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) ›› 2025, Vol. 19 ›› Issue (02) : 200 -203. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1674-3946.2025.02.022.

论著

射频消融术联合TSH抑制治疗甲状腺微小乳头状癌的效果及生存预后分析
董家旭1, 宋美姿1, 毕讯1,()   
  1. 1.570000 海口,海南医学院第一附属医院普外科
  • 收稿日期:2024-07-29 出版日期:2025-04-26
  • 通信作者: 毕讯
  • 基金资助:
    海南省2020年度省重点研发计划项目(ZDYF2020034)

Effect and survival prognosis of radiofrequency ablation combined with TSH suppression in the treatment of papillary thyroid microcarcinoma

Jiaxu Dong1, Meizi Song1, Xun Bi1,()   

  1. 1.Department of General Surgery, Affiliated First Hospital of Hainan Medical University, Haikou Hainan Province 570000, China
  • Received:2024-07-29 Published:2025-04-26
  • Corresponding author: Xun Bi
引用本文:

董家旭, 宋美姿, 毕讯. 射频消融术联合TSH抑制治疗甲状腺微小乳头状癌的效果及生存预后分析[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(02): 200-203.

Jiaxu Dong, Meizi Song, Xun Bi. Effect and survival prognosis of radiofrequency ablation combined with TSH suppression in the treatment of papillary thyroid microcarcinoma[J/OL]. Chinese Journal of Operative Procedures of General Surgery(Electronic Edition), 2025, 19(02): 200-203.

目的

探讨射频消融术(RFA)联合促甲状腺激素(TSH)抑制治疗甲状腺微小乳头状癌(PTMC)的效果及生存预后。

方法

回顾性分析2020年4月至2023年4月收治的148例PTMC患者病例资料,按照治疗方式不同分为RFA组(行RFA联合TSH抑制治疗,n=76例)和切除组(行外科切除术联合TSH抑制治疗,n=72例)。数据用SPSS 24.0软件分析,手术相关指标、病灶体积、甲状腺激素指标等计量资料用(x±s)表示,组间比较采用LSD-t检验,组内比较采用配对样本t检验;淋巴结转移率、肿瘤复发率等计数资料用[例(%)]表示,采用χ2检验。P<0.05为差异有统计学意义。

结果

RFA组患者手术时间、术中失血量、住院时间、VSS评分均低于切除组(P<0.05)。RFA组患者并发症发生率低于切除组(P<0.05)。术后1、3、6、12个月,RFA组患者病灶体积均呈降低趋势、病灶体积缩小率(VRR)均呈升高趋势(P<0.05)。术后30d,RFA组患者TSH水平降低(P<0.05),且RFA组低于切除组(P<0.05);术后30d,两组游离三碘甲状腺原氨酸(FT3)、游离甲状腺素(FT4)均降低(P<0.05),但RFA组高于切除组(P<0.05)。两组患者总不良预后发生率比较(1.3% vs.4.2%)无显著差异(P>0.05)。

结论

RFA结合TSH抑制治疗与外科切除均可获取良好疗效,但RFA术式可降低术中失血量、手术及住院时间,避免高并发症风险,促进病灶尽快吸收,且远期预后效果更佳,更具微创优势。

Objective

To investigate the effect and survival prognosis of radiofrequency ablation(RFA) combined with thyroid stimulating hormone (TSH) suppression in the treatment of papillary thyroid microcarcinoma (PTMC).

Methods

The medical records of 148 patients with PTMC in the hospital were retrospectively analyzed from April 2020 to April 2023.According to different treatment methods, they were divided into RFA group (RFA combined with TSH suppression therapy, n=76) and resection group (surgical resection combined with TSH suppression therapy, n=72).The data were analyzed by SPSS 24.0 software.Measurement data such as surgical related indicators, lesion volume and thyroid hormone indicators were expressed as (x±s).LSD-t test was used for between-group comparison, and paired sample t test was adopted for within-group comparison.Enumeration data such as lymph node metastasis rate and tumor recurrence rate were expressed as [cases (%)] by adopting χ2 test.P<0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results

The surgical time, intraoperative blood loss, hospital stay and VSS score in RFA group were shorter or less than those in resection group (P<0.05).The incidence rates of complications in RFA group were lower than those in resection group (P<0.05).At 1, 3, 6 and 12 months after surgery, the lesion volume in RFA group showed a decreasing trend, and the VRR showed an increasing trend (P<0.05).TSH level at 30 days after surgery was increased in RFA group (P<0.05), and the level was lower in RFA group than that in resection group (P<0.05).The levels of free triiodothyronine (FT3) and free thyroxine (FT4) at 30 days after surgery were declined in both groups (P<0.05), but the levels in RFA group were higher than those in resection group (P<0.05).There was no obvious difference in incidence rate of total poor prognosis between both groups (1.3% vs. 4.2%)(P>0.05).

Conclusion

RFA combined with TSH suppression therapy and surgical resection can achieve good results, but RFA can better reduce intraoperative blood loss, surgical time and hospital stay, avoid high risk of complications and promote rapid absorption of lesions, and it has better long-term prognosis effect and has more minimally invasive advantages.

表1 两组甲状腺微小乳头状癌患者一般资料比较
表2 两组甲状腺微小乳头状癌患者手术相关指标比较(± s
表3 甲状腺微小乳头状癌患者RFA术后12个月病灶体积缩小率分析(± s
表4 两组甲状腺微小乳头状癌患者甲状腺激素指标比较(± s
[1]
吴元清, 林杰, 罗佳宝, 等.甲状腺微小乳头状癌淋巴结转移和腺外侵犯的危险因素分析[J/CD].中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2021, 15(03): 319-322.
[2]
宋艾红, 陈智杰, 陈成, 等.经口腔前庭入路腔镜甲状腺腺叶切除联合中央区淋巴结清扫术的临床应用[J].局解手术学杂志, 2021, 30(09): 808-812.
[3]
Ramundo V, Sponziello M, Falcone R, et al.Low-risk papillary thyroid microcarcinoma: Optimal management toward a more conservative approach[ J].J Surg Oncol, 2020, 121(6): 958-963.
[4]
Oroff LA, Noel JE, Staek BC Jr, et al.Radiofrequeney ablationand related ultrasound-guided ablation technologies for treatment ofbenign and malignant thyroid disease:an international multidiscipli-nary consensus statemen[tJ].Head Neck, 2022,44(3): 633-660.
[5]
Zheng L, Dou JP, Han ZY, et al.Microwave Ablation for Papillary Thyroid Microcarcinoma with and without US-detected Capsule Invasion: A Multicenter Prospective Cohort Study[J].Radiology,2023, 307(3): e220661.
[6]
中国抗癌协会甲状腺癌专业委员会(CATO).甲状腺微小乳头状癌诊断与治疗中国专家共识(2016版)[J].中国肿瘤临床,2016, 43(10): 405-411.
[7]
中国医师协会超声医师分会.甲状腺微小乳头状癌热消融诊疗指征专家共识[J/CD].中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2019,16(08): 571-574.
[8]
Park H, Park J, Yoo H, et al.Bone-density testing interval and transition to osteoporosis in differentiated thyroid carcinoma patients on TSH suppression therapy[J].Clin Endocrinol (Oxf),2022, 97(1): 130-136.
[9]
魏战杰, 颜家琪, 杨永刚, 等.温哥华瘢痕量表在曲安奈德治疗甲状腺术后增生性瘢痕中的应用[J].中华实验外科杂志,2022, 39(05): 924-927.
[10]
Abdelgawad M, Shalaby H, Akkera M, et al.Ultrasound Elastography Predicts Thyroid Nodule Volume Reduction Rate After Percutaneous Ethanol Ablation[ J].Am Surg, 2021, 87(4):581-587.
[11]
李高峰, 石岩, 徐翠, 等.超声弹性对比指数联合常规超声预测甲状腺乳头状癌淋巴结转移的研究[J].实用医学杂志,2020, 36(05): 661-666.
[12]
彭民, 石华铮, 熊爱民, 等.超声联合18F-FDG PET/CT对甲状腺乳头状癌术后复发转移的诊断价值[J].肿瘤影像学, 2020,29(04): 365-369.
[13]
Lin Y, Wu ZR, Shi YP, et al.Radiofrequency Ablation of Unifocal Papillary Thyroid Microcarcinoma With BRAF V600E Mutation[ J].J Clin Endocrinol Metab, 2023, 108(11): 1298-1305.
[14]
Seo YK, Cho SW, Sim JS, et al.Radiofrequency Ablation of Papillary Thyroid Microcarcinoma: A 10-Year Follow-Up Study[ J].Taehan Yongsang Uihakhoe Chi, 2021, 82(4): 914-922.
[15]
王艳秋, 罗渝昆, 张明博, 等.超声引导下射频消融治疗甲状腺乳头状癌转移性淋巴结的疗效及安全性[J].中国医学影像学杂志, 2018, 26(09): 690-694.
[16]
王勇, 王玲.甲状腺癌术后碘131联合甲状腺激素应用效果分析[J/CD].中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版, 2020, 14(06):616-619.
[17]
薛媛, 石昊, 张杰, 等.^(131)I+TSH抑制治疗对分化型甲状腺癌术后患者甲状腺功能、免疫功能及复发转移的影响[J].检验医学与临床, 2024, 21(01): 70-74.
[18]
冯娜, 黄品同, 徐栋, 等.甲状腺微小乳头状癌射频消融术与外科手术的比较[J].介入放射学杂志, 2021, 30(04): 356-360.
[1] 王振宁, 杨康, 王得晨, 邹敏, 归明彬, 王雅楠, 徐明. 腹腔镜直肠癌根治术后预置造口与襻式回肠造口短期疗效评价:一项倾向性评分匹配队列研究[J/OL]. 中华普通外科学文献(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 21-27.
[2] 陈宝鹤, 张文卓, 王隽. 头尾侧联合入路腹腔镜右半结肠癌根治术的近中期临床观察[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(02): 153-156.
[3] 韦洋, 赵远权, 王小波, 黄海, 陈洁. BCLC 0/A期肝细胞癌患者术后辅助治疗后早期复发风险分析及预测模型建立[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(02): 157-161.
[4] 李峥, 马晋峰. 基于炎症反应评分系统构建预测根治性术后食管胃结合部腺癌患者预后的列线图模型[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(02): 170-175.
[5] 许杰, 李亚俊, 韩军伟. 两种入路下腹腔镜根治性全胃切除术治疗超重胃癌的效果比较[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 19-22.
[6] 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.
[7] 杨建波, 马欢, 黄小梅, 刘华柱. 结肠镜辅助下EMR、CSP和RFA术治疗直径<1cm结直肠息肉的疗效和安全性比较[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 76-79.
[8] 王伟伟, 费建平, 王璋瑜. 不同手术空间建立方法的经口腔前庭入路腔镜甲状腺术对比研究[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 84-87.
[9] 李代勤, 刘佩杰. 动态增强磁共振评估中晚期低位直肠癌同步放化疗后疗效及预后的价值[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 100-103.
[10] 孙莲, 马红萍, 吴文英. 局部进展期甲状腺癌患者外科处理[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 112-114.
[11] 麻紫月, 王贞文, 张强, 赵代伟, 张翊伦. 右侧喉不返神经1例报告[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 115-116.
[12] 刘郁, 段绍斌, 丁志翔, 史志涛. miR-34a-5p 在结肠癌患者的表达及其与临床特征及预后的相关性研究[J/OL]. 中华消化病与影像杂志(电子版), 2024, 14(06): 485-490.
[13] 陈倩倩, 袁晨, 刘基, 尹婷婷. 多层螺旋CT 参数、癌胚抗原、错配修复基因及病理指标对结直肠癌预后的影响[J/OL]. 中华消化病与影像杂志(电子版), 2024, 14(06): 507-511.
[14] 曾明芬, 王艳. 急性胰腺炎合并脂肪肝患者CT 与彩色多普勒超声诊断参数与其病情和预后的关联性研究[J/OL]. 中华消化病与影像杂志(电子版), 2024, 14(06): 531-535.
[15] 王景明, 王磊, 许小多, 邢文强, 张兆岩, 黄伟敏. 腰椎椎旁肌的研究进展[J/OL]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(09): 846-852.
阅读次数
全文


摘要