These authors contributed equally to this manuscript.
There are limited studies on the management of hepatic hemangiomas (HHs). We investigated the proportion and predictors of surgical resection and analyzed HH growth rates in addition to associated factors.
A retrospective case-control study of patients treated in 2 centers was conducted. Thirty-six patients who underwent surgical resection were assigned to the case group. Patients who did not undergo surgical treatment were randomly selected at a 1:10 ratio and assigned to the control group (n = 360). Baseline characteristics, clinical course and surgical outcomes were analyzed.
The proportion of surgically treated HH patients was 0.3% (36 per 11,049). The longest diameter at diagnosis (mean ± standard deviation) was 7.7 ± 5.2 cm in the case group and 2.4 ± 1.8 cm in the control group (
Approximately one in 300 patients with an HH underwent surgical treatment. Multiple HHs and a growth rate of more than 4.8%/year were indications for surgical treatment. Nearly half of the HHs showed growing pattern in our study.
The widespread use of abdominal ultrasonography (USG), computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in clinical practice has led to the detection of many focal hepatic lesions. Among them, hepatic hemangioma (HH) is the most common hepatic lesion, with a prevalence of 0.4–20% [
After diagnosis, many physicians recommend follow-up imaging after 6–12 months because they are concerned about unexpected growth or the low possibility of hemangioendothelioma or hemangiosarcoma, which cannot be completely excluded by CT or MRI. However, it has been stated in international guidelines that imaging follow-up is not required for typical hemangiomas [
Although almost all cases of HH follow an indolent clinical course without symptoms [
We aimed to analyze the proportion of patients for whom surgical treatment is required and to investigate the growth rate of HH and its related factors using a case-control design in two tertiary hospitals.
Using a clinical database warehouse, data on patients diagnosed with HH (International Classification of Diseases, 10th revision [ICD-10] code D18.03) from January 2006 to May 2022 were retrieved from two tertiary hospitals. Among them, patients with pathologically confirmed HH after resection were defined as the case group. Patients incidentally diagnosed with HH during hepatectomy for other malignancies, such as hepatocellular carcinoma, cholangiocarcinoma, or metastatic liver cancer, were excluded. The proportion and clinical characteristics of surgically resected HH patients were investigated in the case group.
Controls were randomly sampled at a 1:10 ratio from HH patients without a history of hepatic surgery. In a case-control study, it is known that when a relatively large number of controls are available, unmatched controls might provide a steadier estimate than the matched analysis. Since a significantly larger size of controls than cases was expected in our study, we performed unmatched random sampling for the control group [
Patients who underwent at least two follow-up radiologic studies within the study period became a subgroup for estimating the annual HH growth rate. The flow chart of the overall patient selection is depicted in
This study was approved by the Institutional Review Boards (IRB No.: B-2207-767-101) of Seoul National University Bundang Hospital (SNUBH). The requirement for written informed consent was waived due to the retrospective nature of the data analysis.
Medical records were reviewed retrospectively for data regarding baseline demographics and clinical characteristics: age, sex, date of diagnosis and end of follow-up, symptom development, comorbidities, and laboratory findings. Baseline data were collected at the initial visit to the hospital. Imaging studies, including USG, CT, and MRI, were reviewed to obtain the characteristics of HH, such as size, lobar distribution, number of lesions, and depth of intrahepatic location. Size was defined as the longest diameter (LD) of the HH, and when multiple hemangiomas were identified in each patient, the LD of the largest hemangioma was measured. Change in size was described as both the absolute difference (the final size at the end of follow-up minus the initial size at the initial imaging study) and the relative growth compared with the initial size (expressed as a percentage) during the follow-up period. Growth rates were assessed by dividing the change in size by the follow-up period per year. Growth rates were then categorized as “substantial growth (≥ 5% in size compared to the initial diameter of HH)”, “stable”, and “substantial shrinkage (> 5% decrease compared to the initial size of the largest lesion)”. This categorization was also adopted in another study, as this arbitrary cutoff is meant to reduce the detection of small changes that may be attributed to measurement variability [
All continuous variables are expressed as the mean ± standard deviation and were analyzed using Student’s t-test or the Mann–Whitney test. Categorical variables are summarized as percentages and were calculated using the chi-square test or Fisher’s exact test.
Logistic regression analysis was performed in the subgroup to search for independent factors associated with surgical resection and symptom development of HH. Variables with a
The correlation between the LD of the largest HH at initial diagnosis and the HH growth rate was analyzed by Spearman’s rank correlation test because both variables were nonnormally distributed. A
The overall proportion of surgically treated HH patients was 36 per 11,049 (0.3%) in two hospitals (mean age: 46.5 yr; 61.1% female). The proportion of resected HHs at SNUBH was higher (31 per 5,965, 0.5%) than that at SNUH (5 per 5,084, 0.1%) because the enrollment period was shorter at SNUH, where liver surgery for cancer or transplantation was performed more frequently than at SNUBH. The reasons for surgery were growing HHs in 18 patients (48.6%), presence of symptoms in 16 patients (43.2%), and an unclear diagnosis of HH on radiologic studies in 2 patients (5.4%). Almost all symptomatic patients presented with compressive symptoms such as abdominal pain or dyspnea. None were identified as having a ruptured hemangioma.
A summary of the surgical details and outcomes is shown in
On postoperative pathologic analysis, 35 patients (97.2%) were identified as having a cavernous hemangioma. There were no cases of capillary hemangioma since the study involved only adults (> 18 yr). One patient was diagnosed with a sclerosed hemangioma. No malignant features or atypical vascular lesions were found in any of the cases.
Overall, surgical resection for HH was safely performed with little estimated blood loss, a relatively short operation time (mean: 201.5 min), and no postoperative complications.
Thirty-six surgically treated HH patients comprised the case group, and 360 HH patients without surgical resection comprised the control group. Compared to the controls, cases were more likely to be multiple (≥ 2 in number), larger (7.7 ± 5.2 cm in the case group and 2.4 ± 1.8 cm in the control group) HHs located in the left lobe or subcapsular area with exophytic growth. In addition, the case group was more likely to have symptomatic HH and lower hemoglobin levels. Otherwise, there were no significant differences in terms of clinical characteristics, including age, sex, comorbidities, and laboratory results, between the case and control groups. These comparative characteristics are shown in
There were 20 patients in the case group and 203 patients in the control group who had at least 2 follow-up imaging studies during the study period, and their clinical characteristics and growth rates are summarized in
Interval changes in size during follow-up were 5.1 ± 3.3 cm in the case group and 0.3 ± 0.8 cm in the control group, on average (
The correlation analysis between the initial LD of HH and annual growth rate showed a weak positive correlation (Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient [rho] 0.29,
To identify the factors associated with the surgical treatment of HH, logistic regression was performed in subgroups (
Because symptomatic HH is an important indication for surgery, logistic regression was conducted for symptom development (
This study shows that 0.3% of HHs were surgically treated due to progressive growth or symptom development. The predictors for surgery were multiple HHs and a mean growth rate > 4.8%/year, while left lobar location, depth of location, initial size > 10 cm, and symptom presentation showed marginal significance. The mean annual growth of all HHs was 0.14 cm, with a growth rate of 4.8%/year. Overall, 41.3% of HH patients showed substantial growth (≥ 5% in diameter); 52.9%, a stable size; and 5.8%, a substantial shrinkage (< 5% in diameter). The proportion of substantial growth was largest in the HH group, which initially measured ≥ 10 cm, followed by the 5–10 cm group and the < 5 cm group.
There are several previous studies on the characteristics and outcomes of surgically treated HH, but there are scarce data on the proportion of surgically treated HHs. Our results show that although 0.3% of HH patients underwent surgical treatment, the proportion ranged from 0.1% to 0.5%. This difference between the 2 hospitals may be related to the different enrollment periods and referral statuses. SNUBH was established in 2003 as a secondary hospital and later became a tertiary hospital. However, SNUH was established as a national representative hospital in 1945 with a heavy clinical burden of serious liver disease, such as liver cancer and liver transplantation. Therefore, HH patients were mostly re-referred after diagnostic confirmation at SNUH, which might have resulted in a lower proportion than that at SNUBH. Due to this gap in the proportion of surgery, we considered conducting a center effect analysis, but the outcome was too rare at SNUH, with only 3 patients capable of growth rate assessment. Presently, more HHs with a small size are being detected; thus, the proportion of surgically treated HHs might decrease compared to the findings in our study and occur in older patients during longer follow-ups in the future.
The reasons for surgery were rapid growth (48.6%) and symptom development (43.2%). Other indications were uncertainty of malignancy in two cases. Giant hemangiomas are commonly defined as hemangiomas larger than 4–5 cm. In our study, hemangiomas in the case group measured 11.5 ± 5.2 cm, with the smallest being 4.5 cm. Consequently, all cases corresponded to giant hemangiomas. Individual cases were assigned to an abdominal radiologist with more than 10 years of experience (YJL) and confirmed. In a retrospective 6-center study in the USA including 241 resected HH patients, the reasons for surgery were symptoms (85%) and increasing size (11%). The 30-day mortality was 0.8%, and the rate of Clavien-Dindo grade 3 or higher complications was 5.7%. This result could be related to the relatively larger size of resected HHs and the higher proportion of major hepatectomy [
Compared to nonsurgical cases, multiple HHs and those with a larger initial size, subcapsular/exophytic distribution, and lower hemoglobin level were more likely surgically treated. The independent predictors for surgery were multiple HHs and a faster mean yearly growth rate, whereas an initial size > 10 cm, presence of symptoms and subcapsular/exophytic location, and left lobar location showed marginal significance, probably due to the small sample size of the case group. Likewise, the independent predictor for symptom development was an initial size > 10 cm. The superficial intrahepatic location and rapid growth rate also had high ORs but did not show significance due to the small sample size of symptomatic HHs. Patients with an HH in a left lobar location or those with subcapsular/exophytic HHs were more likely to develop symptoms or to have lesions anatomically feasible for surgeons. After resection of problematic HHs, most of the patients with multiple lesions were not followed up for the remaining HHs. Interestingly, there have been several case reports on liver transplantation as a treatment for giant HH [
In this study, the mean annual linear growth rate of the HHs was 0.14 cm/year overall in 230 patients, while it was 0.03 cm/year in a USA multicenter study including 123 patients without the mention of surgery [
HH generally exhibits a benign and indolent clinical course [
In the past, HH growth was suggested to be associated with female sex hormones [
HH in adults is mostly the cavernous type and is not considered a true tumor but a slow-flow venous malformation in contrast to infantile hemangioma or congenital hemangioma because HHs are histologically composed of malformed vessels without glucose transporter-1 expression and mitosis [
Although the outcome of TAE for giant HHs is controversial due to increased risks of ischemia, infection, intracavitary bleeding, and biliary damage along with vascular recanalization, a recent meta-analysis on the effectiveness showed a pooled diameter reduction of −4.37 cm with a high rate of symptom alleviation and safety [
Our study had some limitations. First, due to the retrospective design, data on the presence of symptoms or surgical details were limited. Second, the change in size was measured only in linear dimensions, not in volumetric measures, and in the case of multiple HHs, only the largest hemangioma was measured for subgroup analysis. Additionally, since many of the patients were evaluated with few imaging studies and then re-referred to local clinics or hospitals, growth rates were estimated on the assumption that the size of hemangiomas changes uniformly regardless of the length of follow-up, which was suggested by Hasan et al. [
In conclusion, approximately 1 in 300 typical HH patients in our study were surgically treated due to progressive growth or symptom development. The predictors for surgery were multiple HHs and a mean growth rate > 4.8%/year. Overall, substantial growth was observed in 41.3% of HH patients, a stable size in 52.9%, and substantial shrinkage in 5.8%, with a mean annual HH growth of 0.14 cm (4.8%/year).
1. In this retrospective case-control study, we found that approximately one in 300 patients with a HH were surgically treated due to progressive growth or symptom development.
2. The predictors for surgery were multiple lesions and a mean growth rate > 4.8%/year.
3. Overall, substantial growth was observed in 41.3% of HH patients; a stable size, in 52.9%; and substantial shrinkage, in 5.8%, with a mean annual growth of HH of 0.14 cm (4.8%/year).
We would like to express our gratitude to all investigators who participated in this study and to the Medical Research Collaborating Center at SNUBH, which reviewed and certified the statistical analysis used in this study.
Young Cheol Shin: conceptualization, data curation, formal analysis, methodology, project administration, visualization, writing - original draft, writing - review & editing; Eun Ju Cho: conceptualization, data curation, methodology, project administration, visualization, writing - original draft, writing - review & editing; Hee Young Na: conceptualization, data curation, methodology, project administration, writing - review & editing; Jai Young Cho: conceptualization, methodology, project administration, writing - review & editing; Ho-Seong Han: conceptualization, methodology, project administration, writing - review & editing; Yoon Jin Lee: conceptualization, data curation, methodology, project administration, writing - review & editing; Haeryoung Kim: conceptualization, data curation, methodology, project administration, writing - review & editing; Sangmi Jang: conceptualization, data curation, methodology, project administration, writing - review & editing; Gwang Hyeon Choi: conceptualization, data curation, formal analysis, methodology, project administration, writing - review & editing; Eun Sun Jang: conceptualization, methodology, project administration, writing - review & editing; Jin-Wook Kim: conceptualization, methodology, project administration, writing - review & editing; Sook-Hyang Jeong: conceptualization, methodology, investigation, data curation, formal analysis, validation, writing - original draft, writing - review & editing, visualization, supervision, project administration
The authors disclose no conflicts.
None
The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.
Flow chart indicating the patient enrollment for the two study aims. CDW, clinical database warehouse.
Pie chart indicating the growth patterns overall and according to the initial size categories of subgroups. (A) Growth pattern in the overall subgroup (n = 223). (B) Growth pattern in hemangiomas measuring < 5 cm (n = 187). (C) Growth pattern in hemangiomas measuring ≥ 5 cm but < 10 cm (n = 30). (D) Growth pattern in hemangiomas measuring ≥ 10 cm (n = 6). Substantial growth was defined as growth of ≥ 5% compared to the initial longest diameter. Substantial shrinkage was defined as shrinkage of ≥ 5% compared to the initial longest diameter. Stable hemangioma size was defined as ranging between substantial growth and shrinkage.
Relationship between size at diagnosis or initiation of follow-up and hemangioma growth rate. The correlation analysis between the initial longest diameter of the HH and the annual growth rate showed a weak positive correlation (Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient [rho]: 0.29,
Indication and summary of surgical details of case group
| Variable | Case group (n = 36) |
|---|---|
| Age, yr | 46.5 ± 12.0 |
| Female | 22 (61.1) |
| Indication for surgery | |
| Symptomatic | 16 (44.4) |
| Hemangioma growth | 18 (50.0) |
| Ruling out malignancy | 2 (5.6) |
| Surgical resection extent | |
| Hemihepatectomy | 14 (38.9) |
| Sectionectomy | 13 (36.1) |
| Segmentectomy | 4 (11.1) |
| Wedge resection | 1 (2.8) |
| Tumorectomy | 3 (8.3) |
| Liver transplantation | 1 (2.8) |
| Surgical approach | |
| Open surgery | 2 (5.6) |
| Laparoscopy | 34 (94.4) |
| Estimated blood loss, mL | 176.5 ± 231.1 |
| Operative time, min | 201.5 ± 150.9 |
| Mean hospital stay, d | 6.6 ± 2.8 |
| Pathologic results | |
| Cavernous | 35 (97.2) |
| Sclerosing | 1 (2.8) |
| Other treatment before resection | |
| Transarterial embolization | 1 (2.8) |
| None | 35 (97.2) |
| Post-operative complication | |
| Bile leakage | 0 (0.0) |
| Infection | 0 (0.0) |
| Hemorrhage | 0 (0.0) |
| Hepatic failure | 0 (0.0) |
| Mortality | 0 (0.0) |
Values are presented as mean ± standard deviation or number (%).
Comparison of clinical characteristics between hemangioma patients with and without surgery
| Variable | Overall (n = 396) | Case group (n = 36) | Control group (n = 360) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age, yr |
47.7 ± 10.8 | 46.5 ± 12.0 | 47.8 ± 10.7 | 0.373 |
| Female |
217 (54.8) | 22 (61.1) | 195 (54.2) | 0.425 |
| Number of hemangiomas |
0.026 | |||
| Single | 234 (59.1) | 15 (41.7) | 219 (60.8) | |
| ≥ 2 | 162 (40.9) | 21 (58.3) | 141 (39.2) | |
| Lobar distribution |
0.032 | |||
| Left hemilobar | 81 (20.5) | 15 (41.7) | 66 (18.3) | |
| Right hemilobar | 236 (59.6) | 14 (38.9) | 222 (61.7) | |
| Bilobar | 79 (19.9) | 7 (19.4) | 72 (20.0) | |
| Depth of location |
< 0.001 | |||
| Exophytic | 13 (3.3) | 10 (27.8) | 3 (0.8) | |
| Subcapsular | 160 (40.4) | 24 (66.7) | 136 (37.8) | |
| Deep | 223 (56.3) | 2 (5.5) | 221 (61.4) | |
| Size at initiation of follow-up, cm |
2.9 ± 2.8 | 7.7 ± 5.2 | 2.4 ± 1.8 | < 0.001 |
| WBC, 103/uL |
6.4 ± 2.6 | 7.1 ± 6.2 | 6.3 ± 1.8 | 0.530 |
| Hemoglobin, g/dL |
14.1 ± 1.5 | 13.5 ± 1.7 | 14.1 ± 1.5 | 0.018 |
| Platelet, 103/uL |
242.4 ± 65.0 | 235.1 ± 67.0 | 243.3 ± 64.8 | 0.499 |
| Total cholesterol, mg/dL |
189.3 ± 37.2 | 185.1 ± 43.3 | 189.8 ± 36.5 | 0.474 |
| Total protein, g/dL |
7.3 ± 0.5 | 7.3 ± 0.5 | 7.3 ± 0.5 | 0.707 |
| Albumin, g/dL |
4.4 ± 0.4 | 4.3 ± 0.3 | 4.4 ± 0.4 | 0.461 |
| Total bilirubin, mg/dL |
0.9 ± 0.4 | 0.9 ± 0.3 | 0.9 ± 0.4 | 0.020 |
| AST, IU/L |
27.4 ± 16.4 | 27.5 ± 17.5 | 27.4 ± 16.3 | 0.553 |
| ALT, IU/L |
28.5 ± 26.1 | 31.3 ± 48.1 | 28.2 ± 22.4 | 0.675 |
| Creatinine, mg/dL |
0.8 ± 0.2 | 0.8 ± 0.2 | 0.8 ± 0.2 | 0.393 |
| Alpha-fetoprotein, ng/mL |
3.4 ± 2.8 | 2.8 ± 1.5 | 3.5 ± 2.9 | 0.311 |
| Concomitant diseases | ||||
| Diabetes mellitus |
29 (7.3) | 3 (8.3) | 26 (7.2) | 0.738 |
| Hypertension |
34 (8.6) | 4 (11.1) | 30 (8.3) | 0.534 |
| Dyslipidemia |
48 (12.1) | 4 (11.1) | 44 (12.2) | > 0.999 |
| Chronic viral hepatitis |
56 (14.1) | 5 (13.9) | 51 (14.2) | 0.964 |
| Liver cirrhosis |
16 (4.0) | 1 (2.8) | 15 (4.2) | > 0.999 |
| Alcoholic liver disease |
32 (8.1) | 2 (5.6) | 30 (8.3) | 0.755 |
| Fatty liver disease |
53 (13.4) | 2 (5.6) | 51 (14.2) | 0.200 |
Values are presented as mean ± standard deviation or number (%), unless otherwise indicated.
ALT, alanine aminotransferase; AST, aspartate aminotransferase; WBC, white blood cell.
Exophytic was defined as hemangioma protruding beyond liver capsule; subcapsular was defined as hemangioma locating within 1 cm from liver capsule; deep was defined as locating deeper than 1 cm from liver capsule.
Chronic viral hepatitis included hepatitis B or hepatitis C infection without the history of previous diagnosis and evidence of cirrhosis.
Student’s t-test,
Mann–Whitney test,
chi-square test,
Fisher’s exact test, or
linear by linear association.
Baseline characteristics and hemangioma growth patterns of patients with follow-up imaging studies
| Variable | Overall (n = 223) | Case group (n = 20) | Control group (n = 203) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age, yr |
47.7 ± 10.4 | 47.05 ± 11.96 | 47.71 ± 10.25 | 0.787 |
| Female, n |
117 (52.5) | 12 (60.0) | 105 (51.7) | 0.480 |
| Follow up period, yr |
4.9 ± 4.1 | 8.1 ± 3.6 | 4.5 ± 4.0 | < 0.001 |
| Size at initiation of follow-up, cm |
2.9 ± 2.3 | 5.8 ± 3.5 | 2.6 ± 1.9 | < 0.001 |
| Size at end of follow-up, cm |
3.6 ± 3.5 | 10.8 ± 4.4 | 2.9 ± 2.5 | < 0.001 |
| Change in linear size, cm |
0.7 ± 1.9 | 5.1 ± 3.3 | 0.3 ± 0.8 | < 0.001 |
| Change in linear size, % |
21.4 ± 59.4 | 133.3 ± 30.5 | 10.4 ± 27.7 | < 0.001 |
| Mean growth rate, mm/year |
1.4 ± 2.9 | 6.4 ± 3.2 | 0.9 ± 2.4 | < 0.001 |
| Mean growth rate, %/year |
4.8 ± 11.5 | 15.0 ± 11.3 | 3.8 ± 11.1 | < 0.001 |
| Number of hemangiomas |
0.039 | |||
| Single | 137 (61.4) | 8 (40.0) | 129 (63.5) | |
| ≥ 2 | 86 (38.6) | 12 (60.0) | 74 (36.5) | |
| Lobar distribution |
0.236 | |||
| Left hemilobar | 45 (20.2) | 8 (40.0) | 37 (18.2) | |
| Right hemilobar | 130 (58.3) | 7 (35.0) | 123 (60.6) | |
| Bilobar | 48 (21.5) | 5 (25.0) | 43 (21.2) | |
| Depth of location |
< 0.001 | |||
| Exophytic | 5 (2.2) | 3 (15.0) | 2 (1.0) | |
| Subcapsular | 97 (43.5) | 16 (80.0) | 81 (39.9) | |
| Deep | 121 (54.3) | 1 (5.0) | 120 (59.1) | |
| Symptom |
< 0.001 | |||
| Symptomatic | 6 (2.7) | 6 (30.0) | 0 (0.0) | |
| Asymptomatic | 217 (97.3) | 14 (70.0) | 203 (100.0) |
Values are presented as mean ± standard deviation or number (%).
Student’s t-test,
Mann–Whitney test,
chi-square test,
Fisher’s exact test,
linear by linear association.
Univariable and multivariable logistic regression for surgical resection
| Variable | Univariable analysis | Multivariable analysis | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
| |||
| OR (95% CI) | OR (95% CI) | |||
| Age, yr | ||||
|
| ||||
| < 45 | Reference | |||
|
| ||||
| ≥ 45 | 0.62 (0.25–1.57) | 0.316 | ||
|
| ||||
| Sex | ||||
|
| ||||
| Male | Reference | |||
|
| ||||
| Female | 1.40 (0.55–3.57) | 0.481 | ||
|
| ||||
| Number of hemangiomas | ||||
|
| ||||
| Single | Reference | Reference | ||
|
| ||||
| ≥ 2 | 2.62 (1.02–6.69) | 0.045 | 7.64 (1.40–41.72) | 0.019 |
|
| ||||
| Lobar distribution | ||||
|
| ||||
| Right hemilobar or bilobar | Reference | Reference | ||
|
| ||||
| Left hemilobar | 2.99 (1.14–7.84) | 0.026 | 3.17 (0.72–13.97) | 0.128 |
|
| ||||
| Depth of location | ||||
|
| ||||
| Deep | Reference | Reference | ||
|
| ||||
| Subcapsular or exophytic | 27.47 (3.61–209.21) | 0.001 | 5.94 (0.84–42.00) | 0.074 |
|
| ||||
| Initial size, cm | ||||
|
| ||||
| < 5 | Reference | Reference | ||
|
| ||||
| 5–10 | 6.02 (2.05–17.71) | 0.001 | 3.20 (0.67–15.34) | 0.146 |
|
| ||||
| ≥ 10 | 39.56 (6.38–245.28) | < 0.001 | 40.84 (0.89–1873.72) | 0.057 |
|
| ||||
| Mean growth rate > 0.14 cm/year |
188.15 (11.12–3182.41) | < 0.001 | ||
|
| ||||
| Mean growth rate > 4.8%/year |
41.68 (7.68–226.27) | < 0.001 | 30.73 (4.86–194.51) | < 0.001 |
|
| ||||
| Symptom | ||||
|
| ||||
| Asymptomatic | Reference | Reference | ||
|
| ||||
| Symptomatic | 182.45 (9.79–3401.00) | < 0.001 | 33.42 (0.94–1187.87) | 0.054 |
|
| ||||
| Concomitant diseases | ||||
|
| ||||
| Diabetes mellitus | 0.28 (0.02–4.79) | 0.378 | ||
|
| ||||
| Hypertension | 0.22 (0.01–3.75) | 0.294 | ||
|
| ||||
| Dyslipidemia | 0.76 (0.17–3.45) | 0.718 | ||
|
| ||||
| Chronic viral hepatitis | 0.74 (0.21–2.66) | 0.647 | ||
|
| ||||
| Liver cirrhosis | 0.71 (0.09–5.70) | 0.748 | ||
|
| ||||
| Fatty liver disease | 0.24 (0.032–1.88) | 0.176 | ||
|
| ||||
| Alcoholic liver disease | 0.62 (0.08–4.90) | 0.646 | ||
OR, odds ratio; CI, confidence interval.
OR, 95% CI, and
Univariable and multivariable logistic regression for odds of symptom development
| Variable | Univariable analysis | Multivariable analysis | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
| |||
| OR (95% CI) | OR (95% CI) | |||
| Age, yr | ||||
|
| ||||
| < 45 | Reference | |||
|
| ||||
| ≥ 45 | 1.31 (0.24–7.33) | 0.756 | ||
|
| ||||
| Sex | ||||
|
| ||||
| Male | Reference | |||
|
| ||||
| Female | 4.69 (0.54–40.79) | 0.162 | ||
|
| ||||
| Number of hemangiomas | ||||
|
| ||||
| Single | Reference | |||
|
| ||||
| ≥ 2 | 3.29 (0.59–18.38) | 0.174 | ||
|
| ||||
| Location of hemangioma | ||||
|
| ||||
| Right hemilobar or bilobar | Reference | Reference | ||
|
| ||||
| Left hemilobar | 4.17 (0.81–21.38) | 0.087 | 2.71 (0.26–27.78) | 0.402 |
|
| ||||
| Depth of location | ||||
|
| ||||
| Deep | Reference | Reference | ||
|
| ||||
| Subcapsular or exophytic | 16.37 (0.91–294.17) | 0.058 | 4.41 (0.19–100.63) | 0.353 |
|
| ||||
| Initial size, cm | ||||
|
| ||||
| < 5 | Reference | Reference | ||
|
| ||||
| 5–10 | 3.19 (0.28–36.31) | 0.350 | 1.27 (0.13–12.84) | 0.840 |
|
| ||||
| ≥10 cm | 92.50 (11.08–772.10) | < 0.001 | 10.50 (1.06–103.77) | 0.044 |
|
| ||||
| Mean growth rate > 0.14 cm/year |
43.12 (2.39–778.65) | 0.011 | ||
|
| ||||
| Mean growth rate > 4.8%/year |
33.08 (1.84–596.15) | 0.018 | 13.42 (0.77–233.13) | 0.075 |
OR, odds ratio; CI, confidence interval.
OR, 95% CI, and