| Literature DB >> 35528977 |
Zongqian Wu1, Hong Lu1, Qiao Xie1, Jie Cheng1, Kuansheng Ma2, Xiaofei Hu1, Liang Tan3,4, Huarong Zhang5, Chen Liu1, Xiaoming Li1, Ping Cai1.
Abstract
Background and Aims: Microvascular invasion (MVI) affects recurrence after treatment of small hepatocellular carcinoma (sHCC) of ≤3 cm in size. The present study aimed to investigate whether abdominal subcutaneous adipose tissue (SAT), visceral adipose tissue (VAT), and intermuscular adipose tissue (IMAT) are associated with MVI in patients with sHCC.Entities:
Keywords: Computed tomography; Hepatocellular carcinoma; Subcutaneous adipose tissue; Visceral adipose tissue
Year: 2021 PMID: 35528977 PMCID: PMC9039711 DOI: 10.14218/JCTH.2021.00126
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Clin Transl Hepatol ISSN: 2225-0719
Fig. 1Illustrations of abdominal fat marked with ImageJ software. SAT (A), VAT (B), and IMAT (C).
Clinical characteristics of the patients
| Variable | Value |
|---|---|
| Sex, male:female | 101:23 |
| Age in years* | 50.0±10.7 |
| Liver cirrhosis | |
| Present | 100 |
| Absent | 24 |
| AFP in ng/ mL | 36.7 (5.3–192.4) |
| Child-Pugh | |
| A | 121 |
| B | 3 |
| C | 0 |
| Tumor size in cm | 2.1±0.5 |
| Platelet count as 109/dL | 126 (95–165) |
| Etiology of cirrhosis | |
| HBV | 123 |
| HCV | 1 |
| BCLC stage | |
| 0 | 63 |
| A | 61 |
| Anti-virus treatment | |
| Present | 48 |
| Absent | 76 |
| VAT in mm2 | 10,426 (7,042.9–15,926.8) |
| SAT in mm2 | 11,409.2 (7,908.5–16,301) |
| IMAT in mm2 | 247.5 (134.3–419.3) |
*Averages.
Univariate analysis for factors associated with MVI in 124 patients operated for sHCC
| Variable | MVI− ( | MVI+ ( |
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Sex, male:female | 43 | 58 | 0.112 |
| Age in years* | 50.1±11.0 | 49.8±10.6 | 0.896 |
| Liver cirrhosis | 0.988 | ||
| Present | 46 | 54 | |
| Absent | 11 | 13 | |
| AFP in ng/mL | 42.6 (5.5, 222.4) | 35.0 (4.8, 190.7) | 0.698 |
| Child-Pugh | 1.000 | ||
| A | 56 | 65 | |
| B | 1 | 2 | |
| Platelet count as 109/dL | 120.0 (95.0, 167.5) | 131.0 (94.0, 165.0) | 0.757 |
| Etiology of cirrhosis | 1.000 | ||
| HBV | 57 | 66 | |
| HCV | 0 | 1 | |
| BCLC stage | 0.069 | ||
| 0 | 34 | 29 | |
| A | 23 | 38 | |
| Anti-virus treatment | 0.424 | ||
| Present | 19 | 27 | |
| Absent | 38 | 40 | |
| VAT in mm2 | 7,827.7 (4,894.6, 10,410.5) | 13,109.9 (10,213.0, 17,180.6) | <0.001** |
| SAT in mm2 | 10,971.9 (5,868.1, 12,709.8) | 12,844.0 (9,336.3, 17,641.1) | 0.003** |
| IMAT in mm2 | 237.8 (126.7, 693.5) | 267.1 (138.9, 429.3) | 0.421 |
*Averages. **Statistically significant difference in VAT and SAT.
Fig. 2Comparison of VAT between the MVI-positive and MVI-negative group: the larger the VAT area, the higher the risk of being MVI-positive.
Fig. 3Comparison of SAT between the MVI-positive and MVI-negative group: the larger the SAT area, the higher the risk of being MVI-positive.
Fig. 4ROC curve of the VAT and SAT for predicting MVI of sHCC.
Univariate analysis for adipose tissue in M1 and M2 subgroups
| Variable | M1 ( | M2 ( |
|
|---|---|---|---|
| VAT in mm2 | 11,760.5 (8,855.7, 16,276.6) | 19,418.3 (13,240.6, 24,601.3) | 0.01* |
| SAT in mm2 | 11,831.2 (8,816.8, 15,890.9) | 18,078.3 (13,056.6, 22,121.4) | 0.013* |
| IMAT in mm2 | 231.7 (134.7, 411.7) | 353.9 (148.7, 634.4) | 0.199 |
*Statistically significant difference in VAT and SAT.