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) ›› 2025, Vol. 21 ›› Issue (04) : 403 -410. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1673-5250.2025.04.005

论著

晚期上皮性卵巢癌手术复杂度与术后肿瘤残留病灶及并发症的相关性分析
阎昊铮, 黄玥, 李征宇()   
  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:2025-01-05 修回日期:2025-07-03 出版日期:2025-08-01
  • 通信作者: 李征宇

Correlation between surgical complexity, residual disease, and postoperative complications in advanced epithelial ovarian cancer

Haozheng Yan, Yue Huang, Zhengyu Li()   

  1. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Key Laboratory of Birth Defects and Related Disease of Women and Children, Ministry of Education, West China Second University Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041, Sichuan Province, China
  • Received:2025-01-05 Revised:2025-07-03 Published:2025-08-01
  • Corresponding author: Zhengyu Li
  • Supported by:
    Natural Science Foundation of Sichuan Province(2023NSFSC0743)
引用本文:

阎昊铮, 黄玥, 李征宇. 晚期上皮性卵巢癌手术复杂度与术后肿瘤残留病灶及并发症的相关性分析[J/OL]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2025, 21(04): 403-410.

Haozheng Yan, Yue Huang, Zhengyu Li. Correlation between surgical complexity, residual disease, and postoperative complications in advanced epithelial ovarian cancer[J/OL]. Chinese Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Pediatrics(Electronic Edition), 2025, 21(04): 403-410.

目的

探讨采取新辅助化疗(NACT)联合中间性肿瘤细胞减灭术(IDS)治疗晚期上皮性卵巢癌(EOC)患者的手术复杂性评分(SCS)、病变评分(DS)和术后残留病变(RD)的相关性。

方法

选取2013年9月至2018年6月在四川大学华西第二医院接受NACT联合IDS治疗的160例晚期EOC患者为研究对象。采用回顾性分析方法,根据NACT联合IDS后是否达到肉眼无残留病灶(R0),将其分别纳入R0组(n=86)和RD组(n=74)。收集2组患者的一般临床资料、实验室检查结果、术中切除组织病理学结果、术后并发症发生率及预后结果等。采用Mann-Whitney U检验、Pearson χ2检验或Fisher精确概率法等对2组患者临床病例资料进行统计学分析。采用多因素非条件logistic回归分析,对晚期EOC患者IDS达R0的影响因素进行分析。采用Mantel-Haenszel χ2检验对晚期EOC患者SCS与DS进行相关性分析。采用Log-rank法对R0组与RD组患者的总体生存(OS)率进行比较。本研究经四川大学华西第二医院医学伦理委员会批准,并遵循其伦理要求(审批文号:2022伦审批第167号)。

结果

①RD组患者术前糖类抗原(CA)125水平高于R0组,并且差异有统计学意义(Z=-2.52,P=0.012)。②2组患者不同程度的DS构成比比较,差异有统计学意义(χ2=10.92,P=0.004),不同程度SCS的构成比比较,差异有统计学意义(χ2=15.41,P=0.001)。多因素非条件logistic回归分析结果显示,DS为接受IDS后达R0的独立危险因素,中DS患者接受IDS较低DS患者更难达到R0(OR=0.094, 95%CI:0.021~0.431,P=0.002),SCS为接受IDS后达R0的独立保护因素,中SCS患者接受IDS较低SCS患者更易达到R0(OR=13.660, 95%CI:2.150~86.803,P=0.006)。③Mantel-Haenszel χ2检验结果显示,晚期EOC患者的DS与SCS无趋势相关性(χ2=0.01,P=0.906)。④Log-rank检验提示2组患者生存曲线比较,差异有统计学意义(χ2=9.46,P=0.002)。⑤在术后有无并发症2组中,年龄、美国麻醉医师协会(ASA)分级、DS和SCS构成比比较,差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05)。

结论

对接受NACT联合IDS治疗的晚期EOC患者,提高手术复杂度有助于实现R0并改善患者预后,但需权衡肿瘤负荷及术后并发症风险。建议术前综合评估及进行个体化决策。

Objective

To investigate the correlation between surgical complexity score (SCS), disease score (DS), and residual disease (RD) in patients with advanced epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) undergoing interval debulking surgery (IDS), with the aim of informing individualized surgical decision-making.

Methods

A total of 160 patients with advanced EOC who underwent neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) followed by IDS at West China Second University Hospital, Sichuan University, between September 2013 and June 2018 were retrospectively analyzed. According to whether complete cytoreduction (R0) was achieved, patients were categorized into the R0 group (n=86) and the RD group (n=74). Clinical data, including baseline characteristics, histopathological findings, laboratory results, postoperative complications, and prognosis, were collected for both groups. Statistical analyses were performed using the Mann-Whitney U test, Pearson′s chi-square test, or Fisher′s exact test, as appropriate, to compare clinical variables between the two groups. Multivariate unconditional logistic regression analysis was conducted to identify independent factors associated with achieving R0 resection in advanced EOC patients. The Mantel-Haenszel chi-square test was used to evaluate the correlation between SCS and DS. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis with the Log-rank test was employed to compare overall survival (OS) between the R0 and RD groups. This study was approved by the Ethics Committee of West China Second University Hospital, Sichuan University, and conducted in accordance with its ethical requirements (Approval No. 2022-167).

Results

① The preoperative carbohydrate antigen 125 (CA125) level in the RD group was significantly higher than that in the R0 group (Z=-2.52, P=0.012). ② The distribution of DS grades between the two groups differed significantly was (χ2=10.92, P=0.004), the distribution of SCS between the two groups also differed significantly (χ2=15.41, P=0.001). DS was an independent risk factor for reaching R0 after receiving IDS, while SCS was an independent protective factor. Multivariate unconditional logistic regression analysis indicated that patients with moderate DS had a significantly lower likelihood of achieving R0 resection compared with those with low DS (OR=0.094, 95%CI: 0.021-0.431, P=0.002), whereas patients with moderate SCS were more likely to achieve R0 compared with those with low SCS (OR=13.660, 95%CI: 2.150-86.803, P=0.006). ③ Mantel-Haenszel χ2 test revealed no significant trend correlation between DS and SCS in patients with advanced EOC (χ2=0.01, P=0.906). ④ The Log-rank test demonstrated that the survival curves of the two groups differed significantly (χ2=9.46, P=0.002). ⑤ Comparisons of age, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) classification, DS grade, and SCS grade between patients with and without postoperative complications showed no significant differences (all P>0.05).

Conclusions

For patients with advanced EOC treated with NACT followed by IDS, increasing surgical complexity may facilitate the achievement of R0 resection and improve prognosis. However, such an approach requires careful consideration of tumor burden and the risk of postoperative complications. Preoperative comprehensive evaluation and individualized decision-making are therefore recommended.

表1 SCS的手术复杂度评分表(分)[9]
表2 本研究160例晚期EOC患者的临床资料[例数(%)]
表3 R0组与RD组晚期EOC患者临床资料比较
表4 晚期EOC患者IDS达R0的多因素非条件logistic回归分析
表5 晚期EOC患者DS与SCS的相关性分析(例)
图1 2组晚期EOC患者的OS曲线注:EOC为上皮性卵巢癌,OS为总体生存。R0组指肿瘤细胞减灭术中无肉眼可见残留病灶,RD组指肿瘤细胞减灭术中有肉眼可见残留病灶
表6 160例晚期EOC患者IDS后30 d内有无并发症者的临床资料比较
[1]
何欣林,阎昊铮,赵亦非,等. 新辅助化疗联合间歇性肿瘤细胞减灭术对上皮性卵巢癌患者预后及血清学与影像学指标对患者预后的预测价值[J/OL]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版)202420(1):47-57. DOI: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1673-5250.2024.01.007.
[2]
董静,熊伟. 卵巢癌手术患者预后的危险因素分析[J].当代医学202228(12):143-145. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1009-4393.2022.12.050.
[3]
National Comprehensive Cancer Network. (NCCN) Clinical practice guidelines in oncology. Ovarian cancer/fallopian tube cancer/primary peritoneal cancer version: 1.2025 (EB/OL). [2025-04-18].

URL    
[4]
中国抗癌协会妇科肿瘤专业委员会. 卵巢恶性肿瘤诊断与治疗指南(2021年版) [J].中国癌症杂志2021, 31(6): 490-500. DOI: 10.19401/j.cnki.1007-3639.2021.06.07.
[5]
Bristow RE, Tomacruz RS, Armstrong DK, et al. Survival effect of maximal cytoreductive surgery for advanced ovarian carcinoma during the platinum era: a Meta-analysis [J]. J Clin Oncol, 2023, 41(25): 4065-4076. DOI: 10.1200/JCO.22.02765.
[6]
Horowitz NS, Miller A, Rungruang B, et al. Does aggressive surgery improve outcomes? Interaction between preoperative disease burden and complex surgery in patients with advanced-stage ovarian cancer: an analysis of GOG 182 [J]. J Clin Oncol, 2015, 33(8): 937-943. DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2014.56.3106.
[7]
Kalampokas E, Young H, Bednarek A, et al. Surgical outcomes and morbidity after radical surgery for ovarian cancer in Aberdeen Royal Infirmary, the Northeast of Scotland Gynaecologic Oncology Centre [J]. Anticancer Res, 2018, 38(2): 923-928. DOI: 10.21873/anticanres.12304.
[8]
Winter WE, Maxwell GL, Tian C, et al. Tumor residual after surgical cytoreduction in prediction of clinical outcome in stage Ⅳ epithelial ovarian cancer: a Gynecologic Oncology Group Study [J]. J Clin Oncol, 2008, 26(1): 83-89. DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2007.13.1953.
[9]
Aletti GD, Eisenhauer EL, Santillan A, et al. Identification of patient groups at highest risk from traditional approach to ovarian cancer treatment [J]. Gynecol Oncol, 2011, 120(1): 23-28. DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2010.09.010.
[10]
Lee YJ, Lee JY, Nam EJ, et al. Rethinking radical surgery in interval debulking surgery for advanced-stage ovarian cancer patients undergoing neoadjuvant chemotherapy [J]. J Clin Med, 2020, 9(4): 1235. DOI: 10.3390/jcm9041235.
[11]
Yao T, DeJong SR, McGree ME, et al. Frailty in ovarian cancer identified the need for increased postoperative care requirements following cytoreductive surgery [J]. Gynecol Oncol, 2019, 153(1): 68-73. DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2018.12.025.
[12]
Thrall MM, Goff BA, Symons RG, et al. Thirty-day mortality after primary cytoreductive surgery for advanced ovarian cancer in the elderly [J]. Obstet Gynecol, 2011, 118(3): 537-547. DOI: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e31822a6d56.
[13]
陈荟竹,郭应坤,汪昕蓉,等. 上皮性卵巢癌"二元论模型"的分子生物学研究现状[J/OL]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版)2023, 19(4):394-402. DOI:10.3877/cma.j.issn.1673-5250.2023.04.004.
[14]
Chang SJ, Bristow RE, Chi DS, et al. Role of aggressive surgical cytoreduction in advanced ovarian cancer [J]. J Gynecol Oncol, 2015, 26(4): 336-342. DOI: 10.3802/jgo.2015.26.4.336.
[15]
Tseng JH, Cowan RA, Zhou Q, et al. Continuous improvement in primary debulking surgery for advanced ovarian cancer: do increased complete gross resection rates independently lead to increased progression-free and overall survival? [J]. Gynecol Oncol, 2018, 151(1): 24-31. DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2018.08.014.
[16]
Nishikimi K, Tate S, Matsuoka A, et al. Aggressive surgery could overcome the extent of initial peritoneal dissemination for advanced ovarian, fallopian tube, and peritoneal carcinoma [J]. Sci Rep, 2020, 10(1): 21307. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-020-78296-0.
[17]
Aletti GD, Dowdy SC, Podratz KC, et al. Relationship among surgical complexity, short-term morbidity, and overall survival in primary surgery for advanced ovarian cancer [J]. Am J Obstet Gynecol, 2007, 197(6): 676. e1-e7. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2007.10.495.
[18]
Narasimhulu DM, Kumar A, Weaver AL, et al. Using an evidence-based triage algorithm to reduce 90-day mortality after primary debulking surgery for advanced epithelial ovarian cancer [J]. Gynecol Oncol, 2019, 155(1): 58-62. DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2019.08.004.
[19]
Narasimhulu DM, Kumar A, Weaver AL, et al. Less guessing, more evidence in identifying patients least fit for cytoreductive surgery in advanced ovarian cancer: a triage algorithm to individualize surgical management [J]. Gynecol Oncol, 2020, 157(3): 572-577. DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2020.03.024.
[20]
Jiang C, Li Z. Performance validation of the Mayo triage algorithm applied to individualize surgical management of advanced epithelial ovarian cancer [J]. Gynecol Oncol, 2021, 162(2): 339-344. DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2021.06.003.
[21]
Narasimhulu DM, Thannickal A, Kumar A, et al. Appropriate triage allows aggressive primary debulking surgery with rates of morbidity and mortality comparable to interval surgery after chemotherapy [J]. Gynecol Oncol, 2021, 160(3): 681-687. DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2020.12.026.
[1] 张杰, 张志扬, 聂勇, 蒋铁民. 离体肝切除联合自体肝移植的技术创新与临床应用进展[J/OL]. 中华普通外科学文献(电子版), 2025, 19(05): 351-355.
[2] 王达, 朱建敏. 血小板/淋巴细胞计数比值对乳腺癌新辅助化疗疗效的预测效能[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(06): 650-653.
[3] 王毅, 孔剑桥, 张鹏, 代扬, 李恒平. 腹腔镜超声引导十二指肠镜治疗胆囊合并胆总管结石[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(06): 658-661.
[4] 马超, 王传嘉, 张武坊. 经腋窝入路单孔腔镜保乳术与传统开放手术治疗早期乳腺癌的对比研究[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(06): 674-677.
[5] 张超, 常剑. 混合入路与中间入路行腹腔镜右半结肠癌根治术的近中期随访比较[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(06): 685-688.
[6] 王思竣, 王琼, 李珂雨, 袁新普, 张硕珉, 马睿, 谢天宇, 张朝军. 胃上部癌新辅助化疗联合免疫治疗后实施近端胃切除术的临床疗效分析[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(06): 637-641.
[7] 周丽君, 李姣姣, 孙燕, 王露, 钱蓉. 不同吻合方式对腹腔镜辅助远端胃癌根治术患者术后恢复的影响[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(06): 642-645.
[8] 菅锎宇, 常如玉, 王达, 顼倩茹, 蒋麟, 贾宝雷, 邱宇轩, 梁峰. 进展期食管胃结合部癌不同手术方式的近期疗效研究[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(05): 517-522.
[9] 杨敏, 辛林璞, 杜峻峰. 三精准管理方案对直肠癌造口术后造口并发症的预防效果研究[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(05): 531-534.
[10] 刘小娜, 史博慧, 马晓霞, 陈瑶, 郝娜. 乳腺癌不同手术方式对术后并发症及康复影响的对比观察[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(05): 551-554.
[11] 欧阳骏骏, 蔡宝, 徐冰. 经脐单孔及常规腹腔镜阑尾切除术对阑尾炎患儿的影响[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(05): 566-569.
[12] 邓吟咏, 钟洁, 蒋理立, 杨婕. 结直肠肿瘤手术后并发症的预测与预防:基于临床研究的最新进展[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(05): 579-583.
[13] 宁国龙, 左伟, 侯强强. 两种不同手术方案治疗Meckel憩室肠重复畸形患儿的回顾性研究[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(04): 380-383.
[14] 辛林璞, 杨敏, 杜峻峰. 五定四观察循证方案对直肠癌造口患者生活质量与应用效果的影响[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(04): 409-412.
[15] 刘虎, 任振, 韦笑韩, 王书翰, 潘晨, 吴立胜. 基于心下囊解剖的腹腔镜大食管裂孔疝补片修补术单中心40例分析[J/OL]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(04): 417-421.
阅读次数
全文


摘要


AI


AI小编
你好!我是《中华医学电子期刊资源库》AI小编,有什么可以帮您的吗?