Long-Term Outcomes of Oral Propranolol for Facial Infantile Hemangioma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Oral propranolol is the first-line treatment for problematic infantile hemangiomas (IHs) requiring systematic therapy. Several retrospective studies have reported the successful treatment of facial IHs with propranolol. In this study, the authors conducted a prospective trial to evaluate the long-term outcomes of oral propranolol use in patients with facial IHs. METHODS: The primary outcome was the clinical response 4 years after treatment. RESULTS: A total of 272 patients were analyzed, including 38 patients (14.0%) with ulcerated IHs. Four years after treatment, propranolol treatment had resulted in no/minimal sequelae in 232 patients (85.3%). A total of 265 patients (97.4%) reported a durable response to propranolol therapy. Major rebound occurred in 16.9% of patients after propranolol discontinuation. Additional surgery and laser treatment were required in 8.1% and 8.8% of patients, respectively. Logistic regression analyses revealed that age 3 months or older (95% CI, 1.488 to 31.023; P = 0.013), nasal IH (95% CI, 2.143 to 97.571; P = 0.006), and hemangioma ulceration (95% CI, 2.673 to 49.034; P = 0.001) were independent factors predictive of long-term severe/significant sequelae. Segmental subtype (95% CI, 2.081 to 45.597; P = 0.004), mixed IH (95% CI, 3.249 to 26.841; P < 0.001), and lip IH (95% CI, 2.224 to 92.278; P = 0.005) were independent risk factors for major rebound. CONCLUSIONS: In this large cohort of patients with facial IHs, propranolol treatment was effective and induced no/minimal sequelae at 4 years after treatment. However, long-term severe/significant sequelae and major rebound after propranolol treatment remain challenges.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".