Gd-EOB-DTPA based magnetic resonance imaging for predicting liver response to portal vein embolization

Table 3 Summary of linear regression model results correlating enhancement and kinetic growth

Site	Estimated Slope	95% LCL	95% UCL	P value
Left liver	1.43	-2.14	5.01	0.4
Right liver	1.08	-3.24	5.4	0.6
SegIV	0.04	-3.3	3.38	0.98
SegV	1.23	-1.98	4.43	0.42
SegVI	0.35	-2.92	3.62	0.82
SegVII	1.05	-3.59	5.69	0.63
SegVIII	0.49	-3.41	4.4	0.79
Whole liver	1.37	-2.57	5.32	0.46

Linear regression assumes normality for both enhancement and kGR, it also assumes a linear relationship between the two. The estimated slope shows how much KGR increases with 1 unit increase of enhancement. P value based on test of slope against zero. If P value < 0.05 then there is significant correlation between enhancement and KGR. Conclusion: Enhancement was NOT significantly correlated with KGR in any of the site measured (all slopes not significantly different from zero, i.e., a flat line). PVE: Portal vein embolization; kGR: Kinetic growth rate; FLR: Functional liver reserve; LAVA: Liver acquisition volume acquisition; ROI: Region of interest; LCL: Lower confidence level; UCL: Upper confidence level.