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) ›› 2024, Vol. 18 ›› Issue (05) : 494 -497. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1674-3946.2024.05.007

论著

不同术式治疗早期乳腺癌的效果及并发症发生率、复发率比较
张钊1, 骆成玉1, 张树琦1, 何平1, 李旭斌2,()   
  1. 1. 100029 北京,首都医科大学附属北京安贞医院普外科
    2. 100144 北京,首都医科大学附属北京康复医院普外科
  • 收稿日期:2024-04-01 出版日期:2024-10-26
  • 通信作者: 李旭斌

Comparison of the effect, complication rate and recurrence rate of different operation methods in treating early breast cancer

Zhao Zhang1, Chengyu Luo1, Shuqi Zhang1, Ping He1, Xubin Li2,()   

  1. 1. Department of General Surgery, Beijing Anzhen Hospital,Capital Medicine University, Beijing 100020, China
    2. Department of General Surgery, Beijing Rehabilitation Hospital of Capital Medical University, Beijing 100144, China
  • Received:2024-04-01 Published:2024-10-26
  • Corresponding author: Xubin Li
  • Supported by:
    National Key Project of the 14th Five-Year Plan of National Health Commission(YYWS5622)
引用本文:

张钊, 骆成玉, 张树琦, 何平, 李旭斌. 不同术式治疗早期乳腺癌的效果及并发症发生率、复发率比较[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(05): 494-497.

Zhao Zhang, Chengyu Luo, Shuqi Zhang, Ping He, Xubin Li. Comparison of the effect, complication rate and recurrence rate of different operation methods in treating early breast cancer[J/OL]. Chinese Journal of Operative Procedures of General Surgery(Electronic Edition), 2024, 18(05): 494-497.

目的

比较经腋窝单孔充气法乳腺腔镜手术与经乳晕切口手术治疗早期乳腺癌的效果及并发症发生率、复发率。

方法

回顾性分析2021年2月至2023年10月126例早期乳腺癌患者的临床资料,根据术式不同分为A组(行经腋窝单孔充气法乳腺腔镜手术,n=65例)和B组(行经乳晕切口手术,n=61例)。采用SPSS 24.0分析数据。围手术期指标、乳腺癌治疗的美学及局部效果标准化结局指标(SOMA-LNET)、视觉模拟评分(VAS)和生活质量综合评定问卷(GQOLI-74)等计量资料用()表示,行独立样本t检验;并发症和复发率等计数资料行χ2检验。P<0.05表示差异有统计学意义。

结果

A组患者手术时间长于B组(P<0.05),而术中出血量、切口长度、住院天数均少于B组(P<0.05);A组患者术后SOMA-LNET各项评分均高于B组(P<0.05);术后1d、1周,两组患者VAS评分均较术前降低,且A组均低于B组(P<0.05);术后1个月、6个月,两组患者GQOLI-74各项评分均较术前升高,且A组高于B组(P<0.05);术后随访6个月,A组复发率4.6%,B组复发率9.8%,比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);A组患者并发症总发生率为4.6%,低于B组的18.0%(P<0.05)。

结论

相较于经乳晕切口手术,经腋窝单孔充气法乳腺腔镜手术治疗早期乳腺癌,疗效显著,术后乳房美观度更好,安全性高。

Objective

To compare the effect, complication rate and recurrence rate of breast cancer treated by axillary single hole aeration endoscopic surgery and areola incision surgery.

Methods

The clinical data of 126 patients with early breast cancer from February 2021 to October 2023 were retrospectively analyzed, and they were divided into group A (transaxillary single hole aeration breast endoscopic surgery, n=65 cases) and group B (transareolar incision surgery, n=61 cases) according to different operation methods. SPSS 24.0 was used to analyze the data. Measurement data such as perioperative indicators, standardized outcome indicators of aesthetic and local effects of breast cancer treatment (SOMA-LNET), visual analogue scale (VAS) and comprehensive quality of life Assessment Questionnaire (GQOLI-74) were represented by The clinical data of 126 patients with early breast cancer from February 2021 to October 2023 were retrospectively analyzed, and they were divided into group A (transaxillary single hole aeration breast endoscopic surgery, n=65 cases) and group B (transareolar incision surgery, n=61 cases) according to different operation methods. SPSS 24.0 was used to analyze the data. Measurement data such as perioperative indicators, standardized outcome indicators of aesthetic and local effects of breast cancer treatment (SOMA-LNET), visual analogue scale (VAS) and comprehensive quality of life Assessment Questionnaire (GQOLI-74) were represented by (), and independent sample t test was performed. The statistical data of complications and recurrence rate were chi-square test. P<0.05 indicated that the difference was statistically significant.

Results

The operative time of group A was longer than that of group B (P<0.05), while the amount of blood loss, incision length and hospitalization days of group A were lower than those of group A (P<0.05). The SOMA-LNET scores in group A were higher than those in group B (P<0.05). One day and one week after surgery, VAS scores in both groups were lower than before surgery, and group A was lower than group B (P<0.05). The scores of GQOLI-74 in both groups were higher than those before surgery 1 month and 6 months after surgery, and group A was higher than group B (P<0.05). After 6 months of follow-up, the recurrence rate was 4.6% in group A and 9.8% in group B, with no statistical significance (P>0.05). The total complication rate of group A was 4.6%, which was lower than that of group B (18.0%) (P<0.05).

Conclusion

Compared with transareolar incision, transaxillary single hole aeration breast endoscopic surgery is effective in the treatment of early breast cancer, with better postoperative breast beauty and high safety.

表1 两组患者一般资料比较
表2 两组患者手术指征比较(
表3 两组患者SOMA-LNET评分比较(
表4 两组患者VAS评分比较(分,
表5 两组患者GQOLI-74评分比较(分,
表6 两组患者并发症发生情况比较[例(%)]
[1]
周千贺,尚岳峰,刘通,等. 纯单孔腔镜非溶脂保乳手术在早期乳腺癌治疗中的临床应用[J]. 中华内分泌外科杂志,2023,17(02):143-149.
[2]
王子函,谢芳,闫笑生,等. 充气法单孔腔镜保留乳房手术在早期乳腺癌治疗中的应用[J]. 中华乳腺病杂志(电子版),2020,14(04):228-233.
[3]
海琳悦,王雪菲,刘博文,等. 经腋窝单孔充气法乳腺腔镜手术治疗乳腺疾病的临床应用分析[J]. 中国肿瘤临床,2023,50(05):255-259.
[4]
程文,曾安贵,李攀,等. 保留ATN、ICBN手术治疗Ⅰ~Ⅱ期乳腺癌的可行性及安全性分析[J/CD]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版),2021,15(03):310-313.
[5]
中国抗癌协会乳腺癌专业委员会,中华医学会肿瘤学分会乳腺肿瘤学组,邵志敏. 中国抗癌协会乳腺癌诊治指南与规范(2024年版)[J]. 中国癌症杂志,2023,33(12):1092-1186.
[6]
丁卯,向泓雨,辛灵,等. 中国腔镜乳腺癌手术20年回顾与展望[J]. 中国实用外科杂志,2023,43(02):155-158.
[7]
陈峙霖,李京泰,陈国平,等. 保留乳头乳晕的乳腺切除术治疗早期乳腺癌的临床与美学效果观察[J]. 中国美容医学,2023,32(06):27-30.
[8]
Qu YHan YWang W,et al. Clinical analysis of total endoscopic thyroidectomy via breast areola approach in early differentiated thyroid cancer[J]. J BUON2021,26(3):1022-1027.
[9]
韩拓,张伟,陈亮,等. 三种手术方式治疗Ⅰ-Ⅱ期乳腺癌的疗效及预后比较[J/CD]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版),2022,16(02):150-153.
[10]
徐新伟,杜秀銮,黄炎,等. 年轻乳腺癌患者(<35岁)的临床病理特征及生存预后分析[J]. 现代实用医学,2020,32(03):327-329.
[11]
马云飞,刘尧邦,李宏,等. 经乳晕、腋皱襞切口乳腺癌术后自体背阔肌皮瓣乳房重建[J]. 宁夏医科大学学报,2020,42(06):610-614.
[12]
胥金安,赵英竹,李黎荟,等. 单孔腔镜保留乳头乳晕全乳切除术在早期乳腺癌中的应用效果探讨[J]. 中国临床新医学,2023,16(09):896-900.
[13]
Wang ZHGang TRWu SS,et al. Single-port endoscopic-sentinel lymph node biopsy combined with indocyanine green and carbon nanoparticles in breast cancer[J]. Surg Endosc2023,37(10):7591-7599.
[14]
孙丽,岂怀华,王晶,等. 乳腔镜腋窝淋巴结清扫术对早期乳腺癌患者的治疗效果[J]. 分子诊断与治疗杂志,2023,15(09):1547-1551.
[15]
刘卫华,王子函,田一鸣,等. 单孔充气法腔镜乳房皮下腺体切除术治疗早期乳腺癌的临床疗效[J]. 国际外科学杂志,2021,48(03):149-154,F3.
[16]
Yang HLiang FXie Y,et al. Single axillary incision reverse-order endoscopic nipple/skin-sparing mastectomy followed by subpectoral implant-based breast reconstruction: Technique,clinical outcomes,and aesthetic results from 88 preliminary procedures[J]. Surgery2023,174(3):464-472.
[1] 李刘庆, 陈小翔, 吕成余. 全腹腔镜与腹腔镜辅助远端胃癌根治术治疗进展期胃癌的近中期随访比较[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 23-26.
[2] 刘世君, 马杰, 师鲁静. 胃癌完整系膜切除术+标准D2根治术治疗进展期胃癌的近中期随访研究[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 27-30.
[3] 赵丽霞, 王春霞, 陈一锋, 胡东平, 张维胜, 王涛, 张洪来. 内脏型肥胖对腹腔镜直肠癌根治术后早期并发症的影响[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 35-39.
[4] 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.
[5] 常小伟, 蔡瑜, 赵志勇, 张伟. 高强度聚焦超声消融术联合肝动脉化疗栓塞术治疗原发性肝细胞癌的效果及安全性分析[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 56-59.
[6] 徐逸男. 不同术式治疗梗阻性左半结直肠癌的疗效观察[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 72-75.
[7] 谢田伟, 庞于樊, 吴丽. 超声引导下不同消融术对甲状腺良性结节体积缩减率、复发率的影响[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 80-83.
[8] 王露, 周丽君. 全腹腔镜下远端胃大部切除不同吻合方式对胃癌患者胃功能恢复、并发症发生率的影响[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 92-95.
[9] 康婵娟, 张海涛, 翟静洁. 胰管支架置入术治疗急性胆源性胰腺炎的效果及对患者肝功能、炎症因子水平的影响[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 667-670.
[10] 付成旺, 杨大刚, 王榕, 李福堂. 营养与炎症指标在可切除胰腺癌中的研究进展[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 704-708.
[11] 许杰, 李亚俊, 冯义文. SOX新辅助化疗后腹腔镜胃癌D2根治术与常规根治术治疗进展期胃癌的近期随访比较[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 647-650.
[12] 刘柏隆, 周祥福. 女性尿失禁吊带手术并发症处理的经验分享[J/OL]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 127-127.
[13] 嵇振岭, 陈杰, 唐健雄. 重视复杂腹壁疝手术并发症的预防和处理[J/OL]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 601-606.
[14] 江志鹏, 钟克力, 陈双. 复杂腹壁疝手术后腹腔高压与腹腔间室综合征的预防和处理[J/OL]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 612-615.
[15] 石阳, 于剑锋, 曹可, 翟志伟, 叶春祥, 王振军, 韩加刚. 可扩张金属支架置入联合新辅助化疗治疗完全梗阻性左半结肠癌围手术期并发症分析[J/OL]. 中华结直肠疾病电子杂志, 2024, 13(06): 464-471.
阅读次数
全文


摘要


AI


AI小编
你好!我是《中华医学电子期刊资源库》AI小编,有什么可以帮您的吗?