Skip to main content

Table 1 Clinical characteristics and baseline comorbidities summary

From: The pulmonary-vascular-stump filling defect on CT post lung tumor resection: a predictor of cancer progression

 

Pulmonary vascular stump filling defects

P

No (N = 80)

Convex

(N = 46)

Concave (N = 31)

Gender:

   

0.026

 Male

49(61.3%)#

38(82.6%)

24(77.4%)

 

 Female

31(38.8%)

8(17.4%)

7(22.6%)

 

Age, years:

62.6 ± 8.56

61.8 ± 7.11

63.7 ± 7.14

0.609

Histological types:

   

0.501

 Large cell

2(2.50%)

2(4.35%)

1(3.23%)

 

 Squamous cell

21(26.2%)

18(39.1%)

9(29.0%)

 

 Adenocarcinoma

53(66.2%)

22(47.8%)

18(58.1%)

 

 Small cell

4(5.00%)

4(8.70%)

3(9.68%)

 

Stage of cancer at surgery:

   

0.270

 Stage I/II

61(76.3%)

29(63.0%)

21(67.7%)

 

 Stage III/IV

19(23.7%)

17(37.0%)

10(32.3%)

 

Surgical intervention:

   

0.322

 Right side

50(62.5%)

23(50.0%)

16(51.6%)

 

 Left side

30(37.5%)

23(50.0%)

15(48.4%)

 

Length of vascular stump (cm)

0.61 ± 0.73&

1.33 ± 0.81

1.60 ± 0.89

< 0.001

Tumor progression

22(27.5%)

12(26.1%)

18(58.1%)*

0.003

Diabetes mellitus:

9(11.2%)

6(13.0%)

5(16.1%)

0.785

Arterial hypertension:

15(18.8%)

7(15.2%)

10(11.2%)

0.167

Coronary disease:

6(7.50%)

7(15.2%)

3(3.22%)

0.392

Smoking:

12(15.0%)

9(19.6%)

7(22.6%)

0.604

BMI (BMI ≥ 25):

4(5.00%)

5(10.9%)

1(11.2%)

0.419

Previous VTED:

7(8.75%)

7(15.2%)

4(3.22%)

0.505

Atrial fibrillation:

3(3.75%)

1(2.17%)

1(3.22%)

1.000

Fibrinogen Degrdtion Product abnormal

3(3.75%)

3(6.52%)

4(12.9%)

0.245

D-Dimer>500ug/l

2(4.82%)

3(6.52%)

3(9.68%)

0.270

  1. # Compared to the convex-filling defect group, the difference is statistically significant P = 0.013, # compared to concave-filling defects, the difference is not statistically significant P = 0.107
  2. & Compared to the filling defect group, the difference is statistically significant P<0.001, convex-filling defects compared to concave-filling defects, the difference is not statistically significant P = 0.145
  3. * Compared to the no filling defect group, the difference is statistically significant P = 0.002, * Compared to convex-filling defects, the difference is statistically significant P = 0.005