Search

To evaluate the suitability of volume index measurement (VI) by either ultrasound (US) or computed tomography (CT) for the assessment of liver volume. Fifty-nine patients, 21 women, with a mean age of 66.8 ± 12.6 years underwent US of the liver followed immediately by abdominal CT. In US and CT imaging dorsoventral, mediolateral and craniocaudal liver diameters in their maximum extensions were assessed by two observers. VI was calculated by multiplication of the diameters divided by a constant (3.6). The liver volume determined by a manual segmentation in CT ("true liver volume") served as gold standard. True liver volume and calculated VI determined by US and CT were compared using Bland-Altman analysis. Mean differences of VI between observers were - 34.7% (- 90.1%; 20.7%) for the US-based and 1.1% (- 16.1%; 18.2%) for the CT-based technique, respectively. Liver volumes determined by semi-automated segmentation, US-based VI and CT-based VI, were as follows: 1.500 ± 347cm 3 ; 863 ± 371cm 3 ; 1.509 ± 432cm 3 . Results showed a great discrepancy between US-based VI and true liver volume with a mean bias of 58.3 ± 66.9%, and high agreement between CT-based VI and true liver volume with a low mean difference of 4.4 ± 28.3%. Volume index based on CT diameters is a reliable, fast and simple approach for estimating liver volume and can therefore be recommended for clinical practice. The usage of US-based volume index for assessment of liver volume should not be used due to its low accuracy of US in measurement of liver diameters., (© 2022. The Author(s).)