切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"

中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版) ›› 2020, Vol. 16 ›› Issue (03) : 346 -350. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1673-5250.2020.03.014

所属专题: 文献

论著

术前全腹CT检查对妇科恶性肿瘤盆、腹腔淋巴结转移的诊断价值
陶加英1, 唐丹1, 郄明蓉1,()   
  1. 1. 四川大学华西第二医院妇产科、出生缺陷与相关妇儿疾病教育部重点实验室,成都 610041
  • 收稿日期:2019-06-13 修回日期:2020-04-20 出版日期:2020-06-01
  • 通信作者: 郄明蓉

Diagnostic value of preoperative whole abdominal CT in diagnosis of pelvic and celiac lymph node metastasis of gynecological malignancies

Jiaying Tao1, Dan Tang1, Mingrong Qie1,()   

  1. 1. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Key Laboratory of Birth Defects and Related Diseases of Women and Children (Sichuan University), Ministry of Education, West China Second University Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041, Sichuan Province, China
  • Received:2019-06-13 Revised:2020-04-20 Published:2020-06-01
  • Corresponding author: Mingrong Qie
  • About author:
    Corresponding author: Qie Mingrong, Email:
  • Supported by:
    National Natural Science Foundation of China(81572573)
引用本文:

陶加英, 唐丹, 郄明蓉. 术前全腹CT检查对妇科恶性肿瘤盆、腹腔淋巴结转移的诊断价值[J]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2020, 16(03): 346-350.

Jiaying Tao, Dan Tang, Mingrong Qie. Diagnostic value of preoperative whole abdominal CT in diagnosis of pelvic and celiac lymph node metastasis of gynecological malignancies[J]. Chinese Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Pediatrics(Electronic Edition), 2020, 16(03): 346-350.

目的

探讨肿瘤切除术前全腹CT检查,对妇科恶性肿瘤盆、腹腔淋巴结转移的诊断价值。

方法

选择2018年3月1日至12月31日,于四川大学华西第二医院接受诊治的275例妇科恶性肿瘤患者为研究对象。术前,对其均进行全腹CT+增强CT检查。对CT检查结果显示淋巴结最短直径≥10 mm、淋巴结中心性坏死、淋巴结融合或成簇聚集3项中符合任意一项者,判断为有淋巴结转移。以术后切除淋巴结的组织病理学检查结果,作为诊断淋巴结转移的"金标准"。分析CT诊断妇科恶性肿瘤患者盆、腹腔淋巴结转移的敏感度、特异度、阳性预测值、阴性预测值及准确度等指标。本研究遵循的程序符合2013年修订的《世界医学协会赫尔辛基宣言》。所有患者签署知情同意书。

结果

①275例患者中,宫颈癌患者为169例(61.5%),子宫内膜癌为67例(24.4%),卵巢癌为29例(10.5%)。②术前CT诊断妇科恶性肿瘤患者盆、腹腔淋巴结转移的敏感度为31.0%,特异度为96.6%,阳性预测值为61.9%,阴性预测值为88.6%,准确度为86.5%。③术中对患者盆、腹腔探查结果显示,86例见淋巴结肿大、变硬,其中仅21例患者的切除淋巴结,经术后组织病理学检查,被确诊为淋巴结转移;另外21例患者经术后组织病理学检查,被确诊有淋巴结转移,但术中探查时,未发现淋巴结肿大、融合等异常。

结论

妇科恶性肿瘤患者术前全腹CT检查,对于诊断盆、腹腔淋巴结转移的敏感度较低,特异度较高,对术前评估淋巴结转移具有一定参考价值。

Objective

To explore value of preoperative whole abdominal CT in diagnosis of pelvic and celiac lymph node metastasis of gynecological malignancies.

Methods

From March 1 to December 31, 2018, a total of 275 women with gynecologic malignancies who were diagnosed and treated in West China Second University Hospital, Sichuan University, were chosen as research subjects. All patients received preoperative whole abdominal CT examination. The shortest diameter of lymph node ≥10 mm, or a lymph node with central necrosis, or lymph nodes fused or clustered, were defined as lymph node metastasis. Compared with the golden standard of postsurgical pathology of resected lymph nodes, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value and accuracy of CT for diagnosis of pelvic and celiac lymph node metastasis were analyzed. This study was in line with World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki revised in 2013 and informed contents were obtained from all patients.

Results

① Among 275 patients, there were 169 (61.5%) cases of cervical cancer, 67 (24.4%) cases of endometrial cancer and 29 (10.5%) cases of ovarian cancer. ② Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value and accuracy of CT for diagnosis of pelvic and celiac lymph node metastasis were 31.0%, 96.6%, 61.9%, 88.6%, 86.5%, respectively. ③ According to intraoperative exploration result, pelvic and celiac lymph nodes of 86 patients were enlarged and hardened, among them only 21 patients were diagnosed as lymph node metastasis by postsurgical histopathological examination. In addition, another 21 patients with lymph node metastasis were also confirmed by histopathological examination, but enlarged or fused lymph nodes were not found by intraoperative exploration.

Conclusions

Diagnosis of lymph node metastasis of gynecological malignancies by preoperative whole abdominal CT, its sensitivity is low and specificity is high, and it has certain reference value for preoperative evaluation of lymph node metastasis.

表1 275例妇科恶性肿瘤患者CT与组织病理学检查诊断淋巴结转移的结果(例)
[1]
Bray F, Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, et al. Global cancer statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries[J]. CA Cancer J Clin, 2018, 68(6): 394-424. DOI: 10.3322/caac.21492.
[2]
Singh N, Arif S. Histopathologic parameters of prognosis in cervical cancer - a review[J]. Int J Gynecol Cancer, 2004, 14(5): 741-750. DOI: 10.1111/j.1048-891X.2004.014504.x.
[3]
Manetta A, Delgado G, Petrilli E, et al. The significance of paraaortic node status in carcinoma of the cervix and endometrium[J]. Gynecol Oncol, 1986, 23(3): 284-290. DOI: 10.1016/0090-8258(86)90128-9.
[4]
Kumar S, Podratz KC, Bakkum-Gamez JN, et al. Prospective assessment of the prevalence of pelvic, paraaortic and high paraaortic lymph node metastasis in endometrial cancer[J]. Gynecol Oncol, 2014, 132(1): 38-43. DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2013.10.002.
[5]
Castellino RA, Marglin SI. Imaging of abdominal and pelvic lymph nodes: lymphography or computed tomography?[J]. Invest Radiol, 1982, 17(5): 433-443. DOI: 10.1097/00004424-198209000-00001.
[6]
Eisenhauer EA, Therasse P, Bogaerts J, et al. New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1)[J]. Eur J Cancer, 2009, 45(2): 228-247. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejca.2008.10.026.
[7]
Schwartz LH, Bogaerts J, Ford R, et al. Evaluation of lymph nodes with RECIST 1.1[J]. Eur J Cancer, 2009, 45(2): 261-267. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejca.2008.10.028.
[8]
Benedetti Panici P, Basile S, Angioli R. Pelvic and aortic lymphadenectomy in cervical cancer: the standardization of surgical procedure and its clinical impact[J]. Gynecol Oncol, 2009, 113(2): 284-290. DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2008.12.014.
[9]
Koh WJ, Abu-Rustum NR, Bean S, et al. Cervical cancer, version 3. 2019, NCCN clinical practice guidelines in oncology[J]. J Natl Compr Canc Netw, 2019, 17(1): 64-84. DOI: 10.6004/jnccn.2019.0001
[10]
ASTEC study group, Kitchener H, Swart AM, et al. Efficacy of systematic pelvic lymphadenectomy in endometrial cancer (MRC ASTEC trial): a randomised study[J]. Lancet, 2009, 373(9658): 125-136. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(08)61766-3.
[11]
Benedetti Panici P, Basile S, Maneschi F, et al. Systematic pelvic lymphadenectomy vs. no lymphadenectomy in early-stage endometrial carcinoma: randomized clinical trial[J]. J Natl Cancer Inst, 2008, 100(23): 1707-1716. DOI: 10.1093/jnci/djn397.
[12]
谢玲玲,林荣春,林仲秋. 《2019 NCCN子宫肿瘤临床实践指南(第1版)》解读[J]. 中国实用妇科与产科杂志,2018, 34(12): 1372-1377. DOI: 10.19538/j.fk2018120117.
[13]
谢幸,沈源明. 再议妇科恶性肿瘤淋巴结切除适应证与争议[J]. 中国实用妇科与产科杂志,2017, 33(12): 1217-1219. DOI: 10.19538/j.fk2017120101.
[14]
Armstrong DK, Alvarez RD, Bakkum-Gamez JN, et al. NCCN guidelines insights: ovarian cancer, version 1. 2019[J]. J Natl Compr Canc Netw, 2019, 17(8): 896-909. DOI: 10.6004/jnccn.2019.0039.
[15]
Ogino I, Okamoto N, Andoh K, et al. Analysis of prognostic factors in stageⅡB - ⅣA cervical carcinoma treated with radiation therapy: value of computed tomography[J]. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys, 1997, 37(5): 1071-1077. DOI: 10.1016/s0360-3016(96)00599-8.
[16]
Yang WT, Lam WW, Yu MY, et al. Comparison of dynamic helical CT and dynamic MR imaging in the evaluation of pelvic lymph nodes in cervical carcinoma[J]. AJR Am J Roentgenol, 2000, 175(3): 759-766. DOI: 10.2214/ajr.175.3.1750759.
[17]
高克非,刘富元,冯艳玲,等. 子宫颈癌盆腔淋巴结转移的术前CT评价[J]. 临床肿瘤学杂志,2004, 9(6): 578-580, 585. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1009-0460.2004.06.006.
[18]
Jung W, Park KR, Lee KJ, et al. Value of imaging study in predicting pelvic lymph node metastases of uterine cervical cancer[J]. Radiat Oncol J, 2017, 35(4): 340-348. DOI: 10.3857/roj.2017.00206.
[1] 魏莹, 赵朕龙, 彭丽丽, 李妍, 卢乃聪, 伍洁, 于明安. 淋巴联合静脉超声造影对甲状腺乳头状癌颈部淋巴结转移的诊断价值[J]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2022, 19(08): 761-766.
[2] 晏晴艳, 雍晓梅, 罗洪, 杜敏. 成都地区老年转移性乳腺癌的预后及生存因素研究[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 636-638.
[3] 王晓燕, 肖佑, 肖戈, 王真权. 老年结直肠癌肺转移CT特征及高危因素研究[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(05): 506-509.
[4] 于恒, 陆晓峰, 宋鹏, 毛永欢, 孙锋, 艾世超, 王峰, 陶亮, 胡琼源, 王萌, 刘颂, 王琼, 沈晓菲, 管文贤. 胃癌肝转移危险因素分析及预测模型构建[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(04): 375-379.
[5] 郭伟林, 李运涛, 尚培中, 李晓武, 李伟. 胰腺癌S100A4和Midkine表达研究[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(02): 149-152.
[6] 康海, 谭武宾, 周松, 毛正, 米泽振, 李铁求. 膀胱癌根治术后阴茎转移一例报告[J]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(05): 523-525.
[7] 王振国, 谢正宇, 圣磊, 田径. 彩色多普勒超声联合多层螺旋CT诊断腹股沟斜疝、直疝及股疝的价值[J]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(03): 330-333.
[8] 黄承路, 廖飞, 刘显平, 王志强. 血清外泌体Has_circ_0060937过度表达与NSCLC转移和不良预后的关系[J]. 中华肺部疾病杂志(电子版), 2023, 16(04): 490-494.
[9] 吴亚婷, 张胜行, 王水良. RNA m6A甲基化修饰调控异常在乳腺癌转移中作用的研究新进展[J]. 中华细胞与干细胞杂志(电子版), 2023, 13(01): 45-52.
[10] 王迪, 吕少诚, 黄金灿, 潘飞, 姜涛, 郎韧. 肺腺癌胰腺转移伴门静脉侵犯一例[J]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2023, 12(04): 457-460.
[11] 杨豆, 晋云, 王峻峰, 胡苹苹, 杨超, 韦翔曦. 腹腔镜超声引导下微波消融术在结直肠癌肝转移中的应用[J]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2023, 12(01): 114-116.
[12] 吴峻立, 苗毅. 胰腺神经内分泌肿瘤肝转移术前评估和外科治疗策略[J]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2023, 12(01): 6-10.
[13] 李兆, 张颖, 宋彦呈, 李兆鹏, 刘曙光, 郭栋, 陈栋, 李宇. 构建预测结直肠癌肝转移术后患者生存的列线图模型[J]. 中华结直肠疾病电子杂志, 2023, 12(04): 311-318.
[14] 吴志杰, 袁紫旭, 蔡建, 柯嘉, 王辉. 腹膜转移癌诊疗决策中评分系统的研究进展[J]. 中华结直肠疾病电子杂志, 2023, 12(01): 75-78.
[15] 李翠园, 刘骞. 回肠造口旁腹壁伤口裂开一例并文献复习[J]. 中华结直肠疾病电子杂志, 2023, 12(01): 79-84.
阅读次数
全文


摘要