Sonographic Splenic Sizes In Normal Adult Nigerian Population

Main Article Content

Dr. I. J. Okoye
K. K. Agwu
K. Ochie

Abstract

This study aimed to establish ultrasonic splenic dimensions which can be used as normogram for adult Nigerians. 250 adult subjects were scanned prospectively using a 3. 5 MHZ ultrasound sector probe. The splenic length, width and thickness were obtained in the supine position and the weight calculated using Downey's formula. Differences insplenic dimensions were determined using Z test, while the relationship between the splenic dimension and the subjects age, BMI, and height were analysed using Pearson Moment Correlation. The normal splenic sizes obtained ranged from 9.9 -11.5cm (length - L), 6.0-7.5cm (Width W) and 4.0- 4.5cm (thickness -T). The splenic dimensions for males were 11.1 + 0.7cm (L), 7.3 + 0.2cm (w) and 4.2+ 0.2cm (T). The corresponding values for females were 10.6 + 0.7cm, 6.8 + 0.5cm and 4.2 + 0.2cm respectively; thus showing a statistically significant difference between the males and females (P < 0.05). A poor correlation was shown to exist between splenic dimensions and age but splenic weight increased with body weight (r=0.75). Even though value of the splenic sizes were similar to those of a Caucasian population compared with them (P>0.05), the maximum splenic weights occurred in the 4th decade in Nigerians and in the 2nd decade in Caucasians. This finding appears to bear credence to existing opinion by Chauhan et al that splenic recession rather than splenomegaly is prevalent in adults living in endemic falciparum zones. Statistically significant differences between splenic length and weights of the sexes have been established by the study. The good correlation between subject height and splenic length portends profound options of predicating subjects splenic size and matching his ultrasound values with this predicted splenic length (SPL = 1.2 + 0.063)

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Article Details

Section

Original Article

How to Cite

Okoye, I. J., Agwu, K. K., & Ochie, K. (2025). Sonographic Splenic Sizes In Normal Adult Nigerian Population. West African Journal of Radiology, 12(1), 37-43. https://doi.org/10.82235/wajr.vol12no1.153

References

1. Taylor JW Kenneth. Atlas of Gray Scale Ultrasonography. New York: Churchill Livingstone, 1988: 170-186.

2. Chauhan R, Kapoor V, Vohr PA, Jhala PJ, Upadhyay AK, Pathak KJ. The Small Spleen in Malaria. Journal of Association of Physicians, India,

1996; 44 (7): 483-5

3. Klippenstein DL, Zerin JM, Hirschi RB, Donn SM; Splenic Enlargement in Neonates During Extracoporeal Membrane Oxygenation (ECMO).

Radiology, 1994; 190 (2):411-2

4. Gerspacher L, Pinto RA, Drummond SC, Lambertucci RR. Splenic Palpation for the evaluation of morbidity due to Schistosomiasis Mansoni, Memorial Institute of Oswald-Cruz 1998; 93:245-8

5. Arkes LB. A Palpable Spleen is not necessarily enlarged. Medical Journal Australia, 1986; 114(5): 15-17

6. Loftus, WK, Metreweli C. Ultrasound Assessment of Mild Splenomegally: Spleen/Kidney Ratio, Paediatr. Radiol, 1998 ; 28 (2): 98-100

7. Downey, MT. Estimation of Splenic Weight from Ultrasonographic measurement. Canad Assoc. of Radiol J. 1992; 43 (4): 273-7

8. Bisset RAL, Ichan AN. Differential Diagnosis in Abdominal Ultrasoud, 1990; Linda Berilliere Tindall 96-104

9. Tamayo SG, Riceman LS, Mathews WC, Fullertin SC, Bartok AE, Warner Feigal DW. Armatein GD, Cclander HS, Lyche ICD. Examiner Dependent

in Physical Diagnostic Test for the detention of splenomegaly: A Prospective study will with multiple observed. J Gen Int Med 1993; 8(2): 69-75

10. Deland FH. Human Splenic size. Radiol 1970; 97: 589-592