切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"

中华结直肠疾病电子杂志 ›› 2022, Vol. 11 ›› Issue (05) : 429 -433. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.2095-3224.2022.05.013

经验交流

Tis期结直肠癌内镜下非治愈性切除后追加外科手术的临床分析
廖伟林1, 林佳鑫1, 汪佳豪1, 祝柏森1, 李洪明2, 易小江2, 卢新泉2, 冯晓创2, 陈昭宇2, 刁德昌2,()   
  1. 1. 510405 广州中医药大学第二临床医学院
    2. 510120 广州,广东省中医院结直肠外科
  • 收稿日期:2022-04-26 出版日期:2022-10-25
  • 通信作者: 刁德昌
  • 基金资助:
    广州市科技计划项目(202002030436,202102010240)

Retrospective investigation of the clinicopathological features of patients treated with secondary surgery after non-curative endoscopic resection for Tis colorectal cancer

Weilin Liao1, Jiaxin Lin1, Jiahao Wang1, Baisen Zhu1, Hongming Li2, Xiaojiang Yi2, Xinquan Lu2, Xiaochuang Feng2, Zhaoyu Chen2, Dechang Diao2,()   

  1. 1. The Second School of Clinical Medical Sciences, Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou 510405, China
    2. Department of Colorectal Surgery, Guangdong Provincial Hospital of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou 510120, China
  • Received:2022-04-26 Published:2022-10-25
  • Corresponding author: Dechang Diao
引用本文:

廖伟林, 林佳鑫, 汪佳豪, 祝柏森, 李洪明, 易小江, 卢新泉, 冯晓创, 陈昭宇, 刁德昌. Tis期结直肠癌内镜下非治愈性切除后追加外科手术的临床分析[J/OL]. 中华结直肠疾病电子杂志, 2022, 11(05): 429-433.

Weilin Liao, Jiaxin Lin, Jiahao Wang, Baisen Zhu, Hongming Li, Xiaojiang Yi, Xinquan Lu, Xiaochuang Feng, Zhaoyu Chen, Dechang Diao. Retrospective investigation of the clinicopathological features of patients treated with secondary surgery after non-curative endoscopic resection for Tis colorectal cancer[J/OL]. Chinese Journal of Colorectal Diseases(Electronic Edition), 2022, 11(05): 429-433.

目的

探讨Tis期结直肠癌内镜下非治愈性切除的临床特点及外科手术的应用价值。

方法

通过回顾性收集2013年1月至2021年12月期间在广东省中医院胃肠肿瘤中心行内镜下非治愈性切除后接受补救手术治疗的34例Tis期结直肠癌患者的临床资料,总结患者的内镜治疗情况、补救手术指征、术后病理等,并分析导致补救手术实施的主要原因。

结果

全组34例患者中,男性18例,女性16例,中位年龄58(30~78)岁,病变位于右半结肠6例、左半结肠17例、直肠11例。内镜下观察息肉形态属山田Ⅰ型7例、山田Ⅱ型8例、山田Ⅲ型17例、山田Ⅳ型2例;内镜切除方法包括内镜下黏膜切除术(EMR)20例、内镜黏膜下剥离术(ESD)6例、内镜下黏膜分块切除术(EPMR)以及圈套器套扎切除术各4例。追加外科手术的指征包括可疑黏膜下浸润21例(61.8%)、基底切缘距离肿瘤<1 mm 21例(61.8%)、基底切缘或侧切缘阳性10例(29.4%)、分块切除8例(23.5%)。息肉病理中判断为肿瘤侵犯黏膜肌层24例(70.6%),无患者出现淋巴脉管侵犯或肿瘤出芽。内镜切除与手术切除间隔中位时间为14 d。术后病理结果:共10例(29.4%)患者出现癌残留,包括黏膜内癌残留8例(23.5%)和T1期腺癌残留2例(5.9%);中位淋巴结检出数12(3~34)枚,无患者出现区域淋巴结转移。癌残留的危险因素包括切缘阳性和分块切除,非可疑黏膜下浸润患者均未出现T1期腺癌残留。

结论

Tis期CRC内镜下切除后病理诊断的不明确性是导致追加补救手术的主要原因,外科治疗决策中可能高估了Tis期CRC发生黏膜下浸润的风险。对于具有手术指征的Tis期结直肠癌患者,手术治疗的肿瘤学获益并不大,定期内镜复查可能是更加安全的选择。

Objective

To investigate the clinicopathological characteristics of patients treated with additional surgery after non-curative endoscopic resection for Tis colorectal cancer and estimate the application value of secondary surgery.

Methods

The clinical data of 34 patients with Tis colorectal cancer who underwent additional surgery after non-curative endoscopic resection in Gastrointestinal Cancer Center of Guangdong Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine from January 2013 to December 2021 were retrospectively collected to analyze the characteristics of endoscopic treatment, indications of additional surgery, postoperative pathological results, and the main reason leading to additional surgery.

Results

Among the 34 patients included, eighteen were male and 16 were female, with a median age of 58 years (range 30~78 years). The lesions were located in right-sided colon, left-sided colon and rectum in 6, 17, and 11 cases respectively. In accordance with Yamada classification, seven cases were classified as type Ⅰ, eight were type Ⅱ, seventeen were type Ⅲ and 2 were type Ⅳ. Endoscopic mucosal resection(EMR), endoscopic submucosal dissection(ESD) and endoscopic piecemeal mucosal resection(EPMR) were performed in 20, 6 and 4 patients respectively, and 4 patients were treated with snaring resection. The indications of additional surgery included suspicious submucosal invasion in 21 cases (61.8%), safety resection margin <1 mm in 21 cases (61.8%), positive vertical or lateral resection margin in 10 cases (29.4%) and piecemeal resection in 8 cases (23.5%). Twenty-four (70.6%) patients were diagnosed as tumor invasion of muscularis mucosa, and lymphovascular invasion or tumor budding was present in no patient. The median time between endoscopic resection and surgery was 14 days. Postoperative pathological results showed that residual tumor was present in 10 patients (29.4%) including intramucosal carcinoma 8 cases (23.5%) and T1 adenocarcinoma in 2 cases (5.9%). The median number of total retrieved lymph nodes was 12 (range 3~34), and there was no patient confirmed lymph node metastasis. The risk factors for residual tumor included positive resection margin and piecemeal resection.

Conclusions

The ambiguous pathological diagnosis after endoscopic resection is the main reason leading to additional surgery for Tis CRC. The risk of submucosal invasion might be overestimated in Tis CRC when making surgical decisions. As a result, the oncological benefit of surgical treatment was limit for Tis CRC patients with surgical indications and endoscopic surveillance might be a safer strategy.

表1 34例Tis期CRC补救手术患者的临床病理学资料[例(%)]
表2 Tis期CRC补救手术指征与癌残留的相关性分析
[1]
Rickert A, Aliyev R, Belle S, et al. Oncologic colorectal resection after endoscopic treatment of malignant polyps: does endoscopy have an adverse effect on oncologic and surgical outcomes?[J]. Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, 2014, 79(6): 951-960.
[2]
Van De Ven SE, Backes Y, Hilbink M, et al. Periprocedural adverse events after endoscopic resection of T1 colorectal carcinomas[J]. Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, 2020, 91(1): 142-152, e3.
[3]
CSOCOC. Chinese Society of Clinical Oncology (CSCO) diagnosis and treatment guidelines for colorectal cancer 2018 (English version)[J]. Chinese Journal of Cancer Research, 2019, 31(1): 117-134.
[4]
Hashiguchi Y, Muro K, Saito Y, et al. Japanese Society for Cancer of the Colon and Rectum (JSCCR) guidelines 2019 for the treatment of colorectal cancer[J]. International Journal of Clinical Oncology, 2020, 25(1): 1-42.
[5]
Argilés G, Tabernero J, Labianca R, et al. Localised colon cancer: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up[J]. Annals of Oncology: Official Journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology, 2020, 31(10): 1291-1305.
[6]
Bosman FT, Carneiro F, Hruban RH, et al. WHO classification of tumours of the digestive system[M]. World Health Organization, 2010.
[7]
Fukutomi H. Endoscopic diagnosis of protruding lesions of the stomach[J]. Iryo, 1967, 21(8): 940-946.
[8]
Overwater A, Kessels K, Elias S, et al. Endoscopic resection of high-risk T1 colorectal carcinoma prior to surgical resection has no adverse effect on long-term outcomes[J]. Gut, 2018, 67(2): 284-290.
[9]
Kitajima K, Fujimori T, Fujii S, et al. Correlations between lymph node metastasis and depth of submucosal invasion in submucosal invasive colorectal carcinoma: a Japanese collaborative study[J]. Journal of Gastroenterology, 2004, 39(6): 534-543.
[10]
Kojima M, Shimazaki H, Iwaya K, et al. Intramucosal colorectal carcinoma with invasion of the lamina propria: a study by the Japanese Society for Cancer of the Colon and Rectum[J]. Human Pathology, 2017, 66: 230-237.
[11]
Weiser M. AJCC 8th Edition: colorectal cancer[J]. Annals of Surgical Oncology, 2018, 25(6): 1454-1455.
[12]
Yao T, Shiono S. Differences in the pathological diagnosis of colorectal neoplasia between the East and the West: Present status and future perspectives from Japan[J]. Digestive Endoscopy, 2016, 28(3): 306-311.
[13]
Fenoglio CM, Kaye GI, Lane N. Distribution of human colonic lymphatics in normal, hyperplastic, and adenomatous tissue: Its relationship to metastasis from small carcinomas in pedunculated adenomas, with two case reports[J]. Gastroenterology, 1973, 64(1): 51-66.
[14]
Hashimoto H, Horiuchi H, Kurata A, et al. Intramucosal colorectal carcinoma with lymphovascular invasion: clinicopathological characteristics of nine cases[J]. Histopathology, 2019, 74(7): 1055-1066.
[15]
Nishimura M, Saito Y, Nakanishi Y, et al. Pathology definitions and resection strategies for early colorectal neoplasia: Eastern versus Western approaches in the post-Vienna era[J]. Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, 2020, 91(5): 983-988.
[16]
Bordet M, Bretagne JF, Piette C, et al. Reappraisal of the characteristics, management, and prognosis of intramucosal colorectal cancers and their comparison with T1 carcinomas[J]. Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, 2021, 93(2): 477-485.
[1] 罗青杉, 梅海涛, 郝家领, 蔡锦锋, 周润楷, 温玉刚. 连接蛋白43通过调控细胞周期抑制结直肠癌的增殖机制研究[J/OL]. 中华普通外科学文献(电子版), 2024, 18(05): 344-349.
[2] 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.
[3] 严虹霞, 王晓娟, 张毅勋. 2 型糖尿病对结直肠癌患者肿瘤标记物、临床病理及预后的影响[J/OL]. 中华结直肠疾病电子杂志, 2024, 13(06): 483-487.
[4] 赵磊, 刘文志, 林峰, 于剑, 孙铭骏, 崔佑刚, 张旭, 衣宇鹏, 于宝胜, 冯宁. 深部热疗在改善结直肠癌术后辅助化疗副反应及生活质量中的作用研究[J/OL]. 中华结直肠疾病电子杂志, 2024, 13(06): 488-493.
[5] 黄海洋, 邝永龙, 陈嘉胜. 基层医院结直肠肿瘤经自然腔道取标本手术30 例分析[J/OL]. 中华结直肠疾病电子杂志, 2024, 13(06): 510-518.
[6] 韩加刚, 王振军. 梗阻性左半结肠癌的治疗策略[J/OL]. 中华结直肠疾病电子杂志, 2024, 13(06): 450-458.
[7] 梁轩豪, 李小荣, 李亮, 林昌伟. 肠梗阻支架置入术联合新辅助化疗治疗结直肠癌急性肠梗阻的疗效及其预后的Meta 分析[J/OL]. 中华结直肠疾病电子杂志, 2024, 13(06): 472-482.
[8] 张蔚林, 王哲学, 白峻阁, 黄忠诚, 肖志刚. 利用TCGA数据库构建基于miRNA的结直肠癌列线图预后模型[J/OL]. 中华结直肠疾病电子杂志, 2024, 13(05): 381-388.
[9] 张伟伟, 陈启, 翁和语, 黄亮. 随机森林模型预测T1 期结直肠癌淋巴结转移的初步研究[J/OL]. 中华结直肠疾病电子杂志, 2024, 13(05): 389-393.
[10] 任佳琪, 刁德昌, 何自衍, 张雪阳, 唐新, 李文娟, 李洪明, 卢新泉, 易小江. 网膜融合线导向的脾曲游离技术在左半结肠癌根治术中的应用[J/OL]. 中华结直肠疾病电子杂志, 2024, 13(05): 362-367.
[11] 张迪, 王春霞, 张学东, 李发馨, 庞淅文, 陈一锋, 张维胜, 王涛. 梗阻性左半结直肠癌自膨式金属支架置入后行腹腔镜手术与开腹手术的短期临床疗效比较[J/OL]. 中华结直肠疾病电子杂志, 2024, 13(05): 375-380.
[12] 季鹏程, 鄂一民, 陆晨, 喻春钊. 循环外泌体相关生物标志物在结直肠癌诊断中的研究进展[J/OL]. 中华结直肠疾病电子杂志, 2024, 13(04): 265-273.
[13] 李佳莹, 王旭丹, 梁雪, 张雷, 李佳英. 1990~2021年中国结直肠癌死亡趋势分析[J/OL]. 中华结直肠疾病电子杂志, 2024, 13(04): 274-279.
[14] 戈伟, 陈刚. 纳米炭导航行淋巴示踪在结直肠癌TNM分期中淋巴分期价值的临床研究[J/OL]. 中华结直肠疾病电子杂志, 2024, 13(04): 288-293.
[15] 崔精, 鲍一帆, 沈晓明, 杨增辉, 高森, 鲍传庆. 结直肠癌中circMFSD12对肿瘤细胞功能及5-FU敏感性的调控[J/OL]. 中华结直肠疾病电子杂志, 2024, 13(04): 294-302.
阅读次数
全文


摘要