated the practical impact of performing regional functional heterogeneity assessment. METHODS: The Bland–Altman method was used to retrospectively analyze the agreement between computed tomography– and galactosyl human serum albumin–based future liver remnant % measurements in 84 patients. RESULTS: In ordinary patients with a computed tomography–based future liver remnant % greater than 50%, there was a good agreement between both measurements. However, in cases with a computed tomography–based future liver remnant % less than 40%, galactosyl human serum albumin–based measurements were significantly smaller than computed tomography–based values, with 88% of these patients exhibiting a galactosyl human serum albumin–based future liver remnant % less than 30%. After portal vein embolization, galactosyl human serum albumin–based measurements were primarily greater than or in agreement with computed tomography–based values, even in cases with a computed tomography–based future liver remnant % less than 40%. CONCLUSION: Adding (99m)Tc diethylenetriaminepentaacetic acid-galactosyl human serum albumin scintigraphy to computed tomography liver volumetry is advised when deciding on hepatectomy in patients with a computed tomography–based future liver remnant % less than 50%. If the computed tomography–based future liver remnant % is smaller than 40%, it is strongly recommended to check future liver remnant % by (99m)Tc diethylenetriaminepentaacetic acid-galactosyl human serum albumin scintigraphy. In other cases, computed tomography–based future liver remnant % calculation alone can be regarded as the gold standard of safe hepatectomy.