Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Imaging Studies of the Liver

  • Chapter
Book cover Liver and Biliary Tract Surgery

  • 3119 Accesses

Abstract

Thirty years ago, the imaging investigation of the liver and the biliary tree began with the plain x-ray. Nowadays it is considered less valuable since the ultrasound has become the modality of choice for their initial examination. The liver casts an appreciable shadow on a simple X-ray film. The hepatic shadow appears homogenous and is mostly formed by the right lobe. It is delineated at the right quadrant of the abdomen, though modified by individual variations of shape and orientation. Its outline is deduced due to contrast differences between the right lobe and the right hemidiaphragm and lung above, the preperitoneal fat line laterally, and the extraperitoneal fat and the kidney below. The liver lies approximately at the level of fifth intercostal space at the midclavicular line. The lower border extends to or slightly below the costal margin and should not cross the right psoas margin. The lower anterior edge of the liver that is the one clinically palpated is not directly seen on a plain film, but the gas in the right colon usually indicates its position

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 189.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 249.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 329.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Gosink BB, Leymaster CE: Ultrasonic determination of hepatomegaly. J Clin Ultrasound. 1981; 9:37–41.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Niderau C, Sonnenberg A, Muller JE, et al.: Sonographic measurements of the normal liver, spleen, pancreas and portal vein. Radiology. 1983; 149:537–540.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Withers CE, Wilson SR: The liver. In: Rumack CM, Wilson SR, Charboneau JW, eds. Diagnostic Ultrasound. 2nd ed. St Louis, Mosby; 1998;87–154.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Bryant TH, Blomley MJ, Albrecht T, et al: Improved characterization of liver lesions with liver-phase uptake of liver-specific micribubbles: prospective multicentrer study. Radiology. 2004; 232:420–430.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Niderau C, Muller JE, Sonnenberg A, et al: Extrahepatic bile ducts in helthy subjects, in patients with cholelithiasis, and in postcholecystectomy patients: a prospective ultrasonic study. J Clin Ultrasound. 1983; 11:23–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Behan M, Kazam E: Sonography of the common bile duct size. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1978; 130:701–709.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Wu CC, Ho YH, Chen CY: Effect of aging on common bile duct diameter: a real time ultrasonographic study. J Clin Ultrasound. 1984; 12:473–478.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Bucceri AM, Brogna A, Ferrara R: Common bile duct calibre following cholocystectomy: a two-year sonographic survey. Abdom Imag. 1994; 19:251–252.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Bressler EL, Rubin JM, McCracken S, et al: Sonographic parallel channel sign: a reappraisal. Radiology. 1987; 164:343–346.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Gallen PW, Filly RA: Ultrasonographic localization of the gallbladder. Radiology. 1979:133:678–691.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Worthen NJ, Uszler JM, Funamura JL: Cholocystitis: prospective evaluation of sonography and 99mTc-HIDA cholescintigraphy. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1981; 137:973–978.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Dodds WJ, Groh WJ, Darweesh RMA, et al: Sonographic measurement of gallbladder volume. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1985; 145:1009–1011.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Meilstrup JW, Hopper KD, Thieme GA: Imaging of gallbladder variants. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1991; 157:1205–1208.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Safadi RR, Abu-Yousef MM, Farah AS, et al: Preoperative sonographic diagnosis of gallbladder torsion: report of two cases. J Ultrasound Med; 1993; 12:296–298.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Lim GM, Jeffrey CS, Tolentino CS: Pancreatic pseudoaneurysm. Monitoring the success of transcatheter embolozation with duplex sonography. J Ultasound Med. 1989; 8:643–646.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Kubale R: Abdominal veins, portal venous system, and liver. In: Wolf KJ, Fobbe F, eds. Color duplex sonography. 1st ed New York, Thieme; 1995; 155–182.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Prokop M, van der Molen AJ: Liver. In: Prokop M, Galanski M eds. Spiral and multislice computed tomography of the body. 1st ed. Stuttgart, Thieme; 2003; 405–475.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Kemmerer SR, Mortele KJ, Ros PR: CT scan of the liver. Radiol Clin North Am. 1998; 36:247–261.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Winter TC, Freeny PC, Ngheim HV, et al: Hepatic arterial anatomy in transplantation candidates: Evaluation with three-dimensional CT arteriography. Radiology. 1995; 195:363–370.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Liddel RM, Baron RL, Ekstrom JE, et al: CT description of intrahepatic bile ducts. Radiology. 1990; 176:633–635.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Prokop M: Biliary tree. In: Prokop M, Galanski M eds. Spiral and multislice computed tomography of the body. 1st ed. Stuttgart, Thieme; 2003; 405–475.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Kamel IR, Liapi E, Fishman EK: Liver and Biliary System: Evaluation by Multidetector CT. Radiol Clin North Am; 2005; 43:977–997.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Prando A, Wallace S, Bernandini ME, et al: Computed tomographic arteriography of the liver. Radiology; 1979; 130:679–701.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Kanematsu WA, Hoshi H, Imaeda T, et al: Detection and characterization of hepatic tumors: Value of combined helical CT hepatic arteriography and CT during arterial portography. AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1997; 168:1193–1198.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Lupetin AR, Cammisa BA, Beckman I, et al: Spiral CT during arterial portography. Radiographics; 1996; 16:723–743.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Sahani D, Saini S, Pena C et al: Using multidetector CT for preoperative vascular evaluation of liver neoplasms: technique and results. AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2002; 179:53–59.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Lang H, Radtke A, Liu C, et al: Extended left hepatectomy: modified operation planning based on three-dimentional visulization of liver anatomy. Langenbecks Arch Surg; 2004; 389:306–310.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Onodera Y, Omatsu T, Nakayama J, et al: Perpheral anatomic evaluation using three-dimentional CT hepatic venography in donors: significance of peripheral venous visualization in liver-donor liver transplantation. AJP Am J Roentgenol; 2004; 227:883–889.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Wigmore SJ, Redhead DN, Yan XJ, et al: Virtual hepatic resection using three-dimentional reconstruction of helical computed tomography angioportograms. Ann Surg; 2001; 233:221–226.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Shanmugam V, Beattie GC, Yule SR, et al. Is magnetic resonance cholangiopacreatography the new gold standard in biliary imaging? Br J Radiol; 2005; 78:888–893.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Mitchell DG, Burk DL Jr, Vinitski S, et al: The biophysical basis of tissue contrast in extracranial MR imaging. AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1987; 149:831–837.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Heller SL, Lee VS: MR imaging of the gallbladder and biliary system. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am; 2005 May; 13:295–311.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Martin DR, Danrad R, Shahid MH: MR imaging of the liver. Radiol Clin North Am; 2005; 43:861–886.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Tartaglino LM, Flanders AE, Vinitski S, et al: Metallic artefacts on MR imaging of the postoperative spine: Reduction with fast spin-echo techniques. Radiology; 1994; 190:565–569.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. McFarland EG, Mayo-Smith WW, Saini S, et al: Hepatic hemangiomas and malignant tumors: Improved differantiation with heavily T2-waited conventional spin-echo MR imaging. Radiology; 1994; 193:43–47.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Balci NC, Semelka RC: Contrast agents for MR imaging of the liver. Radiol Clin North Am; 2005; 43:887–898.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Mitchell DG: Hepatobiliary contrast material: A magic bullet for sensitivity and specificity? Radiology; 1993; 188:21–22.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Mitchell DG: Hepatobiliary contrast material: A magic bullet for sensitivity and specificity? Radiology; 1993; 188:21–22.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Freitas ML, Bell RL, Duffy AJ: Choledocholithiasis: Evolving standards for diagnosis and management. World J Gastroenterol; 2006; 28:3162–3167.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Drane WE: Scintigraphic techniques for hepatic imaging. Update for 2000. Radiol Clin North Am; 1998; 36:309–318.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Drane WE: Hepatic imaging in diffuse liver disease. Clin Nucl Med; 1988; 13:182–185.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. Brodsky RI, Friedman AC, Maurer AH, et al: Hepatig hemangioma: Diagnosis with 99mTc-labeled red cells and single photon emission CT. AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1987; 148:125–129.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Brown PH, Juni JE, Lieberman DA, et al: Hepatocyte versus biliary disease: a distinction by deconvolutional analysis of technetium-99m IDA time-activity curves. J Nucl Med; 1988; 29:623–630.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  44. Weissmann HS, Gliedman ML, Wilk PJ, et al: Evaluation Of the postoperative patient with Tc-99m-IDA cholescintigraphy. Semin Nucl Med; 1982; 12:27–52

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  45. Warburg O: On the origin of cancer cells. Science; 1956; 123:309–314.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  46. Pauwels EK, Ribeiro MJ, Stoot JH, et al: FDG accumulation and tumor biology. Nucl Med Biol; 1998; 25:317–322.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  47. Ho CL, Yu SC, Yeung DW: 11C-acetate PET imaging in hepatocellular carcinomaand other liver masses. J Nucl Med; 2003; 44:213–221.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Delbeke D, Vitola JV, Sandier MP et al: Staging recurrent metastatic colorectal carcinoma with PET. J nucl Med; 1997; 38:1196–1201.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  49. Anderson CD, Rice MH, Pinson CW, et al: Fluorodeoxy-glucose PET imaging in the evaluation of gallbladder carcinoma and cholangiocarcinoma. J Gastointest Surg; 2004; 8:90–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Michels NA: Newer anatomy of the liver and its variant blood supply and collateral circulation Am J Surg; 1966; 112:337–347.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  51. Cardella JF, Amplatz K.: Preoperative angiographic evaluation of prospective liver recipients. Radiol Clin North Am; 1987; 25:299–308.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  52. Martin M, Zajko AB, Orons PD, et al: Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt in the management of variceal bleeding: Indications and clinical results. Surgery; 1993; 114:719–727.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  53. Foley WD, Stewart ET, Milbrath JR, et al: Digital substraction angiography of the portal venous system. AJR Am J Roentgnenol; 1983; 140:497–499.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  54. Cheng YF, Huang TL, Lee TY, et al: Variation of the intra-hepatic portal vein; angiographic demonstration and application in living-related hepatic transplantation. Transplant Proc; 1996; 28:1667–1668.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  55. Khiari A, Navarro F, Fabre JM et al: Value of percutaneous hepatic biopsy in diagnosis of presumed bening tumors of the liver. Ann Chir 1996; 50:532–537.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  56. Thanos L, Zormpala A, Papaioannou G, et al: Safety and efficacy of percutaneous CT-guided liver biopsy using an 18-gauge automated needle. Eur J Intern Med; 2000; 16:571–574.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Charboneau JW, Reading CC, and Welch TC: CT and sonographically guided needle biopsy: current techniques and new innovations. AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1990; 154:1–10.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  58. Shankar S, van Sonnenberg E, Silverman SG, Tuncali K: Intervenional radiology procedures in the liver: Biopsy, Drainage, and Ablation. Clin Liver Disease; 2002; 6:91–118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Fernandez MP, Murphy FB: Hepatic biopsies and fluid drainages. Radiol Clin North Am; 1991; 29:1311–1328.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  60. Silverman SG, Deuson TE, Kane N et al: Percutaneous abdominal biopsy: Cost-identification analysis. Radiology 1998; 206:429–435.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  61. Lufkin R, Teresi L, Hanafee W: New needle foe MR-guided aspiration cytology of the head and neck. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1987; 149:380–382.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  62. Tobin MV, Gilmore IT: Plugged liver biopsy in patients with impaired coagulation. Dig Dis Sci; 1989; 34:13–15.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  63. Little AF, Ferris JV, Dodd GD, Baron RL: Image-guided percutaneous hepatic biopsy: Effect of ascites on the complication rate. Radiology; 1996; 199:79–83.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  64. Welch TJ, Sheepy PF II, Jonson CD et al: CT-guided biopsy: Prospective analysis of 1,000 procedures. Radiology; 1989; 171:493–496.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  65. Chevallier P, Dausse F, Berthier F, et al: Transjugular liver biopsy: prospective evaluation of the angle formed between the hepatic veins and the vena cava main axis and modification of a semi-automated biopsy device in cases of an unfavorable angle. Eur Radiol. 2006 May 9 [Epub ahead of print].

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Radiology of Sotiria, General Hospital, Athens, Greece

    L. Thanos MD, PhD (Chairman)

  2. Department of Radiology, Red Cross Hospital, Athens, Greece

    S. Mylona MD

Authors
  1. L. Thanos MD, PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. S. Mylona MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. 2nd Surgical Department and Surgical Oncology Unit, Red Cross Hospital, Athens, Greece

    Constantine Ch. Karaliotas MD, PhD (Chairman) (Chairman)

  2. Department of General Surgery and Transplantation, University Clinic Essen, Germany

    Christoph E. Broelsch MD, FACS (Professor and Chairman) (Professor and Chairman)

  3. Hepatobiliary Surgery, Imperial College, Hammersmith Hospital, London, UK

    Nagy A. Habib ChM, FRCS (Professor) (Professor)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2006 Springer-Verlag/Wien

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Thanos, L., Mylona, S. (2006). Imaging Studies of the Liver. In: Karaliotas, C.C., Broelsch, C.E., Habib, N.A. (eds) Liver and Biliary Tract Surgery. Springer, Vienna. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-211-49277-2_25

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-211-49277-2_25

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Vienna

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-211-49275-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-211-49277-2

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation