切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"

中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版) ›› 2021, Vol. 15 ›› Issue (01) : 31 -34. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1674-3946.2021.01.010

所属专题: 文献

论著

直肠癌肠系膜下动脉根部淋巴结转移的预测模型构建及准确性验证
袁建1, 姚磊1,(), 屈兵1   
  1. 1. 430064 武汉,武汉科技大学附属天佑医院
  • 收稿日期:2020-04-13 出版日期:2021-02-10
  • 通信作者: 姚磊

Construction and verification of prediction model of No.253 lymph node metastasis of rectal cancer

Jian Yuan1, Lei Yao1,(), Bing Qu1   

  1. 1. Tianyou Hospital Affiliated to Wuhan University of Science and Technology, Hubei 430064, China
  • Received:2020-04-13 Published:2021-02-10
  • Corresponding author: Lei Yao
  • Supported by:
    General Project of Natural Science Foundation of Hubei Province(2016CFC718); Scientific Research General Project of Wuhan Municipal Health and Family Planning Commission(WX16D04)
引用本文:

袁建, 姚磊, 屈兵. 直肠癌肠系膜下动脉根部淋巴结转移的预测模型构建及准确性验证[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2021, 15(01): 31-34.

Jian Yuan, Lei Yao, Bing Qu. Construction and verification of prediction model of No.253 lymph node metastasis of rectal cancer[J]. Chinese Journal of Operative Procedures of General Surgery(Electronic Edition), 2021, 15(01): 31-34.

目的

构建直肠癌肠系膜下动脉(IMA)根部淋巴结转移的预测模型并验证其准确性。

方法

回顾性分析2014年1月至2019年3月行直肠癌手术的156例患者资料,所有患者均行IMA根部淋巴结清扫。统计分析采用SPSS 20.0软件,对与IMA根部淋巴结转移相关的临床病理因素进行单因素分析(采用χ2检验)及多因素Logistic回归分析。并构建IMA根部淋巴结转移的预测模型,通过描绘受试者工作特征曲线(ROC)并计算曲线下面积(AUC)从而来评估模型的预测能力,P<0.05表示差异具有统计学意义。并以术后病理诊断结果为金标准对预测模型进行验证。

结果

在156例患者中,IMA根部淋巴结转移21例,转移率为13.5%;平均每例送检淋巴结为2.3个(1~9个),共送检淋巴结359个,其中有转移的淋巴结有72个,转移度为20.1%。多因素回归分析结果显示,肿瘤大小、pT分期、分化程度、是否有肝转移及术前血清CEA水平是IMA根部淋巴结转移的独立危险因素。根据Logistic回归分析各变量的回归系数构建预测模型,通过绘制ROC曲线,计算出AUC值为0.856(95%CI 0.825~0.886),当最佳临界值为2.49时对IMA根部淋巴结转移具有预测价值,此时该预测模型的灵敏度为90.21%,特异度为86.20%,约登指数为0.56。以术后病理诊断为金标准,验证预测模型,灵敏度为85.71%,特异度为99.26%,两者灵敏度和特异度差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。

结论

基于Logistic多因素回归分析建立预测模型具有较高的灵敏度和特异性,对直肠癌肠系膜下动脉根部淋巴结转移的患者具有较高的预测价值,为临床实践提供一定的理论支撑。

Objective

To establish a predictive model for NO.253 lymph nodes metastasis of rectal cancer around inferior mesenteric artery (IMA) and to verify its accuracy.

Methods

The data of 156 patients underwent rectal cancer surgery from January 2014 to March 2019 were analyzed retrospectively.and all of 156 patients underwent NO.253 lymph nodes dissection. Statistical analysis were performed by using SPSS 20.0 software and were examined by using univariate analysis (χ2 test) and multivariate logistic regression analysis of clinicopathological factors related to NO.253 lymph nodes metastasis. To establish a prediction model of NO.253 lymph node metastasis, by drawing the receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC) and calculating the area under the curve (AUC) to evaluate the predictive ability of the model. A P value of <0.05 was considered as statistically significant difference . And the prediction model was verified by the postoperative pathological diagnosis results as the gold standard.

Results

Among the 156 patients, 21 cases (13.5%) of NO.253 lymph nodes metastasis ; The average harvested NO.253 lymph nodes was 2.3 (1~9), with a total of NO.359 lymph nodes were dissected, including 72 positive lymph nodes (20.1%). Logistic multivariate regression analysis was performed on clinically significant pathological data with univariate analysis. The results showed that tumor size, pT stage, degree of differentiation, presence or absence of liver metastases, and serum CEA levels were independent risk factors for NO.253 lymph nodes metastasis. According to the logistic regression analysis of the regression coefficients of each variable, a prediction model is constructed, and by plotting the ROC curve, the AUC value is calculated as 0.856 (95% CI 0.825-0.886). When the optimal critical value of Y is 0.49, it has predictive value for NO.253 lymph nodes metastasis. At this time, the sensitivity of the prediction model is 90.21%, with specificity of 86.20%, and the Jordan index of 0.56. By using the postoperative pathological diagnosis as the gold standard to verify the prediction model, with the sensitivity of 85.71%, and the specificity of 99.26%, without significant difference (P>0.05).

Conclusion

This study establishes a prediction model based on Logistic multivariate regression analysis with high sensitivity and specificity, with a high predictive value for NO.253 lymph nodes metastasis of rectal cancer.

表1 156例直肠癌手术患者临床病理特征与IMA根部淋巴结转移的关系[例(%)]
表2 156例直肠癌手术患者IMA根部淋巴结转移相关危险因素多因素分析
图1 156例直肠癌手术患者IMA根部淋巴结转移的术前预测模型ROC曲线
表3 156例直肠癌手术患者Logistic回归分析各变量赋值方法
表4 156例直肠癌手术患者IMA根部淋巴结转移的术前预测模型与病理诊断结果对比(例)
[1]
Bray F, Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, et al. Global cancer statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries[J]. CA CANCER J CLIN, 2018, 68(6): 394-424.
[2]
赵轩,孙晶.直肠癌和乙状结肠癌根治术中肠系膜下动脉根部淋巴结清扫的相关热点问题及研究进展[J].中国肿瘤外科杂志,2018,10(5): 278-282.
[3]
骆洋,陈建军,秦骏,等.腹腔镜直肠癌根治术中肠系膜下动脉低位结扎对第3站淋巴结清扫的影响及第3站淋巴结转移危险因素分析[J].中华消化外科杂志,2018,17(2): 154-160.
[4]
Muto S, Okabe N, Hasegawa T,et al.Acute necrotizing mediastinitis caused by rectal cancer metastasis[J].The Journal of the Japanese Associtation for Chest Surgery, 2018,32(7): 881-886.
[5]
Sun Y, Chi P, Lin H,et al. Inferior mesenteric artery lymph node metastasis in rectal cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy: Incidence, prediction and prognostic impact[J]. European J Surg Oncol, 2017, 43(1): 85-91.
[6]
Kim S.Distribution of Lymph Nodes in Stage III Patients With Mid and Low Rectal Cancer: Preliminary Study[J]. Ann Coloproctol,2018,34(1): 42-46.
[7]
Dev K, Veerenderkumar KV, Krishnamurthy S.Incidence and Predictive Model for Lateral Pelvic Lymph Node Metastasis in Lower Rectal Cancer[J]. Indian J Surg Oncol,2018,9(2): 150-156.
[8]
Meng WJ, Wang ZQ.Pay attention to the selective lateral pelvic lymph node dissection in mid-low rectal cancer[J]. Zhonghua Wei Chang Wai Ke Za Zhi,2017,20(3): 258-262.
[9]
孔庆元.T2直肠癌肿瘤浸润深度与淋巴结转移的相关性研究[J].中国现代药物应用,2017,11(17): 14-16.
[10]
马帅. 淋巴结转移对T1期结直肠癌预后的评估[D].郑州:郑州大学,2019:1-56.
[11]
王留伟. 结肠癌淋巴结转移的相关因素分析[J]. 肿瘤基础与临床,2018,31(1): 76-78.
[12]
官雯菊,张涛,易鑫,等. 直肠癌TME术后局部复发规律对放疗靶区设计的价值探讨[J]. 中国肿瘤临床,2019,46(10): 501-506.
[13]
Xie H-L, Gong Y-Z, Kuang J-A,et al.The prognostic value of the postoperative serum CEA levels/preoperative serum CEA levels ratio in colorectal cancer patients with high preoperative serum CEA levels[J].Cancer Manag Res,2019,11: 7499-7511.
[14]
戚译天. 直肠癌淋巴结转移的结外相关危险因素分析[D].长春:吉林大学,2018:1-58.
[15]
冯雯卿,宗雅萍,孙晶,等. 肠系膜下动脉高位结扎与低位结扎并血管根部淋巴结清扫在直肠癌手术中对比分析[J]. 中华普通外科杂志,2018, 33(7): 563-566.
[1] 邵华, 那子悦, 荆慧, 李博, 王秋程, 程文. 术前经皮超声造影对乳腺癌腋窝前哨淋巴结转移及负荷的诊断价值[J]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2023, 20(08): 849-853.
[2] 孙帼, 谢迎东, 徐超丽, 杨斌. 超声联合临床特征的列线图模型预测甲状腺乳头状癌淋巴结转移的价值[J]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2023, 20(07): 734-742.
[3] 康夏, 田浩, 钱进, 高源, 缪洪明, 齐晓伟. 骨织素抑制破骨细胞分化改善肿瘤骨转移中骨溶解的机制研究[J]. 中华乳腺病杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 329-339.
[4] 代莉, 邓恢伟, 郭华静, 黄芙蓉. 术中持续输注艾司氯胺酮对腹腔镜结直肠癌手术患者术后睡眠质量的影响[J]. 中华普通外科学文献(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 408-412.
[5] 张俊, 罗再, 段茗玉, 裘正军, 黄陈. 胃癌预后预测模型的研究进展[J]. 中华普通外科学文献(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 456-461.
[6] 王得晨, 杨康, 杨自杰, 归明彬, 屈莲平, 张小凤, 高峰. 结直肠癌微卫星稳定状态和程序性死亡、吲哚胺2,3-双加氧酶关系的研究进展[J]. 中华普通外科学文献(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 462-465.
[7] 李雄雄, 周灿, 徐婷, 任予, 尚进. 初诊导管原位癌伴微浸润腋窝淋巴结转移率的Meta分析[J]. 中华普通外科学文献(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 466-474.
[8] 燕速, 霍博文, 徐惠宁. 4K荧光腹腔镜扩大右半结肠CME+D3根治术及No.206、No.204组淋巴结清扫术[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 14-14.
[9] 杜晓辉, 崔建新. 腹腔镜右半结肠癌D3根治术淋巴结清扫范围与策略[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 5-8.
[10] 唐旭, 韩冰, 刘威, 陈茹星. 结直肠癌根治术后隐匿性肝转移危险因素分析及预测模型构建[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 16-20.
[11] 张生军, 赵阿静, 李守博, 郝祥宏, 刘敏丽. 高糖通过HGF/c-met通路促进结直肠癌侵袭和迁移的实验研究[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 21-24.
[12] 张焱辉, 张蛟, 朱志贤. 留置肛管在中低位直肠癌新辅助放化疗后腹腔镜TME术中的临床研究[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 25-28.
[13] 关旭, 王锡山. 基于外科与免疫视角思考结直肠癌区域淋巴结处理的功与过[J]. 中华结直肠疾病电子杂志, 2023, 12(06): 448-452.
[14] 顾睿祈, 方洪生, 蔡国响. 循环肿瘤DNA检测在结直肠癌诊治中的应用与进展[J]. 中华结直肠疾病电子杂志, 2023, 12(06): 453-459.
[15] 李英茹, 李非, 张玉茹, 刘莉婷. 单点-点压法注射纳米碳在腹腔结肠癌根治术中应用探讨[J]. 中华消化病与影像杂志(电子版), 2023, 13(06): 414-417.
阅读次数
全文


摘要