中华耳鼻咽喉头颈外科杂志
中華耳鼻嚥喉頭頸外科雜誌
중화이비인후두경외과잡지
CHINESE JOURNAL OF OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY HEAD AND NECK SURGERY
2011年
9期
733-737
,共5页
张浏阳%周旋%姚晓峰%张强%张仑
張瀏暘%週鏇%姚曉峰%張彊%張崙
장류양%주선%요효봉%장강%장륜
甲状腺肿瘤%癌,乳头状%淋巴转移%颈淋巴结清扫术
甲狀腺腫瘤%癌,乳頭狀%淋巴轉移%頸淋巴結清掃術
갑상선종류%암,유두상%림파전이%경림파결청소술
Thyroid neoplasms%Carcinoma,papillary%Lymphatic metastasis%Neck dissection
目的 分析甲状腺乳头状癌Ⅱ区淋巴结隐匿性转移的相关因素。方法 回顾分析天津医科大学附属肿瘤医院头颈外科2003年1月至2009年12月收治的213例术前Ⅱ区淋巴结临床阴性,颈侧其他区阳性的初治甲状腺乳头状癌患者的临床资料。淋巴清扫标本经病理证实颈侧区(Ⅱ~Ⅴ)有淋巴转移。单因素和多因素分析分别采用卡方检验和二分类Logistic回归分析。结果 颈部Ⅵ区淋巴结转移率79.3%( 169/213),Ⅲ、Ⅳ、Ⅴ区淋巴结转移率分别为83.6%( 178/213)、75.1% (160/213)、13.1% (28/213),Ⅱ区隐匿性淋巴结转移率为16.0%(34/213)。单因素分析显示:术前颈侧区Ⅲ、Ⅳ区淋巴结同时阳性或者术前Ⅲ区淋巴结阳性,与Ⅱ区淋巴结隐匿性转移密切相关(x2值分别为11.120和5.614,P值均<0.05);多因素分析显示术前颈侧区Ⅲ、Ⅳ区淋巴结同时阳性是隐匿性Ⅱ区淋巴转移的独立危险因素(P=0.033,OR =3.846)。结论 甲状腺乳头状癌患者术前未发现Ⅱ区和Ⅲ区淋巴结阳性时,可以考虑暂时不进行预防性Ⅱ区颈淋巴清扫术。
目的 分析甲狀腺乳頭狀癌Ⅱ區淋巴結隱匿性轉移的相關因素。方法 迴顧分析天津醫科大學附屬腫瘤醫院頭頸外科2003年1月至2009年12月收治的213例術前Ⅱ區淋巴結臨床陰性,頸側其他區暘性的初治甲狀腺乳頭狀癌患者的臨床資料。淋巴清掃標本經病理證實頸側區(Ⅱ~Ⅴ)有淋巴轉移。單因素和多因素分析分彆採用卡方檢驗和二分類Logistic迴歸分析。結果 頸部Ⅵ區淋巴結轉移率79.3%( 169/213),Ⅲ、Ⅳ、Ⅴ區淋巴結轉移率分彆為83.6%( 178/213)、75.1% (160/213)、13.1% (28/213),Ⅱ區隱匿性淋巴結轉移率為16.0%(34/213)。單因素分析顯示:術前頸側區Ⅲ、Ⅳ區淋巴結同時暘性或者術前Ⅲ區淋巴結暘性,與Ⅱ區淋巴結隱匿性轉移密切相關(x2值分彆為11.120和5.614,P值均<0.05);多因素分析顯示術前頸側區Ⅲ、Ⅳ區淋巴結同時暘性是隱匿性Ⅱ區淋巴轉移的獨立危險因素(P=0.033,OR =3.846)。結論 甲狀腺乳頭狀癌患者術前未髮現Ⅱ區和Ⅲ區淋巴結暘性時,可以攷慮暫時不進行預防性Ⅱ區頸淋巴清掃術。
목적 분석갑상선유두상암Ⅱ구림파결은닉성전이적상관인소。방법 회고분석천진의과대학부속종류의원두경외과2003년1월지2009년12월수치적213례술전Ⅱ구림파결림상음성,경측기타구양성적초치갑상선유두상암환자적림상자료。림파청소표본경병리증실경측구(Ⅱ~Ⅴ)유림파전이。단인소화다인소분석분별채용잡방검험화이분류Logistic회귀분석。결과 경부Ⅵ구림파결전이솔79.3%( 169/213),Ⅲ、Ⅳ、Ⅴ구림파결전이솔분별위83.6%( 178/213)、75.1% (160/213)、13.1% (28/213),Ⅱ구은닉성림파결전이솔위16.0%(34/213)。단인소분석현시:술전경측구Ⅲ、Ⅳ구림파결동시양성혹자술전Ⅲ구림파결양성,여Ⅱ구림파결은닉성전이밀절상관(x2치분별위11.120화5.614,P치균<0.05);다인소분석현시술전경측구Ⅲ、Ⅳ구림파결동시양성시은닉성Ⅱ구림파전이적독립위험인소(P=0.033,OR =3.846)。결론 갑상선유두상암환자술전미발현Ⅱ구화Ⅲ구림파결양성시,가이고필잠시불진행예방성Ⅱ구경림파청소술。
Objective To analyze the relavent factors occult Ⅱ lymph node metastases in papillary thyroid carcinoma (PTC) with clinical factors. Methods The medical records of 213 PTC patients with clinically positive neck lymph nodes in level Ⅲ and Ⅳ, and/or Ⅴ based on preoperative ultrasonography,treated between January 2003 and December 2009 were retrospectively reviewed. All patients had no suspicion of clinical positive neck nodes in level Ⅱ. Univariate and Multivariate analysis were performed using the Pearson chi-square test or Fisher's exact test and a binary logistic regression test, respectively.Results The rate of metastasis at levels Ⅲ, Ⅳ, Ⅴ and Ⅵwas83.6% (178/213),75. 1%(160/213),13. 1%(28/213) and 79.3% ( 169/213), respectively. The rate of occult metastasis at level Ⅱ were observed in 16. 0% (34/213). In univariate analysis, lymph node metastasis in level Ⅱ was statistically significantly more frequent in patients with positive level Ⅲ lymph node and positive lymph node throughout the lateral neck ( level Ⅲ + Ⅳ, x2 were 11. 120 and 5. 614 respectively, P < 0. 05 ). Multivariate analysis showed that positive lymph node involvement in all lateral neck ( level Ⅲ + Ⅳ ) was an independent predictive factor of level Ⅱ lymph node metastasis ( P = 0. 033, OR = 3. 846). Conclusion In PTC patients without suspicious lymph node in neck level Ⅱ and Ⅲ by preoperative US, prophylactic level Ⅱ lymph node dissection may not be considered.