浸润性乳腺癌腋窝淋巴结活检:FNAB与CNB的诊断价值比较
本文选题:乳腺癌 + 超声 ; 参考:《山东大学》2016年博士论文
【摘要】:目的:乳腺癌是女性常见的恶性肿瘤之一,也是女性恶性肿瘤致死的主要原因。超声是筛查或诊断乳腺疾病常用的影像学检查手段,其诊断技术不断地改进和提高。超声引导的干预措施,增加了确切的腋窝淋巴结转移的检出率,但是,超声诊断可能受限于医生的主观因素从而影响诊断效果。由于超声检查非常低的敏感性和特异性,不能足够准确的进行乳腺癌患者术前的腋窝淋巴结分期。病理结果是确定肿瘤是否恶性的最准确的依据,病理检查技术不断发展,在前哨淋巴结活检和微创活检技术尚未被应用到临床实践前,医师通常都会选择手术活检及快速冰冻病理的方式以确诊乳腺癌后行改良根治术,但会带给患者巨大身心痛苦。随着广大女性对生活质量要求的提高,微创活检技术应运而生。对于乳腺原发肿瘤,细针穿刺和空芯针穿刺是应用最为广泛的乳腺微创活检技术,其主要特点体现在准确率高、速度快、伤口小、并发症少、成本低等,因此受到临床医师的广泛欢迎并迅速普及开来。随着超声引导下腋窝淋巴结活检技术的引进,无论是细针穿刺活检(fine-needle aspiration biopsy,FNAB)还是空芯针穿刺活检(core-needle biopsy,CNB),均提高了腋窝淋巴结超声检查的敏感性。超声引导下腋窝淋巴结细针穿刺活检(FNAB)和空芯针穿刺活检(CNB)也可提高超声检查在腋窝淋巴结方面的特异度。本研究拟探讨超声引导下初次诊治的浸润性乳腺癌患者腋窝淋巴结细针穿刺活检(FNAB)和空芯针穿刺活检(CNB)的诊断价值。同时,分析判断术前CNB及FNAB腋窝淋巴结标本能否反映术后手术切除乳腺原发肿瘤组织标本的雌激素受体(ER)、孕激素受体(PR)、人表皮生长因子受体-2(Her-2)表达状况。材料与方法:本课题选取我院2009年09月至2015年8月符合纳入标准的所有初诊浸润性乳腺癌患者参加我们的研究。最终共184例患者入组,188例腋窝进行腋窝超声评价(四例为双侧乳腺病变)。超声检查特别注意位于腋尾部的前哨淋巴结的典型位置。从最可疑的腋窝淋巴结获取活检样本,并对其进行组织病理学评价。以术后病理结果为诊断金标准,比较两种方法对腋窝淋巴结术前分期的诊断价值。收集47例CNB、FNAB及原发灶病理均有免疫组织化学(IHC)结果的病例,并进行术前腋窝淋巴结与术后原发灶ER、PR、HER-2的IHC结果比较。结果:对188例腋窝进行超声检查,共有66例(35.1%)腋窝淋巴结符合纳入标准并同时进行了FNAB和CNB。行CNB者,45例腋窝淋巴结为阳性转移,21例为阴性或者取样不足。而行FNAB者,37例腋窝淋巴结为阳性转移,29例为阴性或取样不足。其中8例腋窝淋巴结CNB正确识别阳性转移,而FNAB显示为阴性。无FNAB结果阳性而CNB结果阴性的病例。所有患者中,45例活检提示阳性淋巴结转移的直接行腋窝淋巴结清扫手术(axillary lymph node dissection,ALND)或行新辅助化疗后行保乳治疗,其余143例则行前哨淋巴结活检(Sentinel lymph node biopsy, SLNB),最终另外38例仍需行腋窝淋巴结清扫手术,最终结果显示淋巴结转移阳性患者共为83例。最终的组织病理学分析表明,83/188(44.1%)腋窝淋巴结转移(72例宏转移,11例微转移)。超声引导CNB确定了45/83的腋窝淋巴结转移,FNAB确定了37/83的腋窝淋巴结转移,前哨淋巴结活检则确定了剩余的38例阳性转移。CNB含有6个假阴性结果,FNAB则为14个。两种方法之间差异显著(P0.05)。有微转移的腋窝中,仅有1例进行了上述术前超声引导下腋窝淋巴结活检,结果使用两种腋窝淋巴结活检技术均提示腋窝淋巴结转移阴性。如果再次统计分析,把微转移解释为转移阴性,FNAB和CNB的敏感性会略有增加,分别为74%和90%,但方法之间的差异仍然显著(P0.05)。对腋窝淋巴结行CNB后检测ER、PR、Her-2与术后原发灶检测结果比较,诊断一致率分别为93.6%、91.5%、97.9%。对腋窝淋巴结进行FNAB后检测ER、PR、 Her-2与术后原发灶检测结果比较,诊断一致率分别为97.9%、95.7%、97.9%。结论:对新诊断的乳腺癌患者腋窝淋巴结行准确术前分期时,CNB比FNAB更敏感,提倡作为乳腺癌腋窝淋巴结一线的活检方法,从而减少或替代不必要的前哨淋巴结活检,指导进一步治疗的选择,具有很高的临床应用价值。对腋窝淋巴结行CNB后检测ER、PR、Her-2与术后原发灶检测结果有较好的一致性(p0.05)。对腋窝淋巴结进行FNAB后检测ER、PR、Her-2与术后原发灶检测结果也有较好的一致性(p0.05)。
[Abstract]:Objective: breast cancer is one of the common malignant tumors in women and the main cause of death in female malignant tumors. Ultrasound is a common imaging method for screening or diagnosis of breast diseases. Its diagnostic techniques are constantly improved and improved. Ultrasound guided interventions increase the detection rate of axillary lymph node metastases, but, super Acoustic diagnosis may be limited to the subjective factors of the doctor and affect the diagnosis. Due to the very low sensitivity and specificity of ultrasound examination, the preoperative axillary lymph node staging is not accurate enough for breast cancer patients. The pathological results are the most accurate basis for determining the malignancy of the tumor, and the pathological examination technology is developing continuously and in the outpost. Before the application of knot biopsy and minimally invasive biopsy to clinical practice, physicians usually choose surgical biopsy and rapid frozen pathology to make modified radical mastectomy for the diagnosis of breast cancer, but it will bring great physical and mental pain to the patients. With the improvement of the quality of life for women, minimally invasive biopsy technique arises at the historic moment. Adenocarcinoma, fine needle puncture and hollow needle puncture are the most widely used minimally invasive biopsy techniques. The main features are high accuracy, fast speed, small wound, less complications and low cost. Therefore, it is widely welcomed by clinicians and is popularized rapidly. With the introduction of axillary lymph node biopsy technique under ultrasound guidance, Both fine needle biopsy (fine-needle aspiration biopsy, FNAB) or hollow needle aspiration biopsy (core-needle biopsy, CNB) enhanced the sensitivity of axillary lymph node ultrasonography. Ultrasound guided fine needle aspiration biopsy of axillary lymph nodes (FNAB) and hollow needle puncture biopsy (CNB) can also improve the axillary lymph nodes. The purpose of this study is to explore the diagnostic value of axillary lymph node biopsy (FNAB) and hollow needle aspiration biopsy (CNB) for the first diagnosis of invasive breast cancer under ultrasound guidance. At the same time, the analysis of CNB and FNAB axillary lymph nodes before operation can reflect the estrogen of the primary breast tumor tissue specimen after operation. The expression of receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR) and human epidermal growth factor receptor -2 (Her-2). Materials and methods: this subject selected all of the first diagnosed invasive breast cancer patients in our hospital from 09 months to August 2015 2009 to participate in our study. A total of 184 patients were enrolled in the group, and 188 axillary fossa were evaluated by axillary ultrasound (four cases). Ultrasound examination paid special attention to the typical position of the sentinel lymph nodes located at the tail of the axillary. Biopsy samples were obtained from the most suspected axillary lymph nodes, and the histopathological evaluation was made. The diagnostic value of the two methods for the preoperative staging of axillary lymph node was compared with the postoperative pathological results. 47 cases of CNB, F were collected. NAB and primary pathology have immunohistochemical (IHC) results, and the preoperative axillary lymph node and the primary focus of ER, PR, HER-2 IHC results. Results: 188 cases of axillary ultrasound examination, a total of 66 cases (35.1%) of axillary lymph nodes conformed to the inclusion criteria and simultaneous FNAB and CNB. CNB, 45 cases of axillary lymph nodes For positive metastasis, 21 cases were negative or lack of sampling. In FNAB, 37 cases of axillary lymph nodes were positive, 29 cases were negative or lack of sampling. Among them, 8 cases of axillary lymph nodes were correctly identified with positive metastasis, and FNAB showed negative. No FNAB positive but negative CNB results. 45 cases with positive lymph node biopsy suggested positive lymph nodes. The metastatic direct axillary lymph node dissection (axillary lymph node dissection, ALND) or new adjuvant chemotherapy was performed after breast conserving treatment. The remaining 143 cases underwent sentinel lymph node biopsy (Sentinel lymph node biopsy, SLNB), and the other 38 cases still needed axillary lymph node dissection. The final result showed positive lymph node metastases. A total of 83 cases. The final histopathological analysis showed that 83/188 (44.1%) axillary lymph node metastases (72 cases of macrometastasis, 11 micrometastases). Ultrasound guided CNB to determine the axillary lymph node metastasis of 45/83, FNAB determined the axillary lymph node metastasis of 37/83, and the sentinel lymph node biopsy confirmed the remaining 38 positive metastatic.CNB containing 6 false negative nodes. Fruit, FNAB was 14. The difference between the two methods was significant (P0.05). Only 1 cases of axillary lymph node biopsy under the ultrasound-guided axillary lymph node with micrometastases were performed, and the axillary lymph node metastasis was negative with two axillary lymph node biopsy techniques. If again, the micrometastasis was interpreted as negative transfer, FNAB and The sensitivity of CNB increased slightly, 74% and 90%, respectively, but the difference between the methods was still significant (P0.05). The detection of ER, PR and Her-2 after CNB for axillary lymph nodes was 93.6%, 91.5%, respectively, and 97.9%. was used to detect ER in axillary lymph nodes after FNAB, and PR, Her-2 and postoperative primary detection results were compared. The diagnostic consistency was 97.9%, 95.7%, 97.9%., respectively. Conclusion: CNB is more sensitive than FNAB for the accurate preoperative staging of axillary lymph nodes in newly diagnosed breast cancer patients. It is advocated as a biopsy of the breast cancer axillary lymph nodes, thereby reducing or replacing unnecessary sentinel lymph node biopsy, guiding the choice of further treatment. High clinical value. The detection of ER, PR, Her-2 after CNB for axillary lymph node was better conconformance (P0.05). After FNAB in axillary lymph nodes, ER, PR, Her-2 were also found to be in good agreement with the results of post operation detection (P0.05).
【学位授予单位】:山东大学
【学位级别】:博士
【学位授予年份】:2016
【分类号】:R737.9
【相似文献】
相关期刊论文 前10条
1 聂梅兰;吴璇昭;陈刚;徐忠敏;;手术治疗婴幼儿腋窝淋巴结结核24例[J];贵阳医学院学报;2009年05期
2 张海燕;刘安丽;;腋窝淋巴结结核临床病理分析与探讨[J];中国实用医药;2010年05期
3 姜艳华;朱霖;李慧友;谢玉兵;;腋窝淋巴结移植的应用解剖[J];临床军医杂志;2005年06期
4 徐秋华;燕山;袁方;周辉红;陆林国;;乳腺浸润性导管癌的彩超研究[J];中国超声医学杂志;2008年05期
5 张玉晶;孙冠青;陈娟;陈静;黄晓波;林焕新;胡永红;刘孟忠;杨名添;管迅行;;腋窝淋巴结1~3个转移的早期乳腺癌根治术后局部复发和生存预后因素的研究[J];癌症;2009年04期
6 方笑雷;王丽君;;乳癌患者腋窝淋巴结受累与妊娠次数有关[J];国外医学(肿瘤学分册);1992年04期
7 惠周光,李晔雄,吴君心,余子豪;乳腺癌术后腋窝淋巴结数对放射治疗的指导意义[J];中华放射肿瘤学杂志;2001年03期
8 张晨芳;田浩;丁洪亮;唐新智;李黎;李芬;柯永莉;;运用局部肿胀技术切除腋窝淋巴结的术式探讨[J];临床外科杂志;2008年06期
9 范林军;钟玲;郭德玉;贺青卿;姜军;;纳米炭对乳腺癌腋窝淋巴结示踪效果及其安全性的初步研究[J];中华乳腺病杂志(电子版);2010年03期
10 傅振坤;左腋窝淋巴结结石1例[J];实用外科杂志;1993年02期
相关会议论文 前10条
1 徐秋华;燕山;袁方;周辉红;陆林国;;乳腺浸润性导管癌的彩超研究[A];中国超声医学工程学会第二次全国浅表器官及外周血管超声医学学术会议论文汇编[C];2009年
2 骆成玉;;乳腔镜腋窝淋巴结切除手术的解剖与技术[A];全国乳腺疾病诊治防高级研修班讲义[C];2004年
3 骆成玉;;乳腔镜腋窝淋巴结清扫术的标准化手术技术[A];第二届全国乳腺癌诊断治疗与预防高研班参考资料[C];2005年
4 ;内镜在腋窝淋巴结清扫术中的应用(附2例报告)[A];浙江省微创外科学术交流会暨浙江省医学会微创外科学分会成立大会论文汇编[C];2008年
5 丛新丽;马玉香;;乳癌患者腋窝淋巴结的彩色多普勒显像[A];中华医学会第六次全国超声医学学术年会论文汇编[C];2001年
6 谷英士;李颖嘉;张霞;王冬晓;位红芹;洪少馥;;超声弹性成像在判断乳腺癌腋窝淋巴结性质中的应用[A];中华医学会第十三次全国超声医学学术会议论文汇编[C];2013年
7 吴媚;曾俊;;100例乳腺腔镜腋窝淋巴结清扫术的配合[A];全国第十一届手术室护理学术交流暨专题讲座会议论文汇编(下)[C];2007年
8 吴媚;曾俊;;100例乳腺腔镜腋窝淋巴结清扫术的配合[A];全国外科、神经内外科护理学术交流暨专题讲座会议论文汇编[C];2007年
9 狄根红;;乳癌患者腋窝淋巴结软组织浸润对预后的影响[A];2000全国肿瘤学术大会论文集[C];2000年
10 朱樱;周伟;姚洁洁;胡峗峗;周建桥;董屹婕;詹维伟;;超声及超声引导下细针穿刺对乳腺癌患者术前腋窝淋巴结的评估价值[A];中华医学会第十三次全国超声医学学术会议论文汇编[C];2013年
相关重要报纸文章 前5条
1 骆成玉;从生理微创到心理微创[N];健康报;2004年
2 聂松义 蒋长兴;哨兵淋巴结定位活检意义重大[N];中国医药报;2002年
3 戴毅;疲劳是不是一种病?[N];江苏科技报;2004年
4 ;上海采用“一步法”治疗乳腺癌[N];中国高新技术产业导报;2001年
5 记者 杨步月;专家:乳腺癌患者应避免过度治疗[N];新华每日电讯;2008年
相关博士学位论文 前7条
1 周美琪;乳腺癌腋窝淋巴结术前评估流程的优化[D];浙江大学;2015年
2 王玉龙;超声定位可疑淋巴结取样在早期乳腺癌手术中的临床研究[D];山东大学;2015年
3 孙勇;浸润性乳腺癌腋窝淋巴结活检:FNAB与CNB的诊断价值比较[D];山东大学;2016年
4 陆南杭;VEGF-C基因修饰的淋巴结移植促进淋巴管再生的初步研究[D];复旦大学;2012年
5 张斌;淋巴结阳性乳腺癌预后因素分析及决策树预后模型的构建[D];天津医科大学;2008年
6 谢立|;呼吸道和乳腺肿瘤放疗地位的研究[D];复旦大学;2013年
7 闫茂慧;放疗在乳腺癌术后应用的系统评价[D];中南大学;2012年
相关硕士学位论文 前10条
1 李帅;乳腺癌保乳术后1~3个腋窝淋巴结阳性患者锁骨上淋巴结复发率及风险分析[D];北京协和医学院;2015年
2 张永松;纳米炭在乳腺癌腋窝淋巴结应用的实验与临床研究[D];第三军医大学;2015年
3 马晓放;青海省乳癌患者分子分型与腋窝淋巴结关系[D];青海大学;2016年
4 杜北珏;64排128层螺旋CT及多平面重组技术对乳腺癌腋窝淋巴结的术前评估价值[D];安徽医科大学;2014年
5 晏丹;乳腺癌腋窝淋巴结清扫术的应用解剖学研究[D];南华大学;2005年
6 张强;超声造影对乳腺癌腋窝淋巴结良恶性鉴别诊断价值及淋巴结转移的相关因素分析[D];苏州大学;2014年
7 黄燕萍;腋窝淋巴结检测数目对乳腺癌术后无病生存的影响[D];广西医科大学;2011年
8 王卿炜;乳腺癌腋窝淋巴结清扫术中经腋静脉分支植入静脉输液港的应用研究[D];福建医科大学;2011年
9 王洛昆;前哨淋巴结活检术和腋窝淋巴结清扫术治疗乳腺癌的系统评价[D];新疆医科大学;2012年
10 赵璐;乳腺癌腋窝淋巴结清扫术中保留助间臂神经的临床意义[D];新疆医科大学;2012年
,本文编号:2101036
本文链接:https://www.wllwen.com/yixuelunwen/zlx/2101036.html