食管早癌ESD术后疗效评估及血清指标水平变化
Evaluation of the Efficacy and Changes of Se-rum Markers after ESD for Early Esophageal Cancer
DOI: 10.12677/ACM.2022.12111439, PDF, HTML, XML, 下载: 275  浏览: 398 
作者: 于海恩:青岛大学附属青岛市市立医院,山东 青岛;高玉强*:青岛市市立医院消化内科,山东 青岛
关键词: 食管早癌ESD治疗效果血清指标Early Esophageal Cancer ESD Therapeutic Effect Serum Indicators
摘要: 目的:观察食管早癌内镜黏膜下剥离术(ESD)术后疗效,并对比分析血清指标水平差异。方法:回顾性分析2017年1月至2021年10月在青岛市市立医院消化内镜中心行ESD治疗的100例食管早癌患者,评估患者治疗效果。并选取同期100例食管良性病变及健康查体患者,对比CA199、CA125、癌胚抗原(CEA)、鳞状细胞癌抗原(SCC)、中性粒细胞–淋巴细胞比率(NLR)血清指标水平变化。结果:100例行ESD治疗的食管早癌患者平均住院时间为(8.65 ± 1.65)天,平均手术时间为(57.28 ± 15.40)天,有效切除率(89/100)%、无效切除率(11/100)%,术后出血13例,食管狭窄2例,食管穿孔0例。食管早癌组患者术前血清CA199、CA125、CEA、SCC、NLR水平明显高于食管良性病变组、健康组,而食管早癌组患者术后3个月的血清CA199、CA125、CEA、SCC、NLR水平明显低于术后1个月,通过随访检测血清指标,食管早癌无效切除患者ESD术后6个月的血清CA125、CEA、SCC、NLR水平明显高于有效切除组,差异均有统计学意义(P < 0.05)。结论:ESD是治疗食管早癌的有效方法,食管早癌术后CA125、CEA、SCC、NLR水平明显降低,其水平变化与疗效相关,临床可应用于食管早癌的术前评估及疗效预测。
Abstract: Objective: To observe the effect of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for early esophageal cancer, and compare the difference of serum markers. Methods: Retrospective analysis was made on 100 patients with early esophageal cancer who received ESD treatment in the Digestive Endos-copy Center of Qingdao Municipal Hospital from January 2017 to October 2021, and the treatment effect was evaluated. In the same period, 100 patients with benign esophageal diseases and healthy people were selected to compare the changes of serum CA199, CA125, carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), squamous cell carcinoma antigen (SCC) and neutrophil lymphocyte ratio (NLR). Results: The average hospitalization time of 100 patients with early esophageal cancer treated with ESD was (8.65 ± 1.65) days, the average operation time was (57.28 ± 15.40) days, the effective resection rate was (89/100)%, the ineffective resection rate was (11/100)%, 13 patients suffered from postoper-ative bleeding, 2 patients suffered from esophageal stenosis, and 0 patients suffered from esopha-geal perforation. The levels of serum CA199, CA125, CEA, SCC, NLR in patients with early esophageal cancer before operation were significantly higher than those in patients with benign esophageal le-sions and healthy people, while the levels of serum CA199, CA125, CEA, SCC, NLR in patients with early esophageal cancer 3 months after operation were significantly lower than those in patients with early esophageal cancer 1 month after operation. Through follow-up and detection of serum indicators, the levels of serum CA125, CEA, SCC, NLR in patients with early esophageal cancer who failed to resect ESD 6 months after operation were significantly higher than those in patients with effective resection, The difference was statistically significant (P < 0.05). Conclusion: ESD is an effec-tive method for the treatment of early esophageal cancer. The levels of CA125, CEA, SCC and NLR decreased significantly after the operation of early esophageal cancer, and their changes are related to the curative effect. It can be used in the preoperative evaluation and prognosis of early esopha-geal cancer.
文章引用:于海恩, 高玉强. 食管早癌ESD术后疗效评估及血清指标水平变化[J]. 临床医学进展, 2022, 12(11): 9983-9989. https://doi.org/10.12677/ACM.2022.12111439

1. 引言

迄今为止,食管早癌在全球癌症的发生率仍较高,其死亡率位列于全世界癌症死亡的前列 [1]。早期病变仅发生在黏膜层,没有浸润到黏膜下层,因此肿瘤细胞不会随着淋巴结发生转移。消化道早癌早期症状不明显,发现时大多已进入中晚期,预后较差,丧失手术机会,因此早期诊断在临床上极为关键 [2]。随着内镜诊疗技术的不断更新,从传统的白光内镜,到目前的放大内镜、NBI等新成像技术的应用,消化道早癌的内镜诊出率不断提升 [3],ESD目标为尽可能使切缘干净,已经是早期消化道肿瘤的主要微创手术方式之一 [4]。尽管ESD应用已相当普遍,但ESD操作较为困难,对医师要求较大,存在术后消化道出血、穿孔及狭窄等并发症及复发的可能 [5],特别是食管ESD手术,因解剖位置特殊,较胃肠等部位的手术在术后穿孔等并发症的发生率更高 [6]。

肿瘤标志物是肿瘤细胞或非肿瘤细胞响应恶性肿瘤合成的化合物,是临床鉴别诊断肿瘤的重要指标。其中CEA由主要作为细胞黏附分子存在于细胞内,常见于消化系统肿瘤。CA199是一种存在于细胞膜的糖脂,最初在结直肠癌中发现,在胰腺癌、食管癌、胆囊癌中高表达。CA125等对于消化道肿瘤也是常见的筛查指标,可以检测其水平的变化来评估治疗效果及评估预后 [7]。SCC水平是肿瘤细胞增殖过程中分泌的细胞碎片,也是临床常见的肿瘤标记物 [8]。外周血NLR被认为是全身炎症反应的标志物之一,对预测各种癌症的预后很有价值 [9]。然而,肿瘤标志物及炎性指标在食管等相关肿瘤中的应用仍存在争议,单一指标存在局限性,往往容易产生假阳性结果,故多采用联合指标提高灵敏度和特异度 [10] [11]。既往许多相关研究评估了肿瘤标志物在诊断和预后中的应用,但结论不尽相同 [12] [13],且在食管早癌ESD术前及术后的水平变化方面的研究较少。

本文意在探究食管早癌患者行ESD术后总体疗效及术后并发症相关情况,评估治疗效果。通过对比食管早癌患者内镜治疗前后,结合随访内镜复查结果,检测肿瘤标志物、NLR数值水平变化,进而为消化道早癌患者诊断及预后提供参考,现报道如下。

2. 资料与方法

2.1. 一般资料

搜集2017年1月~2021年10月于青岛市市立医院确诊为食管早癌,并行内镜下粘膜剥离术(ESD)的100例患者,按照治疗效果分为有效切除组及无效切除组,同时选取于我院诊断为Barrett食管(巴雷特食管)、食管上皮增生、食管息肉、食管溃疡、食管白斑等良性病变的100例患者为良性病变组,取食管无明显异常的100例查体人群列为健康组。所有行ESD手术患者均为住院患者,均行术前凝血常规、肿瘤标志物(CA199、CA125、CEA、SCC)、NLR等检查,所有患者术前均未服用抗血小板、抗凝及活血药物,食管早癌病理诊断明确。记录ESD术患者基本临床资料,手术相关信息及并发症发生情况,评估食管早癌ESD治疗效果,同时探究血清指标变化与ESD术后疗效的相关性。本研究所有患者均签署知情同意书,并经伦理委员会论证通过。

2.2. 纳入标准和排除标准

纳入标准:① 患者既往行食管早癌ESD术,并坚持我院随访,依从性良好。② 所有患者签署知情同意书。

排除标准:① 除食管早癌以外合并有其他恶性肿瘤病史;② 随访者断联,或者死亡,自动退出研究组;③ 肝肾功能严重不全患者。

2.3. ESD切除参考标准

ESD切除参考标准:① 整块切除:术后切缘检查未发现残留癌组织;② 治愈性切除:无或低淋巴结转移风险的完整切除;③ 无效切除:术后切缘存在脉管浸润,需要外科手术治疗 [14]。将整块切除组和治愈性切除组列为有效组,无效切除列为无效组,术后第6个月评估治疗效果。

2.4. 手术及检测方法

所有食管早癌ESD患者行全身静脉麻醉,内镜下明确病变部位,进行碘染色,再使用电凝术沿病变边缘0.5 cm处作标记。将玻璃酸钠注射于黏膜下,术中抬举征良好,使得黏膜层、黏膜下层以及固有肌层尽可能分离。用Dual刀沿标记点完全切开黏膜,并使用一次性黏膜切开刀剥离病变处下层,直至剥离出病变组织。术中使用电凝术对出血点、小血管进行电凝止血。ESD术后患者处置方法:当日禁食禁水,予以补液,次日可少量饮水,流质饮食。同时给予黏膜保护剂及抑酸药物治疗。

所有纳入标准的ESD患者检查前空腹12 h以上,统一抽取清晨静脉血5 ml,由我院检验科统一检测,同样方法留取患者术后1、3月血样,并检测同期食管良性病变组及健康组血清标志物水平。

2.5. 统计学方法

采用SPSS24软件行数据分析处理,食管早癌患者行ESD术后总体效果。CA199、CA125、CEA、SCC、NLR等相关指标水平用 x ¯ ± s 表示,多组间比较采用单因素方差分析,两组间比较采用t检验,对比实验结果。

3. 结果

1) 我院100例行ESD治疗的食管早癌患者,男性55例,女性45例,平均年龄65.59 ± 6.34岁,平均身体质量指数(BMI) 22.14 ± 1.77 Kg/m2,平均住院时间为8.65 ± 1.65天,平均手术时间为57.28 ± 15.40天,总体有效切除率(79/100)%,无效切除率(11/100)%,术后出血13例,食管狭窄2例,食管穿孔0例。

2) 食管早癌组、良性病变组、健康组组例数、年龄、性别分布,BMI指数,差异无统计学意义(P > 0.05),具备可比性,见表1

Table 1. Comparison of general data of three groups of subjects

表1. 三组研究对象的一般资料对比

3) 食管早癌组、食管良性病变组、健康组血清指标对比。食管早癌组CA199、CA125、CEA、SCC、NLR水平明显高于食管良性组及健康组,差异具有统计学意义(P < 0.05)。见表2

Table 2. Comparison of CA199, CA125, CEA, SCC and NLR among three groups of subjects

表2. 三组研究对象的CA199、CA125、CEA、SCC、NLR对比

4) 食管早癌组术前及术后1、3月血清指标对比。食管早癌患者ESD术后1、3月血清较术前血清CA199、CA125、CEA、SCC水平下降明显,差异具有统计学意义(P < 0.05),术后3月血清NLR水平较术前下降,差异具有统计学意义(P < 0.05),而术后1月血清NLR水平较术前无明显差异(P > 0.05)。见表3

Table 3. Comparison of serum indexes before operation and 1 and 3 months after operation in early esophageal cancer group

表3. 食管早癌组术前及术后1、3月血清指标对比

5) 有效切除组与无效切除组血清指标对比。术后6月通过再次复查胃镜评估治疗效果,食管早癌的ESD术的有效切除89例,无效切除11例。两组在CA125、CEA、SCC、NLR水平有差异,具有统计学意义(P < 0.05)。见表4

Table 4. Comparison of mean values of serum indexes in effective resection group and ineffective resection group at 6 months after operation

表4. 有效切除组与无效切除组术后6月血清指标平均值对比

4. 讨论

近年来,食管早癌内镜下诊疗方式受到越来越多患者的推崇。ESD是消化道早癌疗效较为肯定的手术方式,避免了开胸手术对于人体的创伤,具有术后恢复快、疗效确切等优点,ESD整块切除率在90%左右。本研究分析了我院行食管早癌ESD术后患者的治疗效果,其中总体有效切除率89%,无效切除率11%,结果与既往相关研究大体一致 [15] [16]。ESD术后并发症发生是多因素作用的结果,可能与年龄、肿瘤直径、浸润深度、创缘大小等因素相关 [17] [18]。

对于行ESD术的食管早癌患者需严格按照术后随访要求进行复查,但少数患者存在间隔期内复发的风险,而反复内镜检查存在一定难度且费用昂贵,动态监测血清指标简单易行,并具有一定临床参考价值。CA199是糖类肿瘤相关抗原,在临床应用广泛,有报道称CA199在食管癌发生中可作为首选标志物 [19],CA125同CA199,临床应用较早,研究表明其与食管癌发生也有相关性 [20]。CEA可作为食管癌早期诊断的价值肿瘤标志物,对于临床检测特异性较高 [21]。ZHANG [22] 等的研究表明SCC可作为灵敏的食管癌的血清学指标,同时对于鉴别食管癌病理分型具有一定价值。NLR作为血清炎性指标,在肿瘤发生中有预测作用,高NLR与食管癌患者的肿瘤进展相关 [23]。本研究对比了食管早癌组、食管良性病变组、健康组在上述肿瘤指标及NLR水平的差异,表明食管癌早期即有血清学变化,较食管良性病变组及健康组血清学处于高水平范围。

通过连续追踪行ESD术后食管早癌患者1、3月上述指标变化,提示CA125、CEA、SCC、NLR在食管早癌发生、发展中起重要作用,其水平变化可作为治疗疗效评估的重要参考根据。食管早癌患者术后6月CA125指标较前水平下降明显,可能与我院食管早癌病理中鳞癌占比较高有关。食管早癌无效切除组与有效切除组对比表明NLR水平在前者检出较高,提示无效切除患者炎性持续状态,因此尽量做到ESD治愈性切除,可改善患者预后。既往有研究表明通过熟练内镜操作缩减手术时间、尽量保持手术精度、术前超声内镜的应用、精确碘染可提高ESD治愈性切除率 [24] [25]。

综上所述,ESD在食管早癌治疗中疗效明确,食管早癌患者ESD术后血清肿瘤标志物、NLR水平明显降低,且其水平变化与治疗效果有关,检测血清肿瘤标志物及NLR水平可为胃肠早癌病情评估以及疗效预测提供指导,本研究仍有不足之处,肿瘤标志物的检测时间应相应缩短,随访时间应延长并动态检测其血清水平变化,具体临床价值有待大样本进一步验证。

NOTES

*通讯作者。

参考文献

[1] Sung, H., Ferlay, J. and Siegel, R.L. (2021) Global Cancer Statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN Estimates of Incidence and Mortality Worldwide for 36 Cancers in 185 Countries.CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians, 71, 209-249.
https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21660
[2] Watanabe, M., Otake, R., Kozuki, R., Toihata, T., Takahashi, K., et al. (2020) Recent Progress in Multidisciplinary Treatment for Patients with Esophageal Cancer. Surgery Today, 50, 12-20.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00595-019-01878-7
[3] 杨怿, 李雪, 程芮, 陈炜, 陈楚岩, 等. 消化道早癌内镜成像技术的研究进展[J]. 首都医科大学学报, 2022, 43(1): 47-52.
[4] Washington, M.K., Goldberg, R.M., Chang, G.J., Limburg, P. and Lam, A.K. (2021) Diagnosis of Digestive System Tumours. International Journal of Cancer, 148, 1040-1050.
https://doi.org/10.1002/ijc.33210
[5] Misumi, Y. and Nonaka, K. (2021) Prevention and Management of Complications and Education in Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection. Journal of Clinical Medicine, 10, Article No. 2511.
https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm10112511
[6] Maeda, Y., Hirasawa, D., Fujita, N., Suzuki, T. and Obana, T., et al. (2011) Mediastinal Emphysema after Esophageal Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection: Its Prevalence and Clinical Sig-nificance. Digestive Endoscopy, 23, 221-226.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1443-1661.2010.01085.x
[7] Yang, X.Q., Chen, C., Wang, F.B., Peng, C.W. and Li, Y. (2011) Preoperative Serum Carcinoembryonic Antigen, Carbohydrate Antigen19-9 and Carbohydrate Antigen 125 as Prognostic Factors for Recurrence-Free Survival in Colorectal Cancer. Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention, 12, 1251-1256.
[8] 陈秀英, 陈怡舟, 徐红, 李佳芯, 肖雄. 血清及胸腔积液中CA19-9、SCC-Ag及CYFRA21-1对肺癌诊断意义的对比研究[J]. 现代生物医学进展, 2018, 18(19): 3733-3736+3794.
[9] He, W., Yin, C., Guo, G., Jiang, C., Wang, F., et al. (2013) Initial Neutrophil Lymphocyte Ratio Is Superior to Platelet Lymphocyte Ratio as an Adverse Prognostic and Predictive Factor in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer. Medical Oncology, 30, Article No. 439.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12032-012-0439-x
[10] Tas, F., Faruk Aykan, N., Aydiner, A., Yasasever, V. and Topuz, E. (2001) Measurement of Serum CA 19-9 May Be More Valuable than CEA in Prediction of Recurrence in Patients with Gastric Cancer. American Journal of Clinical Oncology, 24, 148-149.
https://doi.org/10.1097/00000421-200104000-00010
[11] 王永连, 赵英政, 徐光翠, 姚文健, 郭领, 等. 血清肿瘤标志物水平及其联合检测对食管癌的诊断意义[J]. 重庆医学, 2016, 45(3): 419-420+430.
[12] 曹红, 江华. 血清鳞状上皮细胞癌相关抗原、癌胚抗原、神经元特异性烯醇化酶及细胞角蛋白19片段抗原检测在食管癌诊断中的价值[J]. 中国医药导报, 2013, 10(14): 96-97+100.
[13] Tian, S.B., Yu, J.C., Kang, W.M., Ma, Z.Q., Ye, X., et al. (2014) Combined Detection of CEA, CA 19-9, CA 242 and CA 50 in the Diagnosis and Prognosis of Resectable Gastric Cancer. Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention, 15, 6295-6300.
https://doi.org/10.7314/APJCP.2014.15.15.6295
[14] Japanese Gastric Cancer Association (2011) Japanese Gas-tric Cancer Treatment Guidelines 2010 (ver. 3). Gastric Cancer, 14, 113-123.
[15] Ko, W.J., Kim, Y.M., Yoo, I.K. and Cho, J.Y. (2018) Clinical Outcomes of Minimally Invasive Treatment for Early Gastric Cancer in Patients Beyond the In-dications of Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection. Surgical Endoscopy, 32, 3798-3805.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-018-6105-4
[16] Draganov, P.V., Wang, A.Y., Othman, M.O. and Fukami, N. (2019) AGA Institute Clinical Practice Update: Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection in the United States. Clinical Gas-troenterology and Hepatology, 17, 16-25.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cgh.2018.07.041
[17] 丁娟, 曹名波, 马志杰. 早期食管癌患者内镜下黏膜剥离术后延迟性出血的危险因素分析[J]. 实用癌症杂志, 2022, 37(7): 1144-1146.
[18] 牟钊, 陈雨琳, 杨国栋. 内镜黏膜下剥离术后食管狭窄相关危险因素分析[J]. 现代消化及介入诊疗, 2021, 26(11): 1470-1474.
[19] 孙科, 吴永梅. 异常糖链糖蛋白在食管、胃、大肠癌前病变中的相关研究[J]. 现代诊断与治疗, 2015, 26(3): 508-510.
[20] Gao, Y., Wang, J., Zhou, Y., Sheng, S., Qian, S.Y. and Huo, X. (2018) Evaluation of Serum CEA, CA19-9, CA72-4, CA125 and Ferritin as Diagnostic Markers and Factors of Clinical Parameters for Colorectal Cancer. Scientific Reports, 8, Article No. 2732.
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-21048-y
[21] Siegel, R.L., Miller, K.D. and Jemal, A. (2017) Cancer Statistics, 2017. CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians, 67, 7-30.
https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21387
[22] Zhang, S., Lu, X., Hu, C., Li, Y., Yang, H., et al. (2020) Serum Metabo-lomics for Biomarker Screening of Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma and Esophageal Squamous Dysplasia Using Gas Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry. ACS Omega, 5, 26402-26412.
https://doi.org/10.1021/acsomega.0c02600
[23] Sharaiha, R.Z., Halazun, K.J., Mirza, F., Port, J.L., Lee, P.C., et al. (2011) Elevated Preoperative Neutrophil: Lymphocyte Ratio as a Predictor of Postoperative Disease Recurrence in Esophageal Cancer. Annals of Surgical Oncology, 18, 3362-3369.
https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-011-1754-8
[24] 桑怀鸣, 蒋建霞. 内镜黏膜下剥离术治疗食管高级别上皮内瘤变的疗效分析[J]. 临床消化病杂志, 2018, 30(2): 67-72.
[25] 郑家垚, 林峥嵘, 许炎钦, 陈洋洋, 郑晓玲, 等. 浅表食管癌及癌前病变内镜黏膜下剥离术后水平切缘阳性高危因素分析及随访研究[J]. 中国内镜杂志, 2020, 26(8): 13-19.