Reproducibility and efficiency of liver volumetry using manual method and liver analysis software

Harufumi Maki; Yujiro Nishioka; Antony Haddad; Mateo Lendoire; Hop S Tran Cao; Yun S Chun; Ching-Wei D Tzeng; Jean-Nicolas Vauthey; Timothy E Newhook

doi:10.1016/j.hpb.2024.03.1157

Reproducibility and efficiency of liver volumetry using manual method and liver analysis software

HPB (Oxford). 2024 Mar 21:S1365-182X(24)01228-0. doi: 10.1016/j.hpb.2024.03.1157. Online ahead of print.

Authors

Harufumi Maki¹, Yujiro Nishioka¹, Antony Haddad¹, Mateo Lendoire¹, Hop S Tran Cao¹, Yun S Chun¹, Ching-Wei D Tzeng¹, Jean-Nicolas Vauthey¹, Timothy E Newhook²

Affiliations

¹ Department of Surgical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA.
² Department of Surgical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA. Electronic address: TNewhook@mdanderson.org.

PMID: 38632032
DOI: 10.1016/j.hpb.2024.03.1157

Abstract

Background: For liver volumetry, manual tracing on computed tomography (CT) images is time-consuming and operator dependent. To overcome these disadvantages, several three-dimensional simulation software programs have been developed; however, their efficacy has not fully been evaluated.

Methods: Three physicians performed liver volumetry on preoperative CT images on 30 patients who underwent formal right hepatectomy, using manual tracing volumetry and two simulation software programs, SYNAPSE and syngo.via. The future liver remnant (FLR) was calculated using each method of volumetry. The primary endpoint was reproducibility and secondary outcomes were calculation time and learning curve.

Results: The mean FLR was significantly lower for manual volumetry than for SYNAPSE or syngo.via; there was no significant difference in mean FLR between the two software-based methods. Reproducibility was lower for the manual method than for the software-based methods. Mean calculation time was shortest for SYNAPSE. For the two physicians unfamiliar with the software, no obvious learning curve was observed for using SYNAPSE, whereas learning curves were observed for using syngo.via.

Conclusions: Liver volumetry was more reproducible and faster with three-dimensional simulation software, especially SYNAPSE software, than with the conventional manual tracing method. Software can help even inexperienced physicians learn quickly how to perform liver volumetry.