Clinical Characteristics and Surgical Outcomes of Renal Epithelioid Angiomyolipoma: A Comparison with the Classic Type
1
Issued Date
2026-03-01
Resource Type
eISSN
22288082
Scopus ID
2-s2.0-105032136629
Journal Title
Siriraj Medical Journal
Volume
78
Issue
3
Start Page
229
End Page
239
Rights Holder(s)
SCOPUS
Bibliographic Citation
Siriraj Medical Journal Vol.78 No.3 (2026) , 229-239
Suggested Citation
Wanvimolkul N., Chotikawanich E., Jitpraphai S., Woranisarakul V., Hansomwong T., Jongjitaree K., Laksanabunsong P., Tantranont N., Taweemonkongsap T. Clinical Characteristics and Surgical Outcomes of Renal Epithelioid Angiomyolipoma: A Comparison with the Classic Type. Siriraj Medical Journal Vol.78 No.3 (2026) , 229-239. 239. doi:10.33192/smj.v78i3.279923 Retrieved from: https://repository.li.mahidol.ac.th/handle/123456789/115691
Title
Clinical Characteristics and Surgical Outcomes of Renal Epithelioid Angiomyolipoma: A Comparison with the Classic Type
Author's Affiliation
Corresponding Author(s)
Other Contributor(s)
Abstract
Objective: To compare clinical characteristics and surgical outcomes between patients with epithelioid angiomyolipoma (EAML) and classic angiomyolipoma (AML), and to identify factors associated with EAML diagnosis. Materials and Methods: All patients with renal AML who underwent surgery at Siriraj Hospital between January 2013 and December 2024 were reviewed. Clinical features and surgical outcomes were compared between patients with classic AML and those with EAML, and predictors of EAML were evaluated using multivariable analyses. Results: Among 116 eligible patients, 101 had classic AML and 15 had EAML (12.9%). Most patients were female and were diagnosed in their fifth decade. Demographics, tumor laterality, prevalence of tuberous sclerosis complex gene mutation, and comorbidities did not differ between the 2 groups. Palpable mass (26.7%) and hematuria (13.3%) were more frequent in patients with EAML than in those with classic AML. Most patients with EAML underwent radical or partial nephrectomy due to suspected malignancy. In multivariable analysis, tumor size ≥ 10 cm (odds ratio 15.44; P = 0.003) and a radiologic impression of cancer (odds ratio 46.98; P < 0.001) independently predicted EAML. Four patients with EAML had adverse pathologic features and experienced poor survival; 3 patients died with metastases. The 3-year overall survival was 100% in classic AML and 76.9% in EAML (P < 0.001). Conclusions: Patients with EAML had less favorable surgical outcomes than those with classic AML. Larger tumor size and a preoperative radiologic impression of malignancy were associated with an EAML diagnosis. Adverse pathologic features in EAML suggest malignant potential.