Liver sizes in men and women of different constitutional body types
https://doi.org/10.18699/SSMJ20260303
Abstract
Dynamic monitoring of liver size changes is very important in prognostics and in the diagnosis of various systems organs, and is also used to assess the effectiveness of conservative treatment and in the surgical interventions planning. The contribution of anthropometric factors and constitutional body types to liver size is still being discussed. The aim of the study was to identify the relationship between the constitutional body types of men and women and the liver ultrasound linear dimensions.
Material and methods. A total of 212 people (90 men, 122 women) without abdominal organ pathologies were examined; for each person, the Pignet index was calculated based on the measured anthropometric parameters, depending on the value of which the subjects were divided into asthenics, normosthenics and hypersthenics. We measured anteroposterior (AP) and craniocaudal (CC) diameters of left and right lobes, thickness of caudate lobe and the right lobe oblique craniocaudal maximum diameter (OCC max).
Results and discussion. Hypersthenics, both men and women, have larger AP diameter of the right and left liver lobes than asthenics. At the same time, the AP diameter of both lobes is larger in hypersthenic men than in normosthenics, and greater in normosthenic women than in asthenic. It was found that the AP diameters of both lobes, CC and OCC max diameters of the right lobe are larger in men than in women.
Conclusions. It was found that the most constitutionally dependent is AP diameter for both the left and right liver lobes. Gender differences in liver sizes are observed mainly in hypersthenics.
About the Authors
I. A. Opryshko
Immanuel Kant Baltic Federal University; Infectious Diseases Hospital of Kaliningrad region; OOO «Edkar Beta»
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Irina A. Opryshko
236041, Kaliningrad, Aleksandra Nevskogo st., 14
236016, Kaliningrad, Frunze st., 48
236041, Kaliningrad, Artilleriyskaya st., 22
V. A. Izranov
Immanuel Kant Baltic Federal University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Vladimir A. Izranov, doctor of medical sciences, professor
236041, Kaliningrad, Aleksandra Nevskogo st., 14
V. S. Stepanova
Immanuel Kant Baltic Federal University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Valentina S. Stepanova, candidate of medical sciences
236041, Kaliningrad, Aleksandra Nevskogo st., 14
S. A. Stepanyan
Immanuel Kant Baltic Federal University; BostonGene Technologies LLC
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Stepan A. Stepanyan
236041, Kaliningrad, Aleksandra Nevskogo st., 14
Armenia, 0012, Yerevan, Grachya Kochara, 2a
N. S. Opryshko
Immanuel Kant Baltic Federal University; Regional Clinical Hospital of the Kaliningrad Region
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Nikita S. Opryshko
236041, Kaliningrad, Aleksandra Nevskogo st., 14
236016, Kaliningrad, Klinicheskaya st., 74
References
1. Romanova E.I., Krasavtsev E.L. Differential diagnostics of liver diseases: a teaching aid on infectious diseases for 4th, 5th, and 6th-year students of all faculties of medical universities and infectious disease specialists. Gomel, 2014. 60 p. [In Russian].
2. El-Hussieny M.S., El-Masry S.A., Hassan N.E. Role of anthropometric measurements on sonographic estimation of false hepatomegaly among healthy adult men. J. Arab. Soc. Med. Res. 2021;16(1):51–56. doi: 10.4103/jasmr.jasmr_32_20
3. Huang Y., Zheng Y., Zhang C., Zhong S. Ultrasound assessment of the relevance of liver, spleen, and kidney dimensions with body parameters in adolescents. Comput. Math. Methods Med. 2022; 2022:9150803. doi: 10.1155/2022/9150803
4. Fateyev I.N. Lifetime liver syntopia depending on age and gender according to the magnetic resonance imaging method results. West Kazakhstan Medical Journal. 2023;65(2):96–101. [In Russian]. doi: 10.24412/2707-6180-2023-65-96-101
5. Gao J., Flick A., Allen A., Krasnoff M., Kinder D., Nguyen T. Variability in liver size measurements using different view angles in ultrasound imaging. J. Ultrasound Med. 2024;43(12):2345–2355. doi: 10.1002/jum.16570
6. Loloi J., Patel A., McDevitt P., Bruno M.A., Riley T. How strongly do physical examination estimates and ultrasonographic measurements of liver size correlate? A prospective study. Am. J. Med. 2019;132(1):103–108. doi: 10.1016/j.amjmed.2018.09.012
7. Kromrey M.L., Ittermann T., vWahsen C., Plodeck V., Seppelt D., Hoffmann R.T., Heiss P., Kühn J.P. Reference values of liver volume in Caucasian population and factors influencing liver size. Eur. J. Radiol. 2018;106:32–37. doi: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2018.07.005
8. Rashid A., Ali A., Zulfiqar T. Normal liver size in adults without suspicion of liver disease analyzing the variable (age, weight, and height) that has good correlation. Med. Sci. J. Adv. Res. 2022;3(3):129–133. doi: 10.46966/msjar.v3i3.53
9. Seppelt, D., Ittermann, T., Kromrey M.L., Kolb C., vWahsen C., Heiss P., Völzke H., Hoffmann R.T., Kühn J.P. Simple diameter measurement as predictor of liver volume and liver parenchymal disease. Sci. Rep. 2022;12(1):1257. doi: 10.1038/s41598-022-04825-8
10. Opryshko I.A., Izranov V.A., Gordova V.S., Shushval M.S., Stepanyan S.A., Abdujabborov K. Ultrasound examination of the liver post mortem: are there any changes in size after autopsy? Sibirskij nauchnyj medicinskij zhurnal = Siberian Scientific Medical Journal. 2024;44(5):80–87. [In Russian]. doi: 10.18699/SSMJ20240509
11. Linguraru M.G., Sandberg J.K., Jones E.C., Petrick N., Summers R.M. Assessing hepatomegaly: automated volumetric analysis of the liver. Acad. Radiol. 2012;19(5):588–598. doi: 10.1016/j.acra.2012.01.015
12. Halpern S., Coel M., Ashburn W., Alazraki N., Littenberg R., Hurwitz S., Green J. Correlation of liver and spleen size. Determinations by nuclear medicine studies and physical examination. Arch. Intern. Med. 1974;134(1):123–124.
13. Wolf D.C. Evaluation of the size, shape, and consistency of the liver. In: Walker H.K., Hall W.D., Hurst J.W., editors. Clinical methods: the history, physical, and laboratory examinations. 3rd ed. Boston: Butterworths, 1990. 478–481.
14. Pietri H., Boscaini M., Berthezene P., Durbec J.P., Cros R., Sarles H. Hepatic morphotypes. Their statistical individualization using ultrasonography. J. Ultrasound Med. 1988;7(4):189–196. doi: 10.7863/jum.1988.7.4.189
15. da Silva R.M., Pereira R.B., Siqueira M.V. Correlation between clinical evaluation of liver size versus ultrasonography evaluation according to body mass index (BMI) and biotypes. Rev. Med. Chil. 2010;138(12):1495–1501.
16. Esmeal M.E., Khalid N.H. Correlation between size of left lobe of the liver and body characteristic among Sudanese patients 2018-2019. Int. J. Res. Granthaalayah. 2019;7(11):19–27. doi: 10.29121/granthaalayah.v7.i11.2020.330
17. Dorostghol M., Gharibvand M.M., Hanafi M.G., Motamedfar A. Comparison of size of the liver between patients with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease and healthy controls. J. Family Med. Prim. Care. 2024;13(2):425–430. doi: 10.4103/jfmpc.jfmpc_94_23
18. Stepanyan I.A., Izranov V.A., Gordova V.S., Stepanyan S.A. What anthropometric parameters affect the linear dimensions of left liver lobe? Arch. EuroMedica. 2021;11(6):47–49. doi: 10.35630/2199-885X/2021/11/6.12
19. Stepanyan I.A., Izranov V.A., Gordova V.S., Stepanyan S.A. Anthropometric parameters affecting the linear dimensions of the right liver lobe. Arch. EuroMedica. 2022;12(1):16–18.
20. Patzak M., Porzner M., Oeztuerk S., Mason R.A., Wilhelm M., Graeter T., Kratzer W., Haenle M.M., Akinli A.S. Assessment of liver size by ultrasonography. J. Clin. Ultrasound. 2014;42(7):399–404. doi: 10.1002/jcu.22151
21. Singh T., Singla B. Clinical and sonographic estimation of liver span in normal healthy adults. Int. J. Med. Res Health Sci. 2017;6(1):94–97.
22. Riestra‐Candelaria B.L., Rodriguez‐Mojica W., Jorge J.C. Anatomical criteria to measure the adult right liver lobe by ultrasound. Sonography. 2018;5(4):181–186. doi: 10.1002/sono.12162
23. Özmen Z., Aktaş F., Özmen Z.C., Almus E., Demir O. Ultrasound measurement of liver longitudinal length in a North Anatolian population: A communitybased study. Niger J. Clin. Pract. 2018;21(5):653–657. doi: 10.4103/njcp.njcp_68_17
24. Stepanyan I., Izranov V., Gordova V., Rohwein R., Stepanyan S. Magnetic resonance and ultrasound imaging: do the linear liver measurements differ in men and women? Arch. Euromedica. 2020;10(3):48–50. doi: 10.35630/2199-885X/2020/10/3.11
25. Basiy R.V., Vasilyev V.A., Selivanova E.S. Feature of liver size in women and men of mature age depending on the somatotype. Morphologicheskiy almanakh imeni Vladimira Georgievicha Koveshnikova = V.G. Koveshnikov Morphological Almanac. 2020;18(3):17– 21. [In Russian].
26. Mershalova A.A., Borodina G.N., Elyasin P.A., Marchenko A.A. Constitutional and index assessment of the physical development of young people in the Altai Krai. Zhurnal anatomii i gistopatologii = Journal of Anatomy and Histopathology. 2023;12(3):49–56. [In Russian]. doi: 10.18499/2225-7357-2023-12-3-49-56
27. Stepanyan I.A., Izranov V.A., Gordova V.S., Beletskaya M.A., Palvanova U.B. Ultrasound examination of the liver: the search for the most reproducible and easy to operate measuring method of the right lobe oblique craniocaudal diameter. Luchevaya diagnostika i terapiya = Diagnostic Radiology and Radiotherapy. 2020;11(4):68–79. [In Russian]. doi: 10.22328/2079-5343-2020-11-4-68-79
28. Dietrich C.F., Tuma J., Badea R. Ultrasound of the liver. EFSUMB – European Course Book. Student Edition, 2013. 64 p.
29. Chaplygina E.V., Gubar A.S., Klimova S.I., Litvinova L.V. Tthe dependence of volume of the liver from somatotype and gender of the patient. Fundamentalnye issledovaniya = Fundamental research. 2013;7(2):445–450. [In Russian]
30. Chaplygina E.V., Gubar A.S. Connection linear parameters of liver with individual somatotype. Meditsinskiy vestnik Severnogo Kavkaza = Medical News of North Caucasus. 2014;9(4):356–359. [In Russian]. doi: 10.14300/mnnc.2014.09099.
31. Borchert D., Schuler A., Muche R., Haenle M.M., Akinli A.S., Arnold F., Kratzer W., Pauls S. Comparison of panorama ultrasonography, conventional B-mode ultrasonography, and computed tomography for measuring liver size. Ultraschall Med. 2010;31(1):31–36. doi: 10.1055/s-2008-1109309
32. Seppelt D., Kromrey M.L., Ittermann T., Kolb C., Haubold A., Kampfrath N., Fedders D., Heiss P., Hoberück S., Hoffmann R.T., Kühn J.P Reliability and accuracy of straightforward measurements for liver volume determination in ultrasound and computed tomography compared to real volumetry. Sci. Rep. 2022;12(1):12465. doi: 10.1038/s41598-022-16736-9
33. Boscaini M., Pietri H. Determination of a hepatic volumetric index by ultrasonic scanning. Surg. Endosc. 1987;1(2):103–107. doi:10.1007/BF00312695
34. Niederau C., Sonnenberg A., Müller J.E., Erckenbrecht J.F., Scholten T., Fritsch W.P. Sonographic measurements of the normal liver, spleen, pancreas, and portal vein. Radiology. 1983;149(2):537–540. doi: 10.1148/radiology.149.2.6622701
35. Simon G., Heckmann V., Toth D., Pauka D., Petrus K., Molnar T.F. The effect of hepatic steatosis and fibrosis on liver weight and dimensions. Leg. Med. (Tokyo). 2020;47:101781. doi: 10.1016/j.legalmed.2020.101781
36. Childs J.T., Esterman A.J., Thoirs K.A. Ultrasound measurements of the liver: an intra and inter-rater reliability study. Australas. J. Ultrasound Med. 2014;17(3):113–119. doi: 10.1002/j.2205-0140.2014.tb00026.x
37. Stepanyan I.A., Izranov V.A., Gordova V.S., Beletskaya M.A., Stepanyan S.A. Intra- and inter-research reproducibility of linear liver measurements by ultrasound examination. Luchevaya diagnostika i terapiya = Diagnostic Radiology and Radiotherapy. 2020;11(3):73–81. [In Russian]. doi: 10.22328/2079-5343-2020-11-3-73- 81
Review
Views:
229
JATS XML
Email this article 