Skip to main content
. 2020 Jan 31;60(3):109–120. doi: 10.2176/nmc.ra.2019-0213

Table 4.

Factors that affect symptomatic progression. Results of meta-analyses and individual data analyses

Factors Fixed effect model Heterogeneity References Individual data analyses


MD or OR (95% confidence interval) SympP vs. asymptomatic
Age 4.17* (−1.79 to 10.12), P = 0.29 I2 = 51%, P = 0.10 12, 15, 21, 22, 26, 27 (n = 331) Med, 73 y.o. vs. Med, 69 y.o. n = 268, P = 0.091
Sex 10.08 (3.02–33.65), P = 0.0002 I2 = 0%, P = 0.96 5, 6, 12, 15, 21, 26 (n = 257) M 8 W 2 vs. M 47 W 211 n = 268, P <0.0001
Initial size Diam. 12.44 (8.21–16.68), P <0.0001 I2 = 28%, P = 0.25 12, 15, 21, 22, 26 (n = 288) Vol. 9.96 cm3 vs. 2.55 cm3 n = 229, vol. P = 0.0032, diam. P = 0.0035
Diam. 2.67 cm vs. 1.86 cm
Calcification N.A. (+) 1 (−) 3 vs. (+) 83 (−) 71 n = 158, P = 0.34
T2WI N.A. high, 2; iso, 1; low, 0; high, 46; iso, 63; low, 35 n = 147, P = 0.61
Edema N.A. (+) 2 (−) 2 vs. (+) 7 (−) 118 n = 129, P = 0.024
*

Random effect model. Bold means statistically signify results. MD: mean difference, OR: odds ratio, SympP: symptomatic progression, y.o.: year-old, M: men, N.A.: not available, W: women, Diam.: diameter, Vol.: volume.