切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"

中华普通外科学文献(电子版) ›› 2013, Vol. 07 ›› Issue (06) : 447 -454. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1674-0793.2013.06.007

所属专题: 经典病例 文献

论著

经腹腔镜引导射频消融术治疗肝细胞癌78例疗效分析:附视频
陈楷1, 薛平1,(), 曹良启1, 蒋小峰1, 卢海武1, 郑强1, 温子龙1   
  1. 1. 510260 广州医科大学附属第二医院肝胆外科
  • 收稿日期:2013-06-22 出版日期:2013-12-01
  • 通信作者: 薛平
  • 基金资助:
    广东省科技计划项目(2010B031600141)

Effect of laparoscopic radiofrequency ablation for 78 cases with hepatocellular carcinoma: video attached

Kai CHEN1, Ping XUE1,(), Liang-qi CAO1, Xiao-feng JIANG1, Hai-wu LU1, Qiang ZHENG1, Zi-long WEN1   

  1. 1. Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery, the Second Affiliated Hospital, Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou 510260, China
  • Received:2013-06-22 Published:2013-12-01
  • Corresponding author: Ping XUE
  • About author:
    Corresponding author: XUE Ping, Email:
引用本文:

陈楷, 薛平, 曹良启, 蒋小峰, 卢海武, 郑强, 温子龙. 经腹腔镜引导射频消融术治疗肝细胞癌78例疗效分析:附视频[J/OL]. 中华普通外科学文献(电子版), 2013, 07(06): 447-454.

Kai CHEN, Ping XUE, Liang-qi CAO, Xiao-feng JIANG, Hai-wu LU, Qiang ZHENG, Zi-long WEN. Effect of laparoscopic radiofrequency ablation for 78 cases with hepatocellular carcinoma: video attached[J/OL]. Chinese Archives of General Surgery(Electronic Edition), 2013, 07(06): 447-454.

目的

探讨经腹腔镜射频消融术(LRFA)治疗肝细胞癌的临床应用并评价疗效。

方法

回顾性分析2009年2月至2011年2月间收治的78例肝细胞癌(HCC)患者的临床资料。将符合纳入标准的病例分为LRFA组32例,经皮射频消融术(PRFA组)21例和手术切除组25例。检测各组术前和术后肝功能和AFP的变化,应用视觉模拟评分法(VAS)评价患者术后疼痛缓解程度,进行术后KPS功能状态评分,观察术后并发症发生率和肝内复发率、无瘤生存率、总生存率,并进行生存分析。

结果

(1)术后3月时,3组的ALT、AST、GGT、ALP、AFP各指标明显低于术前(P<0.05);ALB术后1周下降明显,至术后1月逐渐恢复正常(P<0.05);3组的TBIL指标差异无统计学意义。(2) LRFA组和PRFA组术后3级疼痛明显低于手术切除组;3组VAS疼痛评价结果差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。(3) LRFA组的并发症发生率低于其他两组(P=0.012,0.007),手术切除组的伤口感染发生率与LRFA组比较,差异有统计学意义(χ2=7.015,P=0.008)。(4)术后6月前,手术切除组的KPS评分低于LRFA组和PRFA组,而后各时间点3组评分相近。(5) 3组术后6、12、18、24个月的肝内复发率、无瘤生存率和总生存率差异无统计学意义,LRFA组的生存曲线均高于PRFA组和手术切除组。(6)手术切除组平均手术时间、住院时间和费用明显高于LRFA组(P<0.05),LRFA组与PRFA组差异无统计学意义。

结论

LRFA治疗HCC兼具腹腔镜和射频消融的优点,术后肝功能和AFP的恢复程度与PRFA、手术治疗方法相当。该方法有助于患者术后疼痛缓解,并发症少,肝内复发率低,无瘤生存率、总生存率高,是一种安全微创、疗效确切的肝癌治疗方法,值得临床广泛推广。

Objective

To investigate the clinical application and effect of laparoscopic radiofrequency ablation (LRFA) in treating hepatocellular carcinoma.

Methods

The clinical data of 78 patients with HCC treated in the Second Affiliated Hospital to Guangzhou Medical University were collected and retrospectively analyzed from February 2009 to February 2011. The patients were divided into 3 groups, LRFA group (n=32), PRFA group (n=21), and surgery group (n=25). The changes of liver function and AFP in every group were detected before and after the surgery. Visual analogue scale (VAS) was used to assess the degree of pain release and KPS was used to evaluate the whole function after the operation. Moreover, the complications and the related survival rates of the three groups were observed and analyzed after operations.

Results

(1) ALT, AST, GGT, ALP, and AFP of the three groups all decreased apparently three months after the surgery (P<0.05). ALB descended one week after surgery, then rose gradually to normal in one month (P<0.05). TBIL had no statistical difference in each group. (2) The pain degree of group LRFA and PRFA was obviously lower than the surgery group, and had statistical differences (P<0.05). (3) The rate of complications of the LRFA group was lower than the other two groups (P=0.012, 0.007) . The wound infection between open surgery group and LRFA group showed statistical differences (χ2=7.015, P=0.008) . (4) 6 months after the surgery, KPS score in the surgery group was lower, but in the following time, the three groups got similar scores. (5)The intrahepatic recurrence rate, tumor-free survival rate, and overall survival rate of the three groups had no statistical differences 6-, 12-, 18-, and 24-month after the operation. Survival curve of group LRFA was relatively higher. (6) The average surgery time, length of hospital stay, and hospital costs of the operation group were all much higher in the three groups (P<0.05), while the other two groups had no statistical differences.

Conclusions

LRFA takes advantage of both laparoscope and radiofrequency ablation, and the postoperative liver function and AFP are as good as PRFA and traditional surgery. LRFA can help reducing postoperative pains, complications, and intrahepatic recurrence rate. The tumor-free survival rate and overall survival rate are increased as well. Therefore, LRFA is safe, minimally invasive and has reliable effects for the treatment of HCC.

图1 LapUS引导下LRFA(不同位置多针消融)
图2 LRFA术中LapUS下肿瘤烧灼前后对比(箭头所指)
表1 3组患者的一般资料
表2 3组患者治疗前后血液、AFP、肝功能指标变化(±s
组别 ALT(U/L) AST(U/L) AFP(μg/L) ALB(g/L) TBIL(μmol/L) GGT(U/L) ALP(U/L)
LRFA组(32例) ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
? 术前 156.31±135.82 192.12±156.25 503.44±394.09 34.92±7.26 27.65±14.20 88.91±67.63 129.41±99.73
? 术后1周 223.25±182.27 298.21±210.13 400.75±313.27 31.24±6.52 32.26±12.20 111.25±87.92 164.00±94.29
? 术后1月 172.75±123.36 138.28±79.04 344.00±343.75 36.31±6.48 37.82±15.10 112.69±75.68 126.81±62.66
? 术后3月 109.50±63.53a 104.65±56.60b 142.81±118.07b 40.45±7.99b 30.39±10.46 76.34±59.56a 77.31±36.37a
PRFA组(21例) ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
? 术前 210.05±181.23 205.04±155.19 410.48±310.93 38.80±8.70 26.97±11.23 82.40±55.29 117.25±60.55
? 术后1周 322.52±181.71 363.14±193.88 355.62±303.53 34.17±7.80 33.46±10.13 112.81±85.82 143.33±56.23
? 术后1月 226.38±178.35 158.52±139.93 243.86±202.90 36.81±7.26 35.26±14.57 94.38±64.87 104.10±48.29
? 术后3月d 115.10±94.61ac 142.38±139.04bc 204.14±150.85ac 40.49±6.88bc 32.50±16.21c 64.55±37.61ac 109.90±50.68d
手术切除组(25例) ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
? 术前 180.08±123.23 232.44±171.30 438.32±406.31 35.01±6.99 35.88±17.22 90.68±66.08 112.84±36.54
? 术后1周 304.40±161.58 354.56±185.17 336.72±258.47 28.92±6.50 41.57±17.25 125.60±70.91 137.32±61.67
? 术后1月 240.96±137.13 252.08±186.48 287.88±230.98 36.99±5.98 38.95±13.61 103.04±69.03 130.12±62.49
? 术后3月 141.00±103.58ac 165.68±153.83ac 194.64±188.29bc 40.56±5.62ac 43.08±16.13c 79.08±51.95ac 127.52±54.81d
图3 3组患者治疗前后ALT、AST的比较(U/L)(★表示与术前的差值为负值,转化为正值;术后3月与LRFA组比较,*P>0.05)
图4 3组患者治疗前后GGT、ALP的比较(U/L)(★表示与术前的差值为负值,转化为正值;术后3月与LRFA组比较,*P>0.05,**P<0.05)
图5 3组ALB(g/L)、TBIL(μmol/L)的比较(★表示与术前的差值为负值,转化为正值;术后3月与LRFA组比较,*P>0.05)
图6 3组患者治疗前后AFP的比较(μg/L)(★表示与术前的差值为负值,转化为正值;术后3月与LRFA组比较,*P>0.05)
表3 3组患者术后第3天疼痛评价VAS结果[例(%)]
图7 3组治疗前后KPS评分变化曲线
图8 65岁女性患者LRFA治疗前后CT对比 A、B为术前CT平扫和增强,CT显示患者肝实质密度欠均匀,左外叶如箭头所示处可见一大小约3cm×2.5cm低密度肿块影,强化后肿块密度增强;C、D为LRFA术后3月CT平扫和增强,病灶呈术后改变,可见中央较边缘密度略高的不规则团块影,肿块增强期扫描未见明显增强,提示消融部位组织坏死,范围约4.5cm×4cm
图9 65岁女性患者LRFA治疗后6月时B超检查结果 术后5月肝右叶转出现移灶,经LRFA治疗后B超复查,A中箭头所指为肝右后叶新发转移病灶,B、C为原左外叶病灶消融后的超声表现。超声下可见右后叶和左外叶实性低回声结节,边界清,形态不规则,大小分别为5cm×4cm、3cm×3cm,结节中央回声稍高
图10 65岁女性患者LRFA治疗后6月时CT检查 A平扫期,B为动脉期,C为门脉期。肝左外叶及右后叶为LRFA术后改变,肝左叶病灶较前缩小,增强两期无明显强化,两病灶大小分别为3cm×3cm、5.5cm×4.5cm
图11 65岁女性患者LRFA治疗后12月时CT检查 A平扫期和B、C两增强期均表现为术后改变,两病灶大小均较前缩小,病灶无明显强化,未发现肝内复发灶
图12 65岁女性患者LRFA治疗后24月时CT检查 箭头所指病灶较术前6月CT检查有明显缩小,团块中有低密度影,为消融后坏死的肿瘤组织已逐渐溶解吸收3cm×3cm,结节中央回声稍高
图13 51岁男性患者LRFA治疗前后的MRI比较
图14 51岁男性患者LRFA治疗后6月时CT检查
图15 3组肝细胞癌患者肝内复发率(P=0.704>0.05)
图16 3组肝细胞癌患者无瘤生存率曲线(P=0.842>0.05)
图17 3组总生存曲线比较(P=0.677>0.05)
表4 3组住院时间及费用的比较(±st检验)
1
Padma S, Martinie JB, Iannitti DA. Liver tumor ablation: percutaneous and open approaches. J Surg Oncol, 2009, 100(8): 619-634.
2
宗行万自助.疼痛的估价——用特殊的视觉模拟评分法作参考(VAS). 疼痛学杂志, 1994, 2(4): 153.
3
汤钊猷. 现代肿瘤学. 3版. 上海: 复旦大学出版社, 2011: 729.
4
Mazzaglia PJ, Berber E, Siperstein AE, et al. Radiofrequency thermal ablation of metastatic neuroendocrine tumors in the liver. Curr Treat Options Oncol, 2007, 8(4): 322-330.
5
Ballem N, Berber E, Pitt T, et al. Laparoscopic radiofrequency ablation of unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma: long-term follow-up. HPB (Oxford), 2008, 10(5): 315-320.
6
Salama IA, Korayem E, ElAbd O, et al. Laparoscopic ultrasound with radiofrequency ablation of hepatic tumors in cirrhotic patients. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech, 2010, 20(1): 39-46.
7
Simo KA, Sereika SE, Newton KN, et al. Laparoscopic-assisted microwave ablation for hepatocellular carcinoma: safety and efficacy in comparison with radiofrequency ablation. J Surg Oncol, 2011, 104(7): 822-829.
8
陈孝平. 肝胆外科学. 北京: 人民卫生出版社, 2005: 26.
9
陈敏山. 肝癌射频消融治疗的现状与展望[J/CD]. 中华普通外科学文献:电子版, 2011, 5(6): 453-456.
10
Smith MK, Mutter D, Forbes LE, et al. The physiologic effect of the pneumoperitoneum on radiofrequency ablation. Surg Endosc, 2004, 18(1): 35-38.
11
Eishiro M, Yasunari N, Kuniaki A, et al. Enhancement of tumor-specific T-cell responses by transcatheter arterial embolization with dendritic cell infusion for hepatocellular carcinoma. Int J Cancer, 2010, 126(9): 2164-2174.
[1] 李国新, 陈新华. 全腹腔镜下全胃切除术食管空肠吻合的临床研究进展[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 1-4.
[2] 李子禹, 卢信星, 李双喜, 陕飞. 食管胃结合部腺癌腹腔镜手术重建方式的选择[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 5-8.
[3] 李乐平, 张荣华, 商亮. 腹腔镜食管胃结合部腺癌根治淋巴结清扫策略[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 9-12.
[4] 陈方鹏, 杨大伟, 金从稳. 腹腔镜近端胃癌切除术联合改良食管胃吻合术重建His角对术后反流性食管炎的效果研究[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 15-18.
[5] 许杰, 李亚俊, 韩军伟. 两种入路下腹腔镜根治性全胃切除术治疗超重胃癌的效果比较[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 19-22.
[6] 李刘庆, 陈小翔, 吕成余. 全腹腔镜与腹腔镜辅助远端胃癌根治术治疗进展期胃癌的近中期随访比较[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 23-26.
[7] 任佳, 马胜辉, 王馨, 石秀霞, 蔡淑云. 腹腔镜全胃切除、间置空肠代胃术的临床观察[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 31-34.
[8] 赵丽霞, 王春霞, 陈一锋, 胡东平, 张维胜, 王涛, 张洪来. 内脏型肥胖对腹腔镜直肠癌根治术后早期并发症的影响[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 35-39.
[9] 李博, 贾蓬勃, 李栋, 李小庆. ERCP与LCBDE治疗胆总管结石继发急性重症胆管炎的效果[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 60-63.
[10] 杨建波, 马欢, 黄小梅, 刘华柱. 结肠镜辅助下EMR、CSP和RFA术治疗直径<1cm结直肠息肉的疗效和安全性比较[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 76-79.
[11] 韩戟, 杨力, 陈玉. 腹部形态CT参数与完全腹腔镜全胃切除术术中失血量的关系研究[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 88-91.
[12] 王露, 周丽君. 全腹腔镜下远端胃大部切除不同吻合方式对胃癌患者胃功能恢复、并发症发生率的影响[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 92-95.
[13] 王庆亮, 党兮, 师凯, 刘波. 腹腔镜联合胆道子镜经胆囊管胆总管探查取石术[J/OL]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2025, 14(02): 313-313.
[14] 杨建辉, 段文斌, 马忠志, 卿宇豪. 腹腔镜下脾部分切除术[J/OL]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2025, 14(02): 314-314.
[15] 叶劲松, 刘驳强, 柳胜君, 吴浩然. 腹腔镜肝Ⅶ+Ⅷ段背侧段切除[J/OL]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2025, 14(02): 315-315.
阅读次数
全文


摘要