Skip to main content
. 2023 Dec 6;13:1256667. doi: 10.3389/fonc.2023.1256667

Table 1.

Comparison of general clinical features and ultrasound signs between ICTH and FAVA patients.

Variable Group Statistics P
ICTH (N=20) FAVA (N=45)
Gender [cases(%)] 0.39 0.54
 Male 9 (45.0) 24 (53.3)
 Female 11 (55.0) 21 (46.7)
Age (years, x¯ ±s) 8.55±8.06 20.00±13.99 -3.53 <0.001a
Lesion size(mm, x¯ ±s) 53.40±26.30 86.98±44.78 -3.18 0.001a
Is the boundary sharply defined [cases (%) 1.68 0.203
 No 9 (45.0) 28 (62.2)
 Yes 11 (55.0) 17 (37.8)
"Fascialtail sign" [cases (%)] 21.11 <0.001
 No 19 (95.0) 15 (33.3)
 Yes 1 (5.0) 30 (66.7)
Presence of fatty tissue-like hyperecho around the lesion[cases (%)] 40.68 <0.001
 No 2 (10.0) 41 (91.1)
 Yes 18 (90.0) 4 (8.9)
Blood flow [cases (%)] 21.71 <0.001
 0 0 1 (2.2)
 Level I 0 25 (55.6)
 Level II 8 (40.0) 12 (26.7)
 Level III 12 (60.0) 7 (15.6)
Presence of blood capillaries that go straight within the lesion
[cases (%)]
36.11 <0.001
 No 6 (30.0) 45 (100.0)
 Yes 14 (70.0) 0 (0.0)
Anatomical position [cases (%)] 0.067 0.796
 Muscle only 19 (95.0) 42
 Involvement of extra-muscular 1 (5.0) 3
Pain or sensitivity to pressing 8.825 0.003
 No 12 10
 Yes 8 35
a

is for the independent sample t-test, and the rest is for the chi-square test.

ICTH, intramuscular capillary-type hemangioma; FAVA, fibro adipose vascular anomaly.