Hepatic hemangioma: What internists need to know

León, Mónica; Chavez, Luis; Surani, Salim

doi:10.3748/wjg.v26.i1.11

Cited by 52 publications

(48 citation statements)

References 75 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The mechanism of abdominal pain has not been clarified; however, the pressure effect and distention of the liver capsule secondary to infarcts and necrosis might cause pain in cases of giant liver hemangioma. Surgery and non-surgical treatments such as TAE, radio-frequency ablation therapy, and molecular targeting therapy have been reported to be effective to diminish abdominal pain [5]. However, non-surgical treatments are sometimes not effective to relieve symptoms for patients with giant liver hemangioma such as in the case reported here.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 83%

Debulking of giant liver hemangiomas with severe symptoms: a case report

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: There are no previous reports of debulking of giant liver hemangioma. This report describes our experience with debulking surgery for a patient with bilateral giant liver hemangiomas with severe symptoms. Case presentation: We present a case of symptomatic giant liver hemangioma in a 41-year-old woman. She presented with abdominal pain and fullness at a local hospital and underwent trans-arterial embolization (TAE). TAE was not effective, and she was not able to walk a long distance. Giant liver hemangiomas, 30 cm and 15 cm in diameter, were located in the right liver and in the left lateral section, respectively, and normal liver parenchyma with tiny liver hemangiomas was present in segment 4. The liver function was normal. However, right hemihepatectomy with left lateral sectionectomy was considered to be risky according to the 3DCT volumetry. Therefore, we performed right hemi-hepatectomy in order to reduce her symptoms. The postoperative course was uneventful, and she was discharged on the 14th day after surgery. The abdominal fullness and abdominal pain disappeared immediately after surgery. The hemangiomas in the remnant liver, 15 cm in diameter, showed no change, and she is well without symptoms 7 years after surgery. Conclusions: Debulking surgery is one of the options for bilateral giant liver hemangiomas with severe symptoms.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 83%

Debulking of giant liver hemangiomas with severe symptoms: a case report

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We considered that 50% of CE cysts would be active and 50% inactive [ 16 ]. We also considered 2.5% the prevalence of biliary cysts and 5% the prevalence of hemangioma (arguably the most common focal “liquid” and “solid” liver lesion, respectively) in the population [ 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 ]. Diagnostic accuracy analyses were performed interpreting borderline/gray-zone/indecisive (thereafter “borderline”) results as either positive or negative.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of Nine Commercial Serological Tests for the Diagnosis of Human Hepatic Cyst Echinococcosis and the Differential Diagnosis with Other Focal Liver Lesions: A Diagnostic Accuracy Study

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The differential diagnosis of hepatic cystic echinococcosis (CE) may be challenging. When imaging is insufficient, serology can be applied, but no consensus diagnostic algorithm exists. We evaluated the performances of nine serological tests commercialized in Europe for the diagnosis of “echinococcosis”. We performed a diagnostic accuracy study using a panel of sera from patients with hepatic CE (n = 45 “liquid” content stages, n = 25 “solid” content stages) and non-CE focal liver lesions (n = 54 with “liquid” content, n = 11 with “solid” content). The diagnosis and staging of CE were based on ultrasound (gold standard). Nine commercial seroassays (5 ELISA, 2 WB, 1 Chemiluminescence Immunoassay [CLIA] and 1 Immunochromatographic test [ICT]) were the index tests. Sensitivity (Se) ranged from 43 to 94% and from 31 to 87%, and specificity (Sp) from 68 to 100% and from 94 to 100%, when borderline results were considered positive or negative, respectively. Three seroassays (2 ELISA, 1 WB) were excluded from further analyses due to poor performances. When tests were combined, Sp was 98–100%. The best results were obtained using the WB-LDBIO alone (Se 83%) or as a third test after two non-WB tests (Se 67–86%). A validated WB or two non-WB tests, read with stringent criteria (borderline = negative and considered positive only if concordant positive), possibly confirmed by the WB, appear sensible approaches.

show abstract

“…In recent years, the frequency of detection of hepatic hemangiomas has increased due to more use of imaging such as ultrasound, computed tomography (CT), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), positron emission tomography-CT (PET-CT), and angiography [6] , [7] , [8] , [9] , [10] . Although hepatic hemangiomas are benign, some of these tumors (<40%) may increase in size [11] , [12] , [13] . Lesions larger than 4 cm in diameter are referred to as giant hemangiomas [14] .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%