Fig 1.
Digital imaging analysis system.
Fig 2.
Photographs of a hemangioma on the left arm.
(A) The photograph acquired before treatment; (B) The photograph acquired one month after treatment; (C) The photograph taken two months after treatment; (D) The photograph acquired at the end of treatment.
Fig 3.
Workflow used on the digital image analysis system.
(A) Patient information; (B) The RGB measurements; (C) Hemangioma images acquired for the patient; (D) The RGB result.
Table 1.
Clinical and demographic characteristics of the patients.
Fig 4.
RGB ratio between the tissue around the tumor before treatment and at various time points after treatment.
** p<0.01.
Fig 5.
RGB difference between the tissue around the tumor before treatment and at various time points after treatment.
** p<0.01.
Table 2.
RGB mean, ratio, and difference of tumor and normal tissue around the tumor before treatment and at various time intervals after treatment.
Fig 6.
Bar graph illustrating the number of hemangioma for each Achauer score (1 to 5) before and at various time points after treatment.
An Achauer score of 1 means severe hemangioma, and 5 means normal skin. ** p<0.01.
Fig 7.
The Spearman’s correlation between the Achuar and RGB scores.
Table 3.
Number of patients within each Achuaer grade group.
Fig 8.
VAS scores of the patients at each treatment time.
** p<0.01.
Fig 9.
The Spearman’s correlation analysis between the VAS and RGB score.
Table 4.
Number of patients within the VAS scores before and after treatment.
Fig 10.
The HAS scores of the patients at each treatment time.
** p<0.01.
Fig 11.
The Spearman’s correlation analysis between the HAS and RGB scores.
Table 5.
Number of patients in the five HAS score categories before treatment and at each time point after treatment.
Fig 12.
Angiotensin II at each treatment time.
** p<0.01.
Fig 13.
The Pearson’s correlation analysis between Ang II and the RGB score.