Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 697

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 20 of the 20 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Standardized measurement of the future liver remnant prior to extended liver resection: Methodology and clinical associations

Open access
Vauthey, Jean-Nicolas, Chaoui, Amin, Do, Kim-Anh, Bilimoria, Malcolm M., Fenstermacher, Marc J., Charnsangavej, Chuslip, Hicks, Marshall, Alsfasser, Guido, Lauwers, Gregory, Hawkins, Irvin F., Caridi, James·2000·Surgery

Abstract

BACKGROUND There is no agreement regarding the preoperative measurement of liver volumes and the minimal safe size of the liver remnant after extended hepatectomy. METHODS In 20 patients with hepatobiliary malignancy and no underlying chronic liver disease, volumetric measurements of the liver remnant (segments 2 and 3 +/- 1) were obtained before extended right lobectomy (right trisegmentectomy). The ratios of future liver remnant to total liver volume were calculated by using a formula based on body surface area. In 12 patients, response to preoperative right trisectoral portal vein embolization was evaluated. In 15 patients who underwent the planned resection, preoperative volumes were correlated with biochemical and clinical outcome parameters. RESULTS The future liver remnants increased after portal vein embolization (26% versus 36%, P < .01). Smaller size liver remnants were associated with an increase in postoperative liver function tests (P < .05) and longer lengths of hospital stay (P < .02). Preliminary data indicates an increase in major complications for liver volumes < or = 25% (P = .02). CONCLUSIONS A simple method of measurement provides an assessment of the liver remnant before resection. It is useful in evaluating response to portal vein embolization and in predicating the outcome before extended liver resections.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1067/msy.2000.105294

Cites

20 of 20 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 20 references

Cited by

See all 697

Metadata

Authors
Vauthey, J.-N., Chaoui, A., Do, K.-A., Bilimoria, M. M., Fenstermacher, M. J., Charnsangavej, C., Hicks, M., Alsfasser, G., Lauwers, G., Hawkins, I. F., & Caridi, J.
Venue
Surgery
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2000-05
Volume
127
Issue
5
Pages
512-519
ISSN
0039-6060 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2034046304
Cited by
697
References
20
FWCI
7.40
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Standardized measurement of the future liver remnant prior to extended liver resection: Methodology and clinical associations. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1067/msy.2000.105294
The paper
Vauthey, J.-N., Chaoui, A., Do, K.-A., Bilimoria, M. M., Fenstermacher, M. J., Charnsangavej, C., Hicks, M., Alsfasser, G., Lauwers, G., Hawkins, I. F., & Caridi, J. (2000). Standardized measurement of the future liver remnant prior to extended liver resection: Methodology and clinical associations. Surgery. https://doi.org/10.1067/msy.2000.105294

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.