临床外科杂志 ›› 2022, Vol. 30 ›› Issue (9): 830-834.doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1005-6483.2022.09.009

• 论著 • 上一篇    下一篇

胃下部癌No.6组淋巴结分拣特点和转移危险因素分析

  

  1. 430022 武汉,华中科技大学同济医学院附属协和医院胃肠外科(李疆、邓胜和、蔡凯琳),消化肿瘤外科(曹英豪)
  • 收稿日期:2022-02-13 接受日期:2022-02-13 出版日期:2022-09-20 发布日期:2022-10-14
  • 通讯作者: 蔡开琳,Email:caikailin@hust.edu.cn

Analysis of sorting characteristics and metastasis risk factors in group No.6 lymph node of lower gastric carcinoma

  1. Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery,Union Hospital,Tongji Medical College,Huazhong University of Science and Technology,Wuhan 430022,China
  • Received:2022-02-13 Accepted:2022-02-13 Online:2022-09-20 Published:2022-10-14

摘要: 目的 探讨胃下部癌No.6组淋巴结分拣特点和转移危险因素,为规范腹腔镜下远端胃癌根治术淋巴结按组分拣提供支持。方法 2017年1月~2017年12月在我院胃肠外科行腹腔镜下远端胃癌D2根治术的胃下部癌病人66例。按照胃癌D2清扫范围对标本行淋巴结分拣并计算No.1、No.3、No.4sb、No.4d、No.5、No.6、No.7、No.8a、No.9、No.11p和No.12a各组分拣淋巴结总数、转移淋巴结总数、淋巴结转移的病人所占的比例和各组淋巴结转移比率。记录病人的性别、年龄、浸润深度、肿瘤直径、分化程度、神经侵犯、脉管侵犯、体质指数、HER2表达、肿瘤周围癌结节和肿瘤位置。总结No.6组淋巴结的分拣特点;单因素和多因素分析 No.6组淋巴结转移的危险因素。结果 No.6组淋巴结转移的病人比例为18/66(27.3%),淋巴结转移率为60/233(25.8%);单因素分析显示,病灶浸润深度(χ2=7.153,P=0.007)、神经侵犯(χ2=8.503,P=0.004)、脉管侵犯(χ2=5.677,P=0.017)、HER2表达(χ2=4.979,P=0.026)和肿瘤周围癌结节(χ2=5.408,P=0.020)均与No.6组淋巴结转移相关(P<0.05);No.6组淋巴结转移与No.3组(χ2=5.432,P=0.020)、No.7组(χ2=12.726,P=0.000)、No.8a组(χ2=10.615,P=0.001)和No.9组淋巴结转移(χ2=7.787,P=0.005)密切相关(P<0.05);Logistic回归进行多因素分析显示,肿瘤周围癌结节(OR=15.648,95%CI:2.946~83.118)和HER2表达(OR=11.706,95%CI:2.018~67.890)是No.6组淋巴结转移的独立危险因素(P<0.05)。结论 腹腔镜下远端胃癌根治术应重视No.6组淋巴结转移和清扫,根据No.6组淋巴结的转移情况适当扩大淋巴结的清扫范围。

关键词: 胃下部癌, 淋巴结转移, 第6组淋巴结, 淋巴结分拣

Abstract: Objective To investigate the characteristics of lymph node sorting and risk factors of metastasis in group No.6 lymph node of lower gastric carcinoma.To provide the data support for standardizing lymph node grouping and harvested in laparoscopic radical distal gastrectomy.Methods This study included 66 patients with lower gastric carcinoma who underwent laparoscopic D2 radical gastrectomy in the department of Gastrointestinal Surgery,Union Hospital,Tongji Medical College,Huazhong University of Science and Technology from January 2017 to December 2017.Lymph node sorting of each gastric cancer sample was performed according to the scope of D2 dissection.The total number of harvested lymph nodes,total number of metastatic lymph nodes,proportion of patients with lymph node metastasis and lymph node metastasis rate were calculated in each group such as No.1、No.3、No.4sb、No.4d、No.5、No.6、No.7、No.8a、No.9、No.11p and No.12a.Clinicopathological data were recorded:gender,age,depth of invasion,tumor size,degree of differentiation,nerve invasion,vascular invasion,body mass index,HER2 expression,cancer nodule surrounding the tumor and tumor location.The characteristics of lymph node sorting in group No.6 were analyzed and concluded.Univariate and multivariate analysis of risk factors for lymph node metastasis in group No.6 were performed.Results The proportion of patients with lymph node metastasis in group No.6 was 18/66(27.3%),and the rate of lymph node metastasis was 60/233(25.8%).Univariate analysis showed that the depth of invasion(χ2=7.153,P=0.007),nerve invasion(χ2=8.503,P=0.004),vascular invasion(χ2=5.677,P=0.017),HER2 expression(χ2=4.979,P=0.026)and cancer nodule surrounding the tumor(χ2=5.408,P=0.020) were significantly associated with lymph node metastasis in group No.6(P< 0.05).Lymph node metastasis in group No.3(χ2=5.432,P=0.020),group No.7(χ2=12.726,P=0.000),group No.8a(χ2=10.615,P=0.001) and group No.9(χ2=7.787,P=0.005) were closely correlated with lymph node metastasis in group No.6(P<0.05).Multivariate Logistic regression analysis showed that cancer nodule(OR=15.648,95%CI:2.946~83.118)and HER2 expression(OR=11.706,95%CI:2.018~67.890) were independent risk factors for lymph node metastasis in group No.6(P<0.05).Conclusion The attention should be paid to lymph node metastasis and sorting in group No.6 in laparoscopic radical distal gastrectomy.According to the lymph node metastasis of group No.6,the scope of lymph node dissection should be appropriately expanded.

Key words: lower gastric carcinoma, lymphatic metastasis, group No.6 lymph node, lymph node sorting

[1] 张传灼 任明 孟达理 王平 王勇. 甲状腺髓样癌颈侧区淋巴结转移的危险因素分析[J]. 临床外科杂志, 2022, 30(3): 230-233.
[2] 郑衍洪 梁柱 马炳太 黄厚沐. 左侧肺癌切除联合区域淋巴结清扫手术病人淋巴结转移与临床病理的关系分析[J]. 临床外科杂志, 2021, 29(5): 463-465.
[3] 张豪 王自强. 直肠癌侧方清扫适应证及手术操作的要点[J]. 临床外科杂志, 2021, 29(5): 495-498.
[4] 段书强 鲍方 刘振邦 王菲 高慧敏 开蕾. 趋化因子配体12/趋化因子受体4轴在三阴性乳腺癌组织中表达及与淋巴结转移关系[J]. 临床外科杂志, 2021, 29(3): 254-257.
[5] 马静 张楠 马斌林. 甲状腺乳头状癌病人血清微小RNA-451的检测及其诊断价值的研究[J]. 临床外科杂志, 2021, 29(10): 953-956.
[6] 张永辉 张春 付芬芬 张冬洁 谢凌铎 褚福涛 禹雪 徐硕 解云涛. 乳腺癌新辅助化疗后原发灶临床完全缓解对腋淋巴结转阴的预测作用[J]. 临床外科杂志, 2021, 29(1): 83-86.
[7] 徐冉 杨年钊 赵海远 李阳 赵军 张义胜. 多灶性胃癌病人淋巴结转移危险因素及预后分析[J]. 临床外科杂志, 2020, 28(8): 774-777.
[8] 袁俊 李印 彭银杰 凃成志 陈威鹏 秦建军. 术前中性粒细胞与淋巴细胞比值对淋巴结转移的胸段食管鳞癌病人预后的预测价值[J]. 临床外科杂志, 2020, 28(7): 627-630.
[9] 陈沛锐, 卿秋杉, 车国卫等. 术前胸中上段食管癌颈部淋巴结转移相关因素分析[J]. 临床外科杂志, 2019, 27(7): 566-569.
[10] 韦树建, 刘新承, 陈焕杰, 郑海涛. 甲状腺乳头状癌咽旁淋巴结转移一例[J]. 临床外科杂志, 2019, 27(11): 1014-1014.
[11] 陆昌荣. 淋巴结转移率对胃癌患者预后的评估分析[J]. 临床外科杂志, 2012, 20(7): 522-522.
[12] 华胸怀 张瑞祥 孙海波 孟凡宇 于永魁 马海波 李印. 食管胸段鳞右喉返神经旁淋巴结转移的相关性因素分析及其临床意义[J]. 临床外科杂志, 2012, 20(4): 269-269.
[13] 黄宝玉. 前哨淋巴结活检在结直肠癌根治术中的应用研究[J]. 临床外科杂志, 2011, 19(8): 544-544.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed   
[1] 昌盛. 中国心脏死亡捐献供肾器官的维护[J]. 临床外科杂志, 2016, 24(10): 744 .
[2] 石宇;刘学刚 . 冠状动脉旁路移植术后短期内应用强化他汀对患者出血风险的研究[J]. 临床外科杂志, 2016, 24(10): 750 .
[3] 阿布力克木·毛拉尤甫;郑秉礼. 胰腺实性假乳头状瘤45例手术治疗分析[J]. 临床外科杂志, 2016, 24(10): 764 .
[4] 胡志伟;汪忠镐;张玉;等. 腹腔镜Toupet胃底折叠术治疗干燥综合征合并严重胃食管反流病两例[J]. 临床外科杂志, 2016, 24(10): 766 .
[5] 李义亮;张成;克力木;等. 完全腹腔镜下远端胃癌根治术的临床体会[J]. 临床外科杂志, 2016, 24(10): 769 .
[6] 李光焰;张安平;王祥峰;等. 直肠癌切除术后吻合口狭窄14例分析[J]. 临床外科杂志, 2016, 24(10): 772 .
[7] 张忠伟;刘扬;路明. 痔上黏膜环切术治疗直肠前突所致出口梗阻型便秘的疗效观察[J]. 临床外科杂志, 2016, 24(10): 774 .
[8] 肖国栋;刘国辉. 跗骨窦切口联合经皮置钉技术微创治疗跟骨骨折的临床疗效分析[J]. 临床外科杂志, 2016, 24(10): 783 .
[9] 陈绍站;许勇;李婧;等. 防旋股骨近端髓内针与股骨近端解剖锁定钢板治疗转子间骨折的疗效比较[J]. 临床外科杂志, 2016, 24(10): 787 .
[10] 戴强;徐康;周治军;等. 湖北天门地区泌尿系结石成分及特征分析[J]. 临床外科杂志, 2016, 24(10): 789 .