Hemangioma is one of the most common benign tumors in newborns. It is a neoplastic proliferative tumor characterized by a period of growth (proliferation) after birth and possible spontaneous involution (regression). Despite the increased interest in the problems of hemangioma treatment and a large number of developed techniques, no clear criteria for choosing a therapy method and its effectiveness exist. Further search for effective treatment methods is necessary because of the variety of forms, localization and prevalence of hemangiomas. The purpose of this work was to develop and test models for predicting the effectiveness of hemangioma treatment in children. Material and methods. The indicators of 84 children with hemangioma who received three types of treatment were used to develop the models. Propranolol was used for the treatment of the first group of children (17 people), timolol was used in the second group (15 people), timolol with compression was used in the third group (52 children). Results and discussion. Hemangioma treatment outcome prediction models have been developed using fuzzy logic. The value of the developed models lies in the fact that indicators that are determined during the initial examination of the child are used to determine the possible outcome of treatment and to choose its optimal tactics. To predict the effectiveness of propranolol treatment the term of the treatment onset and the activity of hemangioma according to hemangioma severity scale are informative. Additional indicators are the period from the birth of a child to the appearance of hemangioma and deviations from the normal values of the clinical blood test indicators. When using timolol, the main informative indicators for predicting the effectiveness of treatment are the period from the treatment onset, the activity of hemangioma according to hemangioma severity scale and the duration of treatment, which can be selected from the interval from 5 to 11 months. The sFasL1 values and the baby’s birth weight are used as additional indicators. When using timolol with compression for predicting the effectiveness of treatment, the main informative indicators are the duration of treatment, the period of the treatment onset and the indicator according to hemangioma severity scale at the beginning of treatment. The duration of treatment can be chosen in each case, based on the desired result, from the range of 5-19 months. Data on the morphological type of hemangioma, the depth of its spread and the presence of factors provoking its growth are used as additional indicators. The average values of errors of the models of predicting indicators characterizing the effectiveness of treatment using various methods were 0.03-9.1% for the indicator according to HSS; for the indicator according to VAS1(visual analog scale) was 2.2-9.4%; for the indicator according to VAS2 was 0.98-5.0%. Conclusion. Developed models for predicting the effectiveness of hemangioma treatment allowed the doctor choosing the most effective method and determining its duration. The software module that implements a support system for a doctor’s decision making as for selecting the optimal method for treating hemangioma can be used in healthcare institutions of various levels of provision of medical aid

Keywords: hemangioma of newborns, treatment methods, propranolol, timolol, compression, models of predicting

Full text: PDF (Ukr) 394K

1. Bota M, Popa G, Blag C, Tataru A. Infantile Hemangioma: A Brief Review. Clujul Med. 2015; 88(1): 23-27. https://doi.org/10.15386/cjmed-381. PMid:26528043 PMCid:PMC4508608
2. Yu Y, Fuhr J, Boye E, Gyorffy S, Soker S, Atala A, et al. Mesenchymal stem cells and adipogenesis in hemangioma involution. Stem Cells. 2006; 24(6): 1605-1612. https://doi.org/10.1634/stemcells.2005-0298. PMid:16456130
3. Lee JW, Chung HY. Vascular anomalies of the head and neck: current overview. Arch Craniofac Surg. 2018; 19(4): 243-247. https://doi.org/10.7181/acfs.2018.02383. PMid:30613084 PMCid:PMC6325330
5. Darrow DH, Greene AK, Mancini AJ, Nopper AJ. Diagnosis and management of infantile hemangioma. Pediatrics. 2015 Oct; 1136(4): e1060-e1104. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds. 2015-2485. PMid:26416931
6. Torres E, Rosa J, Leaute-Labreze C, Soares-de-Almeida L. Multifocal infantile haemangioma: a diagnostic challenge. BMJ Case Rep. 2016; 2016: bcr2016214827. https://doi.org/10.1136/bcr-2016-214827. PMid:27317759 PMCid:PMC4932334
7. Püttgen KB. Diagnosis and management of infantile hemangiomas. Pediatr Clin North Am. 2014; 61(2): 383-402. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pcl.2013.11.010. PMid:24636652
8. Zheng JW, Zhang L, Zhou Q, Mai HM, Wang YA, Fan XD, et al. A practical guide to treatment of infantile hemangiomas of the head and neck. International journal of clinical and experimental medicine. 2013; 6(10): 851-860.
9. Garzon MC, Epstein LG, Heyer GL, Frommelt PC, Orbach DB, Baylis AL, et al. PHACE Syndrome: Consensus-Derived Diagnosis and Care Recommendations. J Pediatr. 2016; 178: 24-33.e2. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpeds.2016.07.054. PMid:27659028 PMCid:PMC6599593
10. Gontijo B. Complications of infantile hemangiomas. Clin Dermatol. 2014; 32(4): 471-476. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clindermatol.2014.02.002. PMid:25017458
11. Krowchuk DP, Frieden IJ, Mancini AJ, Darrow DH, Blei F, Greene AK, et al. Clinical Practice Guideline for the Management of Infantile Hemangiomas. Pediatrics. 2019; 143(1): e20183475. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2018-3475. PMid:30584062
12. Wu HW, Liu C, Wang X, Zhang L, Yuan W, Zheng JW, et al. Topical application of 0.5% timolol maleate hydrogel for the treatment of superficial infantile hemangioma. Frontiers in Oncology. 2017; 7: 137. https://doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2017.00137. PMid:28702374 PMCid:PMC5484769
13. Open source software for numerical computation. Available from: http://www.scilab.org/
14. Fuzzy Logic Library for Microsoft.Net. Available from: https://sourceforge.net/projects/fuzzynet/ Fuzzy Logic Toolbox. Access mode: http://atoms.scilab.org/toolboxes/sciFLT/0.4.7
15. Yager R, Fiiev D. Essentials of Fuzzy Modeling and Control. John Wiley & Sons; 1984. 388 p.
16. Shtovba SD. Design of fuzzy systems using MATLAB. M: Hotline-Telecom; 2007. 288 p.
17. Moyakine AV, Herwegen B, van der Vleuten CJM. Use of the Hemangioma Severity Scale to facilitate treatment decisions for infantile hemangiomas. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2017; 77(5): 868-873. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaad.2017.06.003. PMid:28818436
18. Grzesik P, Wu JK. Current perspectives on the optimal management of infantile hemangioma. Pediatric Health Med Ther. 2017; 8, 107-116. https://doi.org/10.2147/PHMT.S115528. PMid:29388636 PMCid:PMC5774589
19. Rahman BU, Bibi A, Ghafoor A, Taimur M. A Comparison of Propranolol with Steroid in the Treatment of Hemangioma in Children In Terms Of Regression in Size. Isra Med J. 2018; 10(1): 8-11. https://doi.org/10.21767/1989-5216.1000253
20. Frongia G, Byeon JO, Mehrabi A, Günther P. Recurrence rate of infantile hemangioma after oral propranolol therapy. European Journal of Pediatrics. 2020 Nov 13; 180(2): 585-590. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00431-020-03872-5. PMid:33188478
21. Wang X, Feng W, Zhao X, Liu Z, Dong L. The Efficacy and Safety of Topical β-Blockers in Treating Infantile Hemangiomas: A Meta-Analysis Including 11 Randomized Controlled Trials. Dermatology. 2020 Oct 7; 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1159/000510029
22. Rotter A, Samorano LP, de Oliveira Labinas GH, Alvarenga JG, Rivitti‐Machado MC, Bouer M, et al. Ultrasonography as an objective tool for assessment of infantile hemangioma treatment with propranolol. International Journal of Dermatology. 2017; 56(2): 190-194. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijd.13442. PMid:27813086
23. Satterfield KR, Chambers CB. Current treatment and management of infantile hemangiomas. Survey of Ophthalmology. 2019; 64(5): 608-618. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.survophthal.2019.02.005. PMid:30772366
24. MacIsaac ZM, Nayar HS, Gehris R, Mehta D, Geisler S, Grunwaldt LJ. Treatment for Infantile Hemangiomas: Selection Criteria, Safety, and Outcomes Using Oral Propranolol During the Early Phase of Propranolol Use for Hemangiomas. J Craniofac Surg. 2016; 27(1): 159-162. https://doi.org/10.1097/SCS.0000000000002206. PMid:26674892
25. Chinnadurai S, Fonnesbeck C, Snyder KM, Sathe NA, Morad A, Likis FE, et al. Pharmacologic interventions for infantile hemangioma: a meta-analysis. Pediatrics. 2016; 137(2): e20153896. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2015-3896. PMid:26772662
26. Strub GM, Kirsh AL, Whipple ME, Kuo WP, Keller RB, Kapur RP, et al. Endothelial and circulating C19MC microRNAs are biomarkers of infantile hemangioma. JCI insight. 2016; 1(14): e88856. https://doi.org/10.1172/jci.insight.88856. PMid:27660822 PMCid:PMC5029419
27. Li X, Ma C, Xu J, Gao B, Steele M, Idris A. Elevated eosinophil levels observed in infantile hemangioma patients from Kaifeng, China. F1000Res. 2019 Dec 16; 8: 2111. https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.21608.1. PMid:32047605 PMCid:PMC6993820
28. Drolet BA, Pope E, Juern AM, Sato T, Howell B, Puttgen KB, et al. Gastrointestinal bleeding in infantile hemangioma: a complication of segmental, rather than multifocal, infantile hemangiomas. J Pediatr. 2012; 160(6): 1021-1026. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpeds.2011.12.026. PMid:22240112
29. Ding A, Gong X, Li J, Xiong P. Role of ultrasound in diagnosis and differential diagnosis of deep infantile hemangioma and venous malformation. Journal of Vascular Surgery: Venous and Lymphatic Disorders. 2019; 7(5): 715-723. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvsv.2019.01.065. PMid:31421839
30. Chang SJ, Qiao C, Chang L, Gao W, Jin Y, Ma G, et al. A 7‐year follow‐up study on untreated deep or mixed facial infantile hemangioma in East‐Asian patients: When propranolol was not yet an option. J Dermatol. 2019; 46(11): 962-966. https://doi.org/10.1111/1346-8138.15080. PMid:31515846
31. Smith CJF, Friedlander SF, Guma M, Kavanaugh A, Chambers CD. Infantile hemangiomas: an updated review on risk factors, pathogenesis, and treatment. Birth defects research. 2017; 109(11): 809-815. https://doi.org/10.1002/bdr2.1023. PMid:28402073 PMCid:PMC5839165
32. Oszajca K, Szemraj J, Wyrzykowski D, Chrzanowska B, Salamon A, Przewratil P. Single‐nucleotide polymorphisms of VEGF‐A and VEGFR‐2 genes and risk of infantile hemangioma. Int J Dermatol. 2018; 57(10): 1201-1207. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijd.14127. PMid:29984822