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) ›› 2022, Vol. 16 ›› Issue (02) : 154 -157. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1674-3946.2022.02.011

论著

乳腺癌腔镜下前哨淋巴结活检的临床应用效果
杨林1, 包国强1, 董彦明1, 杨平1, 霍良宝2, 张铎1, 彭书甲1,()   
  1. 1. 710038 西安,空军军医大学第二附属医院普通外科
    2. 725700 陕西安康,旬阳县医院普通外科
  • 收稿日期:2021-01-23 出版日期:2022-04-26
  • 通信作者: 彭书甲

Clinical effect of sentinel lymph node biopsy under endoscopy in breast cancer

Lin Yang1, Guoqiang Bao1, Yanming Dong1, Ping Yang1, Liangbao Huo2, Duo Zhang1, Shujia Peng1,()   

  1. 1. Department of general surgery, Second Affiliated Hospital of Air Force Military Medical University, Xi'an Shanxi Province 710038, China
    2. Department of general surgery, Xunyang County Hospital, Ankang Shanxi Province 725700, China
  • Received:2021-01-23 Published:2022-04-26
  • Corresponding author: Shujia Peng
  • Supported by:
    Basic Research Project of Shaanxi Province(2021JM-242)
引用本文:

杨林, 包国强, 董彦明, 杨平, 霍良宝, 张铎, 彭书甲. 乳腺癌腔镜下前哨淋巴结活检的临床应用效果[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2022, 16(02): 154-157.

Lin Yang, Guoqiang Bao, Yanming Dong, Ping Yang, Liangbao Huo, Duo Zhang, Shujia Peng. Clinical effect of sentinel lymph node biopsy under endoscopy in breast cancer[J/OL]. Chinese Journal of Operative Procedures of General Surgery(Electronic Edition), 2022, 16(02): 154-157.

目的

探讨在腔镜下进行乳腺癌前哨淋巴结活检(SLNB)的可行性及临床应用效果。

方法

回顾性分析2016年10月至2019年1月300例行SLNB乳腺癌患者病理资料,根据活检方式不同分为腔镜组(n=72,腔镜下活检)和开放组(n=228,开放活检);分别采用单纯亚甲蓝法、亚甲蓝放射性核素联合法对两组患者进行前哨淋巴结探测。采用统计软件SPSS 21.0进行数据分析,围术期指标等计量资料采用(

xˉ
±s)表示,采用独立t检验;前哨淋巴结(SLN)检出率/阳性率、术后并发症等计数资料组间比较采用χ2检验或Fisher检验。P<0.05差异有统计学意义。

结果

腔镜组患者术中出血量、手术时间、住院时间、首日引流量和拔管时间等围术期指标均显著小于开放组(P<0.05)。腔镜组患者前哨淋巴结检出率为91.7%(66/72),开放组SLN检出率为89.9%(205/228),两组差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。腔镜组患者SLN检出灵敏度为87.5%,准确度为96.7%,假阴性率为12.5%;开放组患者SLN检出灵敏度为89.7%,准确度为97.1%,假阴性率为10.4%,两组检出效果近似。腔镜组患者皮下局部积液的发生率(5.2% vs. 0.0%)高于开放组(P<0.05)。

结论

腔镜下前哨淋巴结活检与开放前哨淋巴结活检比较具有相似的检出率,且美容效果较好,方法可行。

Objective

To investigate the feasibility and clinical effect of sentinel lymph node biopsy(SLNB)for breast cancer under endoscopy.

Methods

The pathological data of 300 SLNB breast cancer patients from October 2016 to January 2019 were retrospectively analyzed and divided into endoscopic group(n=72,endoscopic biopsy)and open group(n=228,open biopsy)according to different biopsy methods. Sentinel lymph nodes were detected by methylene blue alone and methylene blue radionuclide combined method. Statistical software SPSS 21.0 was used for data analysis. Perioperative indicators and other measurement data were expressed by(

xˉ
±s)and independent t test was used;Statistical data such as SLN detection rate/positive rate and postoperative complications were compared between groups using χ2 test or Fisher test. P<0.05 was statistically significant.

Results

The perioperative indexes of intraoperative blood loss,operation time,hospitalization time,first day drainage volume and extubation time were significantly lower in the observation group than in the control group(P<0.05). The sentinel lymph node detection rate was 91.7%(66/72)in the endoscopic group and 89.9%(205/228)in the open group,and there was no significant difference between the two groups(P>0.05). The sensitivity,accuracy and false negative rate of sentinel lymph node detection in endoscopic group were 87.5%,96.7% and 12.5% respectively. The sensitivity,accuracy and false negative rate of SLN in the open group were 89.7%,97.1% and 10.4%,respectively. The incidence of subcutaneous local effusion in endoscopic group(5.2% vs 0.0%)was higher than that in open group.(P<0.05).

Conclusion

Endoscopic sentinel lymph node biopsy and open sentinel lymph node biopsy have similar detection rate,aesthetic effect is better,the method is feasible.

表1 300例乳腺癌患者不同活检方式行SLNB两组一般资料比较[(
xˉ
±s),例]
表2 271例乳腺癌患者不同前哨淋巴结活检方式两组检出情况比较(
xˉ
±s
图1 乳腺癌患者腔镜下前哨淋巴结活检病理图(×20倍)图1A=活检阴性;图1B=活检阳性,箭头所示为淋巴结转移
表3 300例乳腺癌患者不同活检方式行SLNB两组患者围手术期情况比较(
xˉ
±s
表4 234例乳腺癌未行腋窝淋巴结清扫患者术后患肢并发症发生情况比较[例(%)]
[1]
Ghieh D,,Saade C,,Najem E,et al. Staying abreast of imaging - Current status of breast cancer detection in high density breast[J]. Radiography202027(1):229-235.
[2]
梁培德,曾焕城,贺丽芳,等. 乳腺癌腋窝前哨淋巴结探查术的研究进展[J]. 肿瘤学杂志202026(11):995-1001.
[3]
韩转宁,郭宏斌,杨宝林,等. 超声造影引导下导丝定位联合纳米碳染色对乳腺癌SLN的定位效果分析[J/CD]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版)202014(1):54-57.
[4]
章燕,祝亚平,鲍伟,等. 前哨淋巴结检测方法及其在肿瘤中的研究进展[J]. 现代生物医学进展201818(1):164-167,189.
[5]
范明江,日斯白克·阿不都卡德尔,阿布都沙塔尔·吐尔地. 前哨淋巴结活检与腋窝淋巴结清扫对早期乳腺癌患者术后恢复及并发症的影响[J]. 实用癌症杂志202035(1):145-148.
[6]
杨为戈,倪小健. 乳腺癌腔镜腋窝淋巴结清扫手术方式选择及评价[J]. 中国实用外科杂志202040(10):1143-1146.
[7]
骆成玉. 乳腺癌腔镜腋窝淋巴结清扫策略及价值[J]. 中国实用外科杂志202040(10):1141-1143.
[8]
Jakub JW. Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy for Ipsilateral Breast Tumor Recurrence,Technically Feasible but Influence on Oncologic Outcomes Yet to be Completely Defined[J]. Ann Surg Oncol201926(8):2319‐2321.
[9]
Heerdt AS. Lymphatic Mapping and Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy for Breast Cancer[J]. JAMA Oncol20184(3):431.
[10]
唐琴,朱际飚,孙劲松,等. 前哨淋巴结活检在乳腺癌手术中的临床意义研究[J/CD]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版)202115(3):302-305.
[11]
方源,杨颖涛. 乳腺癌乳腔镜腋窝淋巴结清除术疗效和预后Meta分析[J]. 中华肿瘤防治杂志202027(10):813-820.
[12]
莫海扬,方志潮,林丹,等. 乳腔镜下前哨淋巴结活检术与常规开放前哨淋巴结活检术在早期乳腺癌中的效果研究[J]. 中外医学研究202119(4):80-82.
[13]
邓博,姜越,王铮. 乳腺癌手术腋窝淋巴结清扫时保留肋间臂神经的临床意义探讨[J]. 中国现代药物应用202014(20):72-74.
[14]
Zhou Y,,Xuang X,,Mao F,et al. Predictors of nonsentinel lymph node metastasis in patients with breast cancer with metastasis in the sentinel node[J]. Medicine201998(1):e13916.
[15]
吴爽,孙晓,丛斌斌,等. 乳腺癌前哨淋巴结活检示踪剂研究进展[J]. 中国癌症杂志201929(7):540-544.
[16]
郑中秋,陈敏龙,严星强,等. 亚甲蓝染色法前哨淋巴结活检应用于肿块切除术后乳腺癌的可行性分析[J]. 浙江医学201941(11):1207-1208,1220.
[17]
吕忠元,魏玉峰,吴红艳,等. 乳腺癌前哨淋巴结的示踪与定位临床研究[J]. 当代医学201824(27):135-137.
[18]
Vermersch C,,Raia-Barjat T,,Chapelle C,et al. Randomized comparison between indocyanine green fluorescence plus 99mtechnetium and 99mtechnetium alone methods for sentinel lymph node biopsy in breast cancer[J]. Sci Rep20199(1):6943.
[19]
Zhang JJ,,Zhang WC,,An CX,et al. Comparative research on 99mTc-Rituximab and 99mTc-sulfur colloid in sentinel lymph node imaging of breast cancer[J]. BMC Cancer201919(1):956.
[1] 李洋, 蔡金玉, 党晓智, 常婉英, 巨艳, 高毅, 宋宏萍. 基于深度学习的乳腺超声应变弹性图像生成模型的应用研究[J/OL]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2024, 21(06): 563-570.
[2] 周荷妹, 金杰, 叶建东, 夏之一, 王进进, 丁宁. 罕见成人肋骨郎格汉斯细胞组织细胞增生症被误诊为乳腺癌术后骨转移一例[J/OL]. 中华乳腺病杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 380-383.
[3] 河北省抗癌协会乳腺癌专业委员会护理协作组. 乳腺癌中心静脉通路护理管理专家共识[J/OL]. 中华乳腺病杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 321-329.
[4] 刘晨鹭, 刘洁, 张帆, 严彩英, 陈倩, 陈双庆. 增强MRI 影像组学特征生境分析在预测乳腺癌HER-2 表达状态中的应用[J/OL]. 中华乳腺病杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 339-345.
[5] 张晓宇, 殷雨来, 张银旭. 阿帕替尼联合新辅助化疗对三阴性乳腺癌的疗效及预后分析[J/OL]. 中华乳腺病杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 346-352.
[6] 邱琳, 刘锦辉, 组木热提·吐尔洪, 马悦心, 冷晓玲. 超声影像组学对致密型乳腺背景中非肿块型乳腺癌的诊断价值[J/OL]. 中华乳腺病杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 353-360.
[7] 程燕妮, 樊菁, 肖瑶, 舒瑞, 明昊, 党晓智, 宋宏萍. 乳腺组织定位标记夹的应用与进展[J/OL]. 中华乳腺病杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 361-365.
[8] 涂盛楠, 胡芬, 张娟, 蔡海峰, 杨俊泉. 天然植物提取物在乳腺癌治疗中的应用[J/OL]. 中华乳腺病杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 366-370.
[9] 李华志, 曹广, 刘殿刚, 张雅静. 不同入路下行肝切除术治疗原发性肝细胞癌的临床对比[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 52-55.
[10] 高杰红, 黎平平, 齐婧, 代引海. ETFA和CD34在乳腺癌中的表达及与临床病理参数和预后的关系研究[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 64-67.
[11] 韩萌萌, 冯雪园, 马宁. 乳腺癌改良根治术后桡神经损伤1例[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 117-118.
[12] 张志兆, 王睿, 郜苹苹, 王成方, 王成, 齐晓伟. DNMT3B与乳腺癌预后的关系及其生物学机制[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 624-629.
[13] 王玲艳, 高春晖, 冯雪园, 崔鑫淼, 刘欢, 赵文明, 张金库. 循环肿瘤细胞在乳腺癌新辅助及术后辅助治疗中的应用[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 630-633.
[14] 赵林娟, 吕婕, 王文胜, 马德茂, 侯涛. 超声引导下染色剂标记切缘的梭柱型和圆柱型保乳区段切除术的效果研究[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 634-637.
[15] 许月芳, 刘旺, 曾妙甜, 郭宇姝. 多粘菌素B和多粘菌素E治疗外科多重耐药菌感染临床疗效及安全性分析[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 700-703.
阅读次数
全文


摘要