130例结直肠癌癌周间隙的出现与预后关系的回顾性分析

doi:10.3969/j.issn.2095-378X.2021.03.004

外科研究与新技术 ›› 2021, Vol. 10 ›› Issue (3): 172-175.doi: 10.3969/j.issn.2095-378X.2021.03.004

130例结直肠癌癌周间隙的出现与预后关系的回顾性分析

刘立伟¹, 易祥华², 张婷婷², 吴运瑾², 范德生¹

1.上海中医药大学附属曙光医院宝山分院病理科,上海 201900;
2.同济大学附属同济医院病理科,上海 200065

收稿日期:2021-01-12 出版日期:2021-09-28 发布日期:2022-08-22
通讯作者: 范德生,电子信箱：hellen4099@126.com
作者简介:刘立伟（1979—）,女,医学硕士,主治医师,从事临床病理诊断工作

Relationship between peritumor retraction clefting and prognosis： A retrospective analysis of 130 cases of colorectal carcinoma

LIU Liwei¹, YI Xianghua², ZHANG Tingting², WU Yunjin², FAN Desheng¹

1. Department of Pathology, Baoshan Branch, Shuguang Hospital Affiliated to Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shanghai 201900, China;
2. Department of Pathology, Tongji Hospital Affiliated to Tongji University, Shanghai 200065, China

Received:2021-01-12 Online:2021-09-28 Published:2022-08-22

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 目的探讨结直肠普通型腺癌中癌周间隙的出现与脉管侵犯、神经累及及淋巴结转移的关系。方法收集2016年4月—2019年12月经病理确诊的196例结直肠普通型腺癌患者的病理资料,并对其癌周间隙、脉管侵犯、神经受累、淋巴结转移等进行回顾性分析。按照第4版消化系统肿瘤WHO分类标准复核诊断,并将其分为两组：无癌周间隙组66例和有癌周间隙组130例。有癌周间隙组根据癌周间隙范围的大小再进一步分为两组：≥20%组,共42例;<20%组,共88例。采用SPSS 19.0统计软件分析各组与脉管侵犯、神经累及及淋巴结转移的关系。结果有癌周间隙组比无癌周间隙组脉管侵犯、神经累及、淋巴结转移概率大,差异有统计学意义;在无脉管侵犯的患者中,有癌周间隙的病例比无癌周间隙的病例发生淋巴结转移的概率高（P<0.05）,但低于既有脉管侵犯又有癌周间隙的病例（P<0.05）,与癌周间隙范围的大小无关（P>0.05）。结论结直肠腺癌中癌周间隙的出现与脉管侵犯、神经累及、淋巴结转移呈正相关,提示预后不良。

关键词: 结直肠癌, 腺癌, 癌周间隙, 淋巴结转移

Abstract: Objective To investigate the relationships of peritumor retraction clefting with vascular invasion, nerve involvement, and lymph node metastasis in common colorectal adenocarcinoma. Methods The clinicopathological data of 196 patients with common colorectal adenocarcinoma who were pathologically diagnosed from April 2016 to December 2019 were retrieved, and their clinicopathological features such as peritumor retraction clefting, vascular invasion, nerve involvement, and lymph node metastasis were retrospectively analyzed. The diagnosis was reviewed according to the fourth edition of WHO classification of gastrointestinal tumors, and the patients were divided into two groups： 66 cases of non-peritumor retraction clefting and 130 cases of peritumor retraction clefting. The peritumor retraction clefting group was further divided into two subgroups according to extent of retraction clefts： ≥20% retraction clefts, 42 cases;<20% retraction clefts, 88 cases. SPSS 19.0 statistical software was used to analyze the relationships with vascular invasion, nerve involvement, and lymph node metastasis in each group. Results The peritumor retraction clefting group had significantly higher incidence rates of vascular invasion, nerve involvement, and lymph node metastasis than the non-peritumor retraction clefting group （P<0.05）. The peritumor retraction clefting group without vascular invasion had a higher incidence of lymph node metastasis than the non-peritumor retraction clefting group without vascular invasion （P<0.05）, but lower than the peritumor retraction clefting group with vascular invasion （P<0.05）, and had no relationship with the extent of peritumor retraction clefts （P>0.05）. Conclusion The appearance of peritumor retraction clefting in colorectal adenocarcinoma is positively correlated with vascular invasion, nerve involvement, and lymph node metastasis, indicating a poor prognosis.

Key words: Colorectal carcinoma, Adenocarcinoma, Peritumor retraction, Lymph node metastasis

中图分类号:

R735.5

刘立伟, 易祥华, 张婷婷, 吴运瑾, 范德生. 130例结直肠癌癌周间隙的出现与预后关系的回顾性分析[J]. 外科研究与新技术, 2021, 10(3): 172-175.

LIU Liwei, YI Xianghua, ZHANG Tingting, WU Yunjin, FAN Desheng. Relationship between peritumor retraction clefting and prognosis： A retrospective analysis of 130 cases of colorectal carcinoma[J]. Surgical Research and New Technique, 2021, 10(3): 172-175.

参考文献

[1] 李道娟,李倩,贺宇彤.结直肠癌流行病学趋势[J].肿瘤防治研究, 2015,42(3):305-310.
[2] Torre L A, Siegel R L, Ward E M, et al.Global cancer incidence and mortality rates and trends—an update[J]. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev, 2016,25(1):16-27.
[3] 邓会岩,王心然,岳萌,等.非特殊型浸润性乳腺癌中大范围癌周间隙的出现对预后的影响[J].中华病理学杂志. 2018,47(3):196-200.
[4] Kruslin B, Tomas D, Rogatsch H, et al.Periacinar retraction clefting in the prostatic needle core biopsies: an important diagnostic criterion or a simple artifact?[J]. Virchows Arch, 2003,443(4):524-527.
[5] Kruslin B, Tomas D, Rogatsch H, et al.Correlation of periacinar retraction clefting in needle core biopsies and corresponding prostatectomy specimens of patients with prostatic adenocarcinoma[J]. Int J Surg Pathol, 2005,13(1): 67-72.
[6] Ulamec M, Tomas D, Ensinger C, et al.Periacinar retraction clefting in proliferative prostatic atrophy and prostatic adenocarcinoma[J]. J Clin Pathol, 2007,60(10):1098-1101.
[7] Jain D, Tikku G, Bhadana P, et al.The impact of peritumoral retraction clefting & intratumoral eosinophils on overall survival in oral squamous carcinoma patients[J]. Pathol Oncol Res, 2019,25(1):183-189.
[8] Bujas T, Pavić I, Lenicek T, et al.Peritumoral retraction clefting correlates with advanced stage squamous cell carcinoma of the esophagus[J]. Pathol Oncol Res, 2008,14(4):443-447.
[9] Džombeta T, Krušlin B.High grade T1 papillary urothelial bladder cancer shows prominent peritumoral retraction clefting[J]. Pathol Oncol Res, 2018,24(3):567-574.
[10] Acs G, Khakpour N, Kiluk J, et al.The presence of extensive retraction clefts in invasive breast carcinomas correlates with lymphatic invasion and nodal metastasis and predicts poor outcome: a prospective validation study of 2742 consecutive cases[J]. Am J Surg Pathol, 2015,39(3):325-337.
[11] Ulamec M, Džombeta T, Cupić H, et al.Periacinar retraction clefting and d2-40 expression in prostatic adenocarcinoma[J]. Pathol Oncol Res, 2012,18(2):365-370.
[12] Fávaro W J, Hetzl A C, Reis L O, et al.Periacinar retraction clefting in nonneoplastic and neoplastic prostatic glands: artifact or molecular involvement[J]. Pathol Oncol Res, 2012,18(2):285-292.
[13] Acs G, Paragh G, Rakosy Z, et al.The extent of retraction clefts correlates with lymphatic vessel density and VEGF-C expression and predicts nodal metastasis and poor prognosis in early-stage breast carcinoma[J]. Mod Pathol, 2012,25(2): 163-177.

[1]	陈晓峰, 姚勇生. 腹腔镜下结直肠癌根治术治疗结直肠癌疗效对比分析[J]. 外科研究与新技术, 2021, 10(3): 189-191.
[2]	王晓娜, 林旭林, 林耿彬, 黄俊萍. 不同麻醉镇痛方式对腹腔镜结直肠癌根治术患者术后转归的影响[J]. 外科研究与新技术, 2021, 10(1): 57-60.
[3]	王晖, 王芳涛, 范跃祖. 抗淋巴管生成治疗结直肠癌研究进展[J]. 外科研究与新技术, 2021, 10(1): 64-67.
[4]	金海龙, 武彪, 张毅. 乳腺癌术后患者不同局部区域复发对预后的影响[J]. 外科研究与新技术, 2020, 9(3): 149-153.
[5]	姚莉雯, 许树长. 巴雷特食管演变为食管腺癌的研究进展[J]. 外科研究与新技术, 2020, 9(2): 100-104.
[6]	吴松龄, 张美泽, 刘佳慧, 詹巧惠. 98例早期乳腺癌非前哨淋巴结转移的影响因素分析[J]. 外科研究与新技术, 2020, 9(1): 6-9.
[7]	李创坤, 黄颖烽, 邹瞭南, 李筱颖, 罗杰, 牛凤, 赵日升, 王怀明, 王辉, 黄榕康. 粪便SDC2基因甲基化检测在结直肠肿瘤早期检测中的应用价值[J]. 外科研究与新技术, 2020, 9(1): 10-13.
[8]	杨秀春, 王盼. 腹腔镜结直肠癌根治术治疗结直肠癌的近期疗效观察[J]. 外科研究与新技术, 2020, 9(1): 14-16.
[9]	王永亮, 柴辉, 赵宏卿, 王怀锦, 褚瑞军, 郭思亮, 翟耀君. 他莫昔芬与阿那曲唑乳腺癌内分泌治疗对于骨代谢水平的影响[J]. 外科研究与新技术, 2019, 8(4): 262-264.
[10]	陈蔓青, 吴春山, 佘丹育, 方志潮, 曾灿艺, 许丽珊. 腋窝超声联合亚甲蓝示踪剂在乳腺癌前哨淋巴结活检术中的应用研究[J]. 外科研究与新技术, 2019, 8(3): 163-166.
[11]	贺雪, 殷佩浩. 结直肠癌患者血清miR-21检测的临床价值[J]. 外科研究与新技术, 2019, 8(1): 1-3.
[12]	陈文晓, 袁超杰, 吴卫文, 罗海岸. 溶脂辅助腋窝淋巴结清扫术临床应用分析[J]. 外科研究与新技术, 2019, 8(1): 40-43.
[13]	孙璐, 王胜. 腹腔镜手术对结直肠癌患者免疫功能及手术并发症的影响[J]. 外科研究与新技术, 2018, 7(4): 229-231.
[14]	陆峰, 刘成宸, 陈威鹏. 结直肠癌手术并发症相关因素分析[J]. 外科研究与新技术, 2018, 7(4): 235-237.
[15]	包增涛, 唐强, 史文超, 周晓敏, 陈慧玉. 加速康复外科治疗改善结直肠癌患者营养及免疫功能[J]. 外科研究与新技术, 2018, 7(4): 238-240.

130例结直肠癌癌周间隙的出现与预后关系的回顾性分析

Relationship between peritumor retraction clefting and prognosis： A retrospective analysis of 130 cases of colorectal carcinoma

PDF (PC)

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

参考文献

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价