Liver regeneration
Open accessAbstract
In this ‘Snapshot’ article, we take a fresh look at the fundamentals of liver regeneration in light of recent technical innovations. While the mammalian response to partial hepatectomy (PH) has been studied for decades [1,2], in recent years the use of new experimental techniques has not only lead to a re-affirmation of basic principles of regeneration initially described by Nancy Bucher and others [3]; it also highlights remaining questions. PH leads to tightly synchronous rounds of replication, and given that the remaining liver is uninjured, it offers a physiological way to study both proliferative pathways in normal hepatocytes and abnormal regeneration in genetically modified mice.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In humans, complete liver mass recovery usually takes up to 3 months, although hepatocyte DNA synthesis reaches its peak between postoperative days 7 and 10.
“In contrast, in humans, complete liver mass recovery usually takes up to 3 months, although hepatocyte DNA synthesis—measured by radiolabel uptake or Ki-67 staining—reaches its peak between postoperative days 7 and 10[7,17].”
From Liver regeneration after partial hepatectomy: Triggers and mechanisms (2025) · cites this paper as [17]
In rodent models, liver mass is typically restored within 7-10 days after partial hepatectomy, with a peak in DNA synthesis occurring within the first 1-3 days.
“In rodent models, experimental data show that liver mass is typically restored within 7-10 days after partial hepatectomy, with a peak in DNA synthesis occurring within the first 1-3 days.”
From Liver regeneration after partial hepatectomy: Triggers and mechanisms (2025) · cites this paper as [17]
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Long-Term Culture and Coculture of Primary Rat and Human Hepatocytes
Shulman, M., & Nahmias, Y. (2012) · Methods in Molecular Biology · doi:10.1007/978-1-62703-125-7_17 · Cited by 117 · see citing works
“One assumption is that spheroids resemble the organization of liver during regeneration (22, 23).”
BackgroundAutophagy in chronic liver diseases: the two faces of Janus
Gual, P., Gilgenkrantz, H., & Lotersztajn, S. (2017) · American Journal of Physiology-Cell Physiology · doi:10.1152/ajpcell.00295.2016 · Cited by 91 · see citing works
ZFN-mediated in vivo genome editing corrects murine hurler syndrome
Ou, L., DeKelver, R. C., Rohde, M., Tom, S., Radeke, R., St. Martin, S. J., Santiago, Y., Sproul, S., Przybilla, M. J., Koniar, B. L., et al. (2019) · Molecular Therapy · doi:10.1016/j.ymthe.2018.10.018 · Cited by 84 · see citing works
Mouse liver assembloids model periportal architecture and biliary fibrosis
Dowbaj, A. M., Sljukic, A., Niksic, A., Landerer, C., Delpierre, J., Yang, H., Lahree, A., Kühn, A. C., Beers, D., Byrne, H. M., et al. (2025) · Nature · doi:10.1038/s41586-025-09183-9 · Cited by 40 · see citing works
Hyperplasia<i>vs</i>hypertrophy in tissue regeneration after extensive liver resection
Marongiu, F., Marongiu, M., Contini, A., Serra, M., Cadoni, E., Murgia, R., & Laconi, E. (2017) · World Journal of Gastroenterology · doi:10.3748/wjg.v23.i10.1764 · Cited by 24 · see citing works
Liver regeneration after partial hepatectomy: Triggers and mechanisms
Korchilava, B., Khachidze, T., Megrelishvili, N., Svanadze, L., Kakabadze, M., Tsomaia, K., Jintcharadze, M., & Kordzaia, D. (2025) · World Journal of Hepatology · doi:10.4254/wjh.v17.i7.107378 · Cited by 21 · see citing works
- Authors
- Fausto, N., Campbell, J. S., & Riehle, K. J.
- Affiliations
- University of Washington (US)
- Corresponding author
- Riehle, Kimberly J.
- Venue
- Journal of Hepatology
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2012-09
- Volume
- 57
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 692-694
- ISSN
- 0168-8278 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W3022916124
- Cited by
- 187
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 14 · 2018: 20 · 2017: 17 · 2016: 15 · 2015: 23 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 13 · 2012: 2
- FWCI
- 9.65
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Journal of Hepatology (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Hepatology › Liver physiology and pathology
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Tissue Engineering and Regenerative Medicine
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Organ Transplantation Techniques and Outcomes
- Keywords
- liver regeneration, partial hepatectomy, hepatocyte proliferation, genetically modified mice, experimental techniques
- MeSH terms
- Animals, DNA, Hepatectomy, Humans, Liver Regeneration, Stem Cells, Hepatocytes, Cell Proliferation, Mice, Rats
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
