ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Normal Organ Weights in Men

Part IIVThe Brain, Lungs, Liver, Spleen, and Kidneys
D. Kimberley Molina, MD and Vincent J.M. DiMaio, MD

medicolegal settings, systemic disease processes, poisonings, and

Abstract: Organomegaly can be a sign of disease and pathologic ab- other factors that may affect organ weight were not excluded. It has
normality, although standard tables defining organomegaly have yet to been argued that, to adequately and accurately assess normal
be established and universally accepted. This study was designed to organ weights, one must examine it in a population without
address the issue and to determine a normal weight for the major organs medical illness who die suddenly from traumatic causes.1,2
in adult human males. A prospective study of healthy men aged 18 to The following study was designed to eliminate the flaws in
35 years who died of sudden, traumatic deaths was undertaken. Cases the previous studies and to conduct a thorough assessment of
were excluded if there was a history of medical illness including illicit normal organ weights and their relationships to body length and
drug use, if prolonged medical treatment was performed, if there was body weight with the expectation of generating reference ranges
a prolonged period between the time of injury and death, if body length for human organs consistent with other laboratory reference
and weight could not be accurately assessed, or if any illness or intoxi- ranges. This study examined brain, spleen, liver, lung, and kid-
cation was identified after gross and microscopic analysis including ney weights.
evidence of systemic disease. Individual organs were excluded if there
was significant injury to the organ, which could have affected the weight. MATERIALS AND METHODS
A total of 232 cases met criteria for inclusion in the study during the
A prospective study was undertaken to assess organ weight
approximately 6-year period of data collection from 2005 to 2011. The
in healthy human males aged between 18 and 35 years who died
decedents had a mean age of 23.9 years and ranged in length from 146
sudden, traumatic deaths. Cases were excluded if there was any
to 193 cm, with a mean length of 173 cm. The weight ranged from 48.5
known history of medical illness including illicit drug use and if
to 153 kg, with a mean weight of 76.4 kg. Most decedents (87%) died
prolonged medical treatment was performed. Cases were also
of either ballistic or blunt force (including craniocerebral) injuries. The
excluded: if the individual underwent medical procedures, other
mean weight of the brain was 1407 g (range, 1070Y1767 g), that of the
than attempted cardioversion or intravascular line placement; if
liver was 1561 g (range, 838Y2584 g), that of the spleen was 139 g
there was a prolonged period between sustaining the injuries and
(range, 43Y344 g), that of the right lung was 445 g (range, 185Y967 g),
death (92 hours); or if the measurements of height and weight
that of the left lung was 395 g (range, 186Y885 g), that of the right
could not be accurately obtained. Organs were excluded from
kidney was 129 g (range, 79Y223 g), and that of the left kidney was
analysis if there was significant injury or disruption that could
137 g (range, 74Y235 g). Regression analysis was performed and showed
potentially result in an increase or decrease in organ weight (ie,
that there were insufficient associations between organ weight and body
parenchyma loss, intraparenchymal hemorrhage). All autopsies
length, body weight, and body mass index to allow for predictability. The
were performed within 24 hours of death.
authors, therefore, propose establishing a reference range for organ weights
The bodies of those individuals who met criteria for inclu-
in men, much like those in use for other laboratory tests including he-
sion in the study were weighed unclothed and measured without
moglobin, hematocrit, or glucose. The following reference ranges (95%
shoes. The decedents were weighed on a VLC Commercial Duty
inclusion) are proposed: brain, 1179Y1621 g; liver, 968Y1860 g; spleen,
Floor Scale Model 2256 (Mettler Toledo, Columbus, Ohio) with
28Y226 g; right lung, 155Y720 g; left lung, 112Y675 g; right kidney,
a capacity of 5000 lb, a resolution of 1 lb, and an accuracy of
81Y160 g; and left kidney, 83Y176 g.
T1 lb (T. Flores, personal communication, March 13, 2011). The
Key Words: autopsy, forensic pathology, normal organ weights, liver, decedents were measured in anatomical position from heel to
kidney, spleen, lung, brain cranial apex to the nearest 1/2 in, with an 84-in measuring stick
(Am J Forensic Med Pathol 2012;33: 368Y372)
with a resolution of 1/16 in. Body length in inches and weight in
pounds were converted to centimeter and kilograms, respec-
tively, and were used to calculate the body mass index (BMI) of
O rgan weights are often used to assess for the presence of
pathologic disease. However, the exact definition of what
constitutes an abnormal organ weight is largely lacking in the
each decedent defined as body weight (kg)/length2 (m2).
All autopsies were conducted in the same manner. Organs
medical literature. A heavy brain could indicate cerebral edema, were eviscerated by transecting the major attachments and all
or a heavy spleen could indicate a potential hematologic ma- adherent soft tissue was removed; livers were weighed with the
lignancy. But what is heavy and how is it determined? gallbladder intact, when present; brain weights included the
Unfortunately, many studies that examined this question were cerebral and cerebellar hemispheres, midbrain, pons, brainstem,
flawed in their design. Although most studies were performed in and attached leptomeninges excluding the dura. All organs were
weighed on an SK-5001 digital scale (A&D Co, Ltd) with a ca-
pacity of 5000 g, a resolution of 1 g, and an error of T4 g.3 All
Manuscript received May 10, 2011; accepted July 14, 2011.
From the Bexar County Medical Examiner’s Office, San Antonio, TX.
organs were screened grossly and microscopically. Any organ
The authors report no conflicts of interest. with evidence of pathology, including trauma, were excluded
Reprints: D. Kimberley Molina, MD, Bexar County Medical Examiner’s from the study, and the entire case was excluded if there was
Office, 7337 Louis Pasteur, San Antonio, TX 78229. evidence of systemic disease in any organ, (ie, sarcoidosis, in-
E-mail: kmolina@bexar.org.
Copyright * 2012 by Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
fection). Routine toxicologic screening was performed on all cases
ISSN: 0195-7910/12/3304Y0368 for common drugs of abuse, prescription medications and over-
DOI: 10.1097/PAF.0b013e31823d29ad the-counter medications, and any cases where drugs known to be

368 www.amjforensicmedicine.com Am J Forensic Med Pathol & Volume 33, Number 4, December 2012

Copyright © 2012 Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
Am J Forensic Med Pathol & Volume 33, Number 4, December 2012 Normal Organ Weights in Men

Brain
TABLE 1. Causes of Death Of the 232 total cases, 171 brains met criteria for analy-
Cause of Death n (%) sis. The mean (SD) brain weight was 1407 (123.5) g (range,
1070Y1767 g). Brain weight was found to be poorly correlated
Ballistic injuries 98 (42.2) with body length (R2 = 0.02), body weight (R2 = 0.03), and BMI
Multiple blunt force injuries 93 (40.1) (R2 = 0.01). Analysis failed to reveal a significant difference
Hanging 16 (6.9) between the brain weights of the 4 BMI groups (underweight,
Sharp force injuries 11 (4.7) normal weight, overweight, and obese; P 9 0.18). Brain weight
Craniocerebral injuries 11 (4.7) was also unaffected by visceral congestion or blood loss (ex-
Drowning 2 (0.9) sanguination; P 9 0.11).
Neck fracture 1 (0.4)
Liver
Of the 232 total cases, 225 livers met criteria for analysis.
associated with causing pathologic disease (ie, heroin, cocaine, The mean (SD) liver weight was 1561 (317) g (range, 838Y2584 g).
methamphetamine) were excluded from the study. In addition, Liver weight was found to be poorly correlated with body length
cases were notated as having organ congestion, exsanguination (R2 = 0.06). An association was found, indicating that liver weight
(defined as apparent blood loss 91 L), or no evidence of either to increases with increases in body weight and BMI. Liver weight
assess whether these factors affect organ weight. was found to be unaffected by visceral congestion (P = 0.12) but
The decedents were subpopulated into groups based on BMI did significantly decrease in the setting of large blood loss (P =
as defined by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. A 0.035; mean, 1492 g). Analysis revealed a significant difference
BMI less than 18.5 kg/m2 was considered underweight, a BMI of between the liver weights of the 4 BMI groups (underweight,
18.5 to 24.9 kg/m2 normal weight, a BMI of 25 to 29.9 kg/m2 normal weight, overweight, and obese), with those in the un-
overweight, and a BMI of 30 kg/m2 or higher considered obese. derweight group having lighter livers (P = 0.039) and those in the
Data analysis was performed using regression analysis and overweight and obese groups having heavier livers (P G 0.001).
t tests. However, the ability of predicting the liver weight from the
RESULTS body weight or BMI was limited (R2 = 0.41Y0.45).

Overall Spleen
A total of 232 cases met criteria for inclusion in the study Of the 232 total cases, 227 spleens met criteria for analysis.
during the approximately 6-year period of data collection from The mean (SD) splenic weight was 139 (58) g (range, 43Y344 g).
2005 to 2011. The decedents ranged in age from 18 to 35 years, Splenic weight was found to be poorly correlated with body
by study design, and had a mean age of 23.9 years. The races length (R2 = 0.07), body weight (R2= 0.16), and BMI (R2 = 0.10).
represented included 190 caucasoid, 41 negroid, and 2 mon- There was no significant difference in splenic weights in un-
goloid. Overall, the decedents’ body length ranged from 146 derweight (P = 0.7) or overweight (P = 0.11) individuals versus
to 193 cm in length (57.5Y76 in) with a mean length of 173 cm those of a normal weight, although there was a significant dif-
(68 in), the body weight ranged from 48.5 to 153 kg (107Y337 lb) ference between those of a normal weight and obese individuals
with a mean weight of 76.4 kg (168 lb), and the mean (SD) BMI (P = 0.0001).
was 25.4 (4.9) kg/m2, with a range of 16.5 to 44.7 kg/m2. Most
decedents (87%) died of either ballistic or blunt force (including Lungs
craniocerebral) injuries. A summary of the various causes of Of the 232 total cases, 229 right lungs and 230 left lungs
death is listed in Table 1. met criteria for analysis. The weight of the lungs was as follows:
Linear, logarithmic, power, and exponential regression anal- right lung: mean (SD), 445 (159) g; range, 185Y967 g; left lung:
yses were all performed to obtain the best-possible R2 results mean (SD), 395 (147) g; range, 186Y885 g. The difference in
with all analyses generating roughly equivalent results. Given lung weights between the left and right was statistically signif-
the analogous results, linear regression was used for all analyses icant, with the right lung being heavier than the left (P = 0.001).
owing to its ease of use. All organ weights were found to be There was no significant relationship between lung weights,
normally distributed both overall and for the normal BMI pop- either individually or combined, with body length (R2 = 0.06Y0.07),
ulation (W2 goodness of fit). The overall and BMI subpopulation body weight (R2 = 0.008Y0.01), or BMI (R2 = 0.002Y0.004).
results are summarized in Table 2. There was also no significant difference found between the

TABLE 2. Mean Organ Weights by BMI

18.5 kg/m2 e BMI G 25 kg/m2 e BMI G 30

2
Overall BMI G 18.5 kg/m 25 kg/m2 kg/m2 BMI Q 30 kg/m2
Organ Mean, g Range, g Mean, g Range, g Mean, g Range, g Mean, g Range, g Mean, g Range, g
Brain 1407 1070Y1767 1320 1100Y1476 1400 1166Y1646 1415 1070Y1695 1425 1143Y1767
Liver 1561 838Y2584 1236 945Y1689 1414 838Y2013 1633 1115Y2584 1874 1238Y2530
Spleen 139 43Y344 117 51Y335 127 53Y299 140 43Y250 172 79Y344
Right lung 445 185Y967 400 193Y702 437 187Y811 456 185Y967 433 194Y901
Left lung 395 186Y885 340 191Y582 393 192Y780 404 186Y795 381 196Y885
Right kidney 129 79Y223 103 81Y131 121 84Y200 134 93Y189 146 79Y223
Left kidney 137 74Y235 112 74Y142 129 93Y201 141 97Y195 154 84Y235

* 2012 Lippincott Williams & Wilkins www.amjforensicmedicine.com 369

Copyright © 2012 Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
Molina and DiMaio Am J Forensic Med Pathol & Volume 33, Number 4, December 2012

lung weights of underweight, normal weight, overweight, or obese Laboratory Standards Institute and International Federation of
individuals. Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine6 given parametric
It was found that lung weights were affected by both vis- data in a normal, healthy population. Using the data obtained in
ceral congestion and blood loss. Individuals dying with visceral this study, the reference range for brain weights, with 95%
congestion tended to have heavier lungs (P = 0.0004Y0.001) inclusion, would be 1179 to 1621 g.
with means of 665 g (right) and 582 g (left). Individuals dying
with extensive blood loss had lighter lungs (P G 0.001) with
means of 380 g (right) and 330 g (left). Liver
Previous studies have found the mean weight of the liver
Kidneys in adult human males to range from 1677 to 1807 g,1,7,8 with an
Of the 232 total cases, 228 right kidneys and 227 left kid- overall range of 670 to 2900 g,7,9,10 which is consistent with the
neys met criteria for analysis. The mean (SD) right kidney weight present study that found the mean liver weight to be 1561 g with
was 129 (26) g (range, 79Y223 g), and the mean (SD) left kidney a range of 838 to 2584 g. Liver weight has also been previously
weight was 137 (28) g (range, 74Y235 g). There was a signifi- shown to be positively correlated with height, BMI, and body
cant difference between the weights of the kidneys, with the left weight.7,8,10 In their study of 355 adult human males, de la
weighing more than the right (P G 0.002). Grandmaison et al7 found the coefficient of determination (R2)
Renal weight, both individually and combined, increased for liver weight and height to be 0.88 and 0.61 for liver weight
with increasing body weight. There was a significant difference and BMI, whereas Kasiske and Umen8 found R2 values of 0.56
between the renal weights of normal weight individuals and for weight, 0.32 for height, and 0.45 for BMI. Garby et al1
those who were underweight (P = 0.015Y0.2), overweight (P = correlated liver weight with body weight, body height, and age
0.001Y0.002), and obese (P G 0.0001), with the former having using multivariate regression analysis, obtaining an R2 of 0.534
lighter renal weights and the latter two, heavier renal weights. for their population.
Although both kidneys and the total renal mass were positively The correlations found previously are much greater for
correlated with body weight, the relationship was insufficient height than those found in the current study (R2 = 0.06). In
to allow for predictability (R2 = 0.23Y0.25). Neither individ- addition, the study of de la Grandmaison et al7 shows a much
ual renal weights nor the total renal weight showed a signifi- greater correlation with weight and BMI than seen in the pre-
cant association to either body length (R2 = 0.06Y0.09) or BMI sent study (R2 = 0.41 for BMI) or in Kasiske and Umen’s.8 One
(R2 = 0.15Y0.18). reason for this difference may be in the study design. Although
Extensive blood loss (exsanguination) showed no effect all 3 studies had similar demographics for body height/length,
on renal weights (P = 0.46Y0.5), although decedents dying with the current study examined healthy individuals aged between
visceral congestion did have statistically significant heavier kid- 18 and 35 years who died of traumatic causes only. Both de la
neys (P = 0.0007Y0.009). In cases with visceral congestion, the Grandmaison et al7 and Kasiske and Umen8 studied older indi-
mean weights of the kidneys were 143 g (right) and 159 g (left). viduals (mean [SD] age, 42 [17] vs 35.6 [19.9] years, res-
pectively). The decedents in the study of de la Grandmaison
DISCUSSION et al7 also tended to weigh less (mean weight, 68 kg; mean BMI,
22.8 kg/m2) than either those in the present study or in Kasiske
Brain and Umen’s8 study (mean [SD] weight, 72.1 [24.2] kg; BMI,
This study found the mean weight of the brain in men to 24.2 [5.3] kg/m2). In addition, de la Grandmaison et al7 exam-
be 1407 g, which is consistent with previous studies. Lindboe4 ined ‘‘forensic’’ cases but did not specifically define the cases
found that normal, unfixed brains averaged between 1387 and studied. Presumably, this would include trauma, intoxication,
1559 g in 5 individuals aged between 67 and 81 years, whereas and natural disease in their population, although they did ex-
Garby et al1 found a mean (SD) brain weight of 1499 (130) g clude organs with gross or microscopic evidence of disease.
in their study of 1086 healthy and apparently healthy Danish The range of liver weights found in the study of de la Grand-
men (mean age, 41Y45 years). Sanchez et al5 studied 693 hospi- maison et al7 was also greater than in the present study
tal autopsies performed on Venezuelans aged between 19 and (607Y2900 vs 838Y2584 g), leading one to question if perhaps
100 years. Their study excluded any disease processes that were individuals with underlying liver pathologic disease were inad-
known to affect brain weight, although they did not use forensic vertently included in the study of de la Grandmaison given the
cases for study. They found a mean brain weight of 1215 g, design. Kasiske and Umen8 also used forensic cases, but they
which is lower than that found in the current study, although they stated that most of their cases were due to trauma and they also
did comment that the brain weight decreased with age, becom- excluded cases with significant systemic disease, including heart
ing significant at age 65 years. If age-matched data from the disease and diabetes mellitus.
Sanchez et al5 study, which found that average brain weight Although the current study did not specifically address the
of individuals aged 19 to 35 years to range between 1200 and issue of age, as the design was meant to establish reference ranges
1500 g with a range of 1040 to 1700, are compared to the cur- in the young, healthy population before the onset of systemic
rent study, the data are consistent. disease, several other studies have addressed this issue. Both
No study that addressed the relationship between brain de la Grandmaison et al7 and Boyd9 found that liver weight de-
weight and body length, body weight, or BMI individually was creases with age after approximately 50 years. Kasiske and
found. Garby et al1 did address the relationship between brain Umen,8 however, found no effect of age on liver weight, al-
weight and body weight, body height, and age via multivariate though their study population was considerably younger (mean
regression analysis, finding an R2 of 0.132. The results of the age, 35.6 years) than that of de la Grandmaison et al7 or Boyd.9
study of Garby et al1 as well as of the current study would Kasiske and Umen8 also showed that there was no difference
indicate that none of these factors significantly affected the in the weights of livers based on race.
weight of the brain nor does visceral congestion or blood loss. It Boyd9 examined 239 livers of men aged 20 years or older
can be concluded that it is possible to establish a reference range who died of trauma or poisoning and found that hemorrhage
for brain weights, using the criteria proposed by the Clinical and decreased liver weight, which is consistent with the data obtained

370 www.amjforensicmedicine.com * 2012 Lippincott Williams & Wilkins

Copyright © 2012 Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
Am J Forensic Med Pathol & Volume 33, Number 4, December 2012 Normal Organ Weights in Men

in this study. They did not address the issue of visceral congestion and body weight with R2 values ranging from 0.11 to 0.13 and
in their study. from 0.24 to 0.26, respectively,14,15 which are higher than those
Given the results of the current study as well as those dis- found in the current study (0.06Y0.07 and 0.008Y0.01, respec-
cussed above, it can be concluded that: (1) race does not sig- tively). None of the studies, however, showed a significant cor-
nificantly affect the weight of the liver; (2) liver weights seem to relation. In addition, both studies14,15 examined a population
decrease with age, presumably secondary to hepatic involution that was significantly older than that of the current study (mean
as either a result of either aging or disease processes; (3) al- age, 54Y63 vs 24 years).
though positively correlated, there is insufficient accuracy to In their study of organ weights, de la Grandmaison et al7
predict liver weights based on body height, body weight, or found a much larger average and range for lung weights than
BMI; and (4) significant blood loss can lead to a decrease in either the current study or either Whimster study.14,15 de la
liver weight. It can also be postulated that a reference range Grandmaison et al7 found the average weight of the right lung
for liver weight can be established for healthy men aged 18 to to be 663 g with a range of 200 to 1593 g and a mean weight of
35 years using the criteria proposed by the Clinical and Labo- the left lung of 583 g with a range of 206 to 1718 g. The
ratory Standards Institute and International Federation of Clini- variation seen in the study of de la Grandmaison et al is likely
cal Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine6 given parametric data due to the study design, as discussed previously (see section on
in a normal, healthy population. Using the data obtained in this Liver), as well as a failure to exclude cases where death likely
study, the reference range for liver weights proposed is 968 to resulted in/with extensive pulmonary edema. They do, however,
1860 g (95% inclusion) with the caveat that deaths due to or conclude that terminal edema and visceral congestion likely
with excessive blood loss may result in weights at the lower account for the wide variability seen in lung weights.7 de la
end of the reference range. Grandmaison et al7 also found a positive, yet limited, relation-
ship between lung weights and body height and BMI, calculat-
Spleen ing R2 values of 0.41 and 0.01, respectively, for the right lung
Previous studies have reported the average weight of the and 0.49 and 0.06, respectively, for the left lung. The correla-
spleen in men to range from 156 to 175 g, which is slightly tion between lung weight and body height is consistent with
higher than the mean weight found in this study of 139 g.1,7,11Y13 that found in both the current study and both Whimster stud-
Studies have also shown a positive relationship with body height ies,14,15 although the relationship with BMI is greater than that
and body weight and splenic weight7,11,13 and a negative rela- found in either study. This again is likely due to the differences
tionship between splenic weight and age.7,9,11,12 de la Grand- in study design.
maison et al7 calculated R2 values of 0.7 and 0.11 for splenic The authors of the current study would suggest a reference
weights and body height and BMI, respectively. The R2 value range for lung weights to be 155 to 720 g for the right lung and
de la Grandmaison et al7 found for BMI is consistent with that 112 to 675 g for the left lung with the caveat that excessive blood
in the current study, although the value for height is much loss and visceral congestion can both affect lung weights, with
greater. This is likely due to the differences in study design the former having weights toward the low end of normal and the
discussed previously (see section on Liver). de la Grandmaison latter having weights toward the upper end of normal.
et al7 also had a much larger range of splenic weights than the
current study (30Y580 vs 43Y344 g), leading one to question Kidneys
whether individuals with disease processes, which may have Both Moar and Reinach16 and Kasiske and Umen8 had
affected splenic weight, were inadvertently included in the de la previously shown that neither race nor age affected kidney
Grandmaison study. weight. These studies, along with Garby et al,1 found the aver-
Like the current study, Boyd9 found that hemorrhage sig- age total renal mass to average between 214 and 321 g, which is
nificantly decreases splenic weight, although he did not directly consistent with that found in the current study (mean total renal
address the issue of visceral congestion. Myers and Segal12 weight 266 g). Kasiske and Umen8 also described a positive
also postulated that hemorrhage could affect splenic weight, correlation between body height, body weight, and BMI and
although their study did not address the issue directly. generated R2 values of 0.51, 0.6, and 0.41, respectively. The re-
Myers and Segal12 concluded in their study that any spleen lationships found by Kasiske and Umen8 are consistent with
weighing less than 250 g should be considered normal. The au- those found by de la Grandmaison et al7 who calculated R2 values
thors of this study would suggest approaching the spleen as of 0.4 to 0.45 and 0.36 to 0.39 for the height and BMI, respec-
explained previously with the liver and brain, by establishing a tively. de la Grandmaison et al7 concluded that kidney weight
reference range and recommend that the range be 28 to 226 g, with was related to body height and not body weight, so the relation-
the caveat that visceral congestion may cause increased splenic ship seen with BMI is likely a result of the renal weight rela-
weights and excessive blood loss decreased splenic weights such tionship to body height rather than body weight.
that the former would have weights toward the high end of Both Kasiske and Umen8 and de la Grandmaison et al7
normal and the latter weights toward the lower end of normal. found relationships much greater than the present study where
the R2 values were found to be 0.06 to 0.09 for body length,
Lungs 0.15 to 0.18 for BMI, and 0.23 to 0.25 for body weight. The
In the early 1970s, Whimster14 and Whimster and difference between the current study and both that of de la
MacFarlane15 studied lung weights in Jamaicans of African Grandmaison et al7 and Kasiske and Umen8 is likely one of study
decent and European Caucasians, respectively. They concluded design. The differences between the current study and that of
that race had no effect on lung weights and found average Grandmaison have been discussed previously (see section on
weights of 385 to 402 g for the left lung and 455 to 456 g for Liver). Kasiske and Umen8 examined 357 (225 males) medicolegal
the right lung.14,15 The results of the studies of Whimster14 autopsies aged between 1 and 89 years with a mean age of
and Whimster and MacFarlane15 are consistent with the current 35.6 years; a much wider range and older population than the
study, which found the mean lung weights to be 395 and 445 g current study. In addition, the calculations of the relationships
for the left and right lungs, respectively. They also found a included both men and women aged 18 years and older, further
positive correlation between the lung weights and body height skewing the data from the current study population.

* 2012 Lippincott Williams & Wilkins www.amjforensicmedicine.com 371

Copyright © 2012 Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
Molina and DiMaio Am J Forensic Med Pathol & Volume 33, Number 4, December 2012

No previous study was identified that addressed the effects SUMMARY

of blood loss or visceral congestion on renal weight. The current The use of incorrect standards can lead to erroneous diag-
study found no effect of blood loss on renal weight, although noses. Regression analysis performed in this study, as well as
visceral congestion did significantly increase renal weights. In previous studies, has shown that there are insufficient associa-
addition, none of the studies directly compared the renal weights tions between organ weight and body length, body weight, and
to each other. de la Grandmaison et al7 did find the mean weight BMI to allow for predictability. It can be argued that the use of
for the right kidney to be greater than the left (162 vs 160 g), predicting functions as applied to organ weights can lead to
but a direct comparison was not performed. This is in direct faulty conclusions. The more reliable method would be the es-
contrast to the data obtained in the current study, which showed tablishment of reference ranges of weights for each organ, much
a significant difference between the left and right kidney weights, like those used for hemoglobin, hematocrit, albumin, sodium,
with the left kidney weighing more than the right (137 vs 129 g). and other laboratory tests. Applying the standards for setting up
As with the other organs discussed, the authors propose es- reference ranges for laboratory tests given parametric results
tablishing a reference range for kidney weights with those ranges in a healthy population as established by Clinical and Labo-
being 81 to 160 g for the right kidney and 83 to 176 g for the left ratory Standards Institute and International Federation of Clinical
kidney, with the caveat that individuals dying with visceral con- Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine,6 the authors propose refer-
gestion would likely have weights at the higher end of the range. ence ranges for the major organs as outlined in Table 3.

CONCLUSIONS REFERENCES
Being able to predict the organ weights is important in
medical fields that rely on that data to assess the effects of radia- 1. Garby L, Lammert G, Kock KF, et al. Weights of brain, heart, liver,
kidneys, and spleen in healthy and apparently healthy adult danish
tion exposure or to determine radiation doses for therapeutic
subjects. Am J Hum Biol. 1993;5:291Y296.
purposes; however, in the field of forensic pathology, organ
weight is usually used as a determinant of disease processes or 2. Smith HL. The relation of the weight of the heart to the weight
pathologic states. Thus, being able to predict the weight of an of the body and the weight of the heart to age. Am Heart J.
organ is less important than the knowledge of what a normal 1928;4:79Y93.
organ should weigh. 3. SK-5001 Instruction Manual. Tokyo, Japan: A&D Co, Ltd. 1162-2A-IE.
Regression analysis showed insufficient associations to al- March 11, 1997.
low for organ weight predictability by body length, body weight, 4. Lindboe CF. Brain weight: what does it mean? Clin Neuropathol.
and BMI for every organ analyzed. At best, the liver showed an 2003;22(6):263Y265.
R2 of 0.45 with body weight and an R2 of 0.40 with BMI, in- 5. Sanchez R, Morales M, Cardozo J. Peso del encefalo normal del
dicating that approximately 45% of the variation in liver weight venezolano adulto segun sevo y edad [Weight of the normal brain
could be explained by body weight; thus, the other 55% is ex- of the Venezuelan adult according to sex and age]. Invest Clin.
plained by some unknown variable or inherent factor. No other 1997;38(2):83Y93.
organ showed R2 values better than 0.2, indicating that 80% of 6. Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI). Defining,
the organs variability in weight is due to factors other than body Establishing and Verifying Reference Intervals in the Clinical
length, body weight, or BMI. Thus, the authors conclude that Laboratory; Approved Guideline. 3rd ed. CLSI document C28-A3.
organ weight cannot be accurately predicted by the body length, Wayne, PA: Clinical Standards Institute; 2008.
body weight, or BMI and recommend the use of reference ranges
7. de la Grandmaison GL, Clairand I, Durigon M. Organ weight in 684
as are used for other laboratory values. The authors propose
adult autopsies: new tables for a Caucasoid population. Forensic Sci Int.
approaching organ weight as any other laboratory test. In labo- 2001;119:149Y154.
ratory science, to establish a reference range for parametric
(normally distributed) data, it is recommended that 100 normal, 8. Kasiske BL, Umen AJ. The influence of age, sex, race and body
healthy volunteers be tested and those results be analyzed to gen- habitus on kidney weight in humans. Arch Pathol Lab Med.
1986;110:55Y60.
erate a mean, SD, and reference range.6 To achieve 95% inclu-
sion, the following reference ranges for men are proposed: 9. Boyd E. Normal variability in weight of the adult human liver and
spleen. Arch Pathol. 1933;16:350Y372.
10. Deland FH, North WA. Relationship between liver size and body size.
Radiology. 1968;91(6):1195Y1198.
TABLE 3. Reference Ranges for Organs in Healthy 11. Deland FH. Normal spleen size. Radiology. 1970;97(3):589Y592.
Human Males
12. Myers J, Segal RJ. Weight of the spleen. I. Range of normal in a
Organ Reference Range, g nonhospital population. Arch Pathol. 1974;98(1):33Y35.
13. Sprogoe-Jakobsen S, Sprogoe-Jakobsen U. The weight of the normal
Brain 1179Y1621
spleen. Forensic Sci Int. 1997;88:215Y223.
Liver 968Y1860
14. Whimster W. Normal lung weights in Jamaicans. Am Rev Respir Dis.
Spleen 28Y226
1971;103(1):85Y90.
Right lung 155Y720
15. Whimster WF, MacFarlane A. Normal lung weights in a white
Left lung 112Y675
population. Am Rev Respir Dis. 1974;110(4):478Y783.
Right kidney 81Y160
16. Moar JJ, Reinach S. Renal weights in the southern African black
Left kidney 83Y176
population. Am J Phys Anthropol. 1988;76:105Y110.

372 www.amjforensicmedicine.com * 2012 Lippincott Williams & Wilkins

Copyright © 2012 Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.