ESD与EMR治疗早期胃癌的疗效及安全性分析

doi:10.3760/cma.j.issn.1007-1245.2023.23.011

国际医药卫生导报 ›› 2023, Vol. 29 ›› Issue (23): 3370-3374.DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.1007-1245.2023.23.011

ESD与EMR治疗早期胃癌的疗效及安全性分析

程媚霖杨敬端

南阳医学高等专科学校第一附属医院消化内科，南阳　473000

收稿日期:2023-05-24 出版日期:2023-12-01 发布日期:2024-01-03
通讯作者: 程媚霖，Email：chenmeilinli@126.com
基金资助:
河南省医学科技攻关项目（LHGJ202100321）

Analysis of the efficacy and safety of ESD and EMR in the treatment of early gastric cancer

Cheng Meilin, Yang Jingduan

Department of Gastroenterology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanyang Medical College, Nanyang 473000, China

Received:2023-05-24 Online:2023-12-01 Published:2024-01-03
Contact: Cheng Meilin, Email: chenmeilinli@126.com
Supported by:
Medical Science and Technology Research Project of Henan Province (LHGJ202100321)

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

目的　观察内镜下黏膜剥离术（endoscopic submucosal dissection，ESD）及内镜下黏膜切除术（endoscopic mucosal resection，EMR）治疗早期胃癌对血清肿瘤标志物表达的影响，及不同术式与不良预后发生率的相关性。方法　回顾性分析2020年5月至2021年4月南阳医学高等专科学校第一附属医院收治的110例早期胃癌患者为研究对象，根据治疗方式不同，将采用ESD治疗的60例患者列为ESD组［男35例、女25例，年龄（50.33±5.31）岁］，采用EMR治疗的50例患者列为EMR组［男30例、女20例，年龄（51.25±5.17）岁］。对比两组患者治疗情况及预后情况，并经Spearman相关性系数检验不同治疗方式与早期胃癌不良预后发生率的相关性。计量资料采用t检验，计数资料采用χ²检验。结果　ESD组病灶完整切除率［91.67%（55/60）］、治愈性切除率［83.33%（50/60）］均高于EMR组［70.00%（35/50）、60.00%（30/50）］，非治愈性切除率［8.33%（5/60）］低于EMR组［30.00%（15/50）］，差异均有统计学意义（χ²=15.156、9.630、15.156，均P<0.05）。术前，两组患者血清肿瘤标志物比较，差异均无统计学意义（均P>0.05）；术后，ESD组癌胚抗原（carcinoembryonic antigen，CEA）［（6.41±2.11）μg/L］、糖类抗原19-9（carbohydrate antigen 19-9，CA19-9）［（37.22±5.18）U/ml］、糖类抗原724（carbohydrate antigen 724，CA724）［（35.12±5.47）U/ml］均低于EMR组［（8.24±3.13）μg/L、（40.16±5.33）U/ml、（38.44±5.63）U/ml］，差异均有统计学意义（t=3.644、2.925、3.128，均P<0.05）。ESD组术后1年病情复发率为10.00%（6/60）、病死率为6.67%（4/60），均低于EMR组［24.00%（12/50）、18.00%（9/50）］，术后2年病情复发率为16.67%（10/60）、病死率为11.67%（7/60），均低于EMR组［32.00%（16/50）、24.00%（12/50）］，差异均有统计学意义（χ²=6.945、5.936、6.382、5.187，均P<0.05）。经Spearman相关性系数检验，ESD与早期胃癌不良预后发生率呈负相关（r=-0.155、-0.147，均P<0.001），EMR与早期胃癌不良预后发生率呈正相关（r=0.254、0.251，均P<0.001）。结论　与EMR相比，对早期胃癌实施ESD治疗能显著提升病灶切除率，对下调肿瘤标志物表达有重要意义，选择ESD治疗还可有效改善患者预后，降低病情复发及死亡风险。

关键词:

内镜下黏膜剥离术, 内镜下黏膜切除术, 早期胃癌, 肿瘤标志物, 不良预后

Abstract:

Objective　To observe the effects of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) and endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) on the expression of serum tumor markers in early gastric cancer, and the correlation between different surgical procedures and the incidence of adverse prognosis. Methods　This study conducted a retrospective analysis on 110 patients with early gastric cancer admitted to the First Affiliated Hospital of Nanyang Medical College from May 2020 to April 2021. According to different treatment methods, 60 patients who underwent ESD surgery were classified as the ESD group [35 males and 25 females, aged (50.33±5.31) years], and 50 patients who underwent EMR surgery were classified as the EMR group [30 males and 20 females, aged (51.25±5.17) years]. The treatment and prognosis of the two groups were compared. The correlation between different treatment methods and the incidence of adverse prognosis in early gastric cancer was tested by Spearman correlation coefficient. t test was used for the measurement data and χ² test was used for the count data. Results　Under different surgical protocols, the complete resection rate [91.67% (55/60)] and curative resection rate [83.33% (50/60)] of lesions in the ESD group were higher than those in the EMR group [70.00% (35/50) and 60.00% (30/50)], and the non-curative resection rate [8.33% (5/60)] was lower than that in the EMR group [30.00% (15/50)], with statistically significant differences (χ²=15.156, 9.630, and 15.156; all P<0.05). Before surgery, there were no statistically significant differences in the serum tumor markers between the two groups (all P>0.05). After surgery, the levels of carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) [(6.41±2.11) μg/L], carbohydrate antigen 19-9 (CA19-9) [(37.22±5.18) U/ml], carbohydrate antigen 724 (CA724) [(35.12±5.47) U/ml] in the ESD group were lower than those in the EMR group [(8.24±3.13) μg/L, (40.16±5.33) U/ml, and (38.44±5.63) U/ml], with statistically significant differences (t=3.644, 2.925, and 3.128; all P<0.05). The postoperative 1-year recurrence rate and mortality rate of the ESD group were 10.00% (6/60) and 6.67% (4/60), which were both lower than those of the EMR group [24.00% (12/50) and 18.00% (9/50)], and the postoperative 2-year recurrence rate and mortality rate were 16.67% (10/60) and 11.67% (7/60), which were both lower than those of the EMR group [32.00% (16/50) and 24.00% (12/50)], with statistically significant differences (χ²=6.945, 5.936, 6.382, and 5.187; all P<0.05). According to Spearman correlation coefficient test, ESD surgery was negatively correlated with the incidence of adverse prognosis in early gastric cancer (r=-0.155 and -0.147, both P<0.001), while EMR surgery was positively correlated with the incidence of adverse prognosis in early gastric cancer (r=0.254 and 0.251, both P<0.001). Conclusions　Compared with EMR surgery, ESD surgery for early gastric cancer can significantly improve the lesion resection rate and downregulate the expression of tumor markers. Choosing ESD surgery can also effectively improve the prognosis, and reduce the risk of disease recurrence and death.

Key words:

Endoscopic submucosal dissection, Endoscopic mucosal dissection, Early gastric cancer, Tumor markers, Adverse prognosis

程媚霖杨敬端.

ESD与EMR治疗早期胃癌的疗效及安全性分析 [J]. 国际医药卫生导报, 2023, 29(23): 3370-3374.

Cheng Meilin, Yang Jingduan.

Analysis of the efficacy and safety of ESD and EMR in the treatment of early gastric cancer [J]. International Medicine and Health Guidance News, 2023, 29(23): 3370-3374.

参考文献

[1] 胡云卿,朱洪挺,胡春生. 2013-2018年浙江省永康市胃癌发病与生存分析[J]. 中国肿瘤,2021,30(10):754-758.DOI:10.11735/j.issn.1004-0242.2021.10.A006.
[2] 王慕蕴,李智,卢先枝,等. 内镜下黏膜剥离术与常规外科肿瘤切除术对早期胃癌患者术中肿瘤切除率、术后复发率的影响[J]. 实用癌症杂志,2022,37(10):1653-1656.DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1001-5930.2022.10.023.
[3] 张彬. 内镜下黏膜切除术及黏膜剥离术治疗早期胃癌和癌前病变的疗效对比研究[J]. 中国现代药物应用,2022,16(3):82-84.DOI:10.14164/j.cnki.cn11-5581/r.2022.03.029.
[4] 高蕊,张秋艳. 内镜下黏膜剥离术与内镜黏膜下切除术治疗早期胃癌的疗效比较[J]. 癌症进展,2022,20(1):67-70. DOI:10.11877/j.issn.1672-1535.2022.20.01.18.
[5] 霍江波,牛应林,于淑霞,等. 内镜黏膜下剥离术在早期胃癌患者中的长期疗效研究[J]. 中国内镜杂志,2022,28(8):54-58. DOI:10.12235/E20210574.
[6] 武利萍,韩大正,杨文义,等. 超声内镜、多层螺旋CT对胃癌患者术前TNM分期诊断及与临床病理特征的相关性分析[J]. 中国CT和MRI杂志,2022,20(11):137-139.DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1672-5131.2022.11.050.
[7] 蒋祈,张鹏,陶凯雄. 美国国立综合癌症网络临床实践指南:胃癌(2022.V2)更新解读[J]. 临床外科杂志,2023,31(1):21-23.DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1005-6483.2023.01.007.
[8] 诸炎,付佩尧,李全林,等. «早期胃癌内镜黏膜下剥离术和内镜黏膜切除术治疗指南(第二版)»的更新与解读[J]. 中华消化内镜杂志,2021,38(5):361-367.DOI:10.3760/cma.j.cn321463-20210201-00080.
[9] 金鹏,刘昊,李洋,等. 可切除胃癌精准诊治共识与争议[J]. 中华肿瘤杂志,2021,43(3):282-288.DOI:10.3760/cma.j.cn112152-20201115-00989.
[10] Rovetta A. Raiders of the lost correlation: a guide on using Pearson and Spearman coefficients to detect hidden correlations in medical sciences[J].Cureus,2020,12(11):e11794. DOI:10.7759/cureus.11794.
[11] Ilic M, Ilic I. Epidemiology of stomach cancer[J].World J Gastroenterol,2022,28(12):1187-1203. DOI:10.3748/wjg.v28.i12.1187.
[12] 彭进,王伟宁,罗文,等. 胃癌患者幽门螺旋杆菌感染程度与PD-1、PD-L1表达水平的相关性[J]. 中国临床研究,2022,35(11):1565-1569.DOI:10.13429/j.cnki.cjcr.2022.11.017.
[13] Isozaki H, Matsumoto S, Murakami S. Survival outcomes after sentinel node navigation surgery for early gastric cancer[J].Ann Gastroenterol Surg,2019,3(5):552-560.DOI:10.1002/ags3.12280.
[14] Ono H, Yao K, Fujishiro M, et al. Guidelines for endoscopic submucosal dissection and endoscopic mucosal resection for early gastric cancer (second edition)[J]. Dig Endosc,2021,33(1):4-20. DOI:10.1111/den.13883.
[15] 陈敬成,肖小梅. 内镜下黏膜切除术对早期胃癌患者肿瘤切除率、血清PG、CA125水平的影响[J]. 中国医学创新,2022,19(19):153-157.DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1674-4985. 2022.19.036.
[16] 徐宁,张锋,吴震,等. 早期胃癌内镜切除术后淋巴结转移预测模型的构建与验证[J]. 现代消化及介入诊疗,2021,26(11):1418-1421.DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1672-2159.2021. 11.018.
[17] 陆游.ESD与EMR对早期胃癌及癌前病变患者血清EGF、Livin、hs-CRP水平的影响[J/CD].现代医学与健康研究电子杂志,2021,5(5):5-7.
[18] 李朝辉,刘帅峰,王云帅,等. 腹腔镜辅助小切口胃癌根治术治疗远端胃癌的疗效及对血清肿瘤标志物的影响[J]. 癌症进展,2021,19(14):1474-1476,1488.DOI:10.11877/j.issn.1672-1535.2021.19.14.19.
[19] 董林,齐笛,何佳婧,等. 血清肿瘤标志物对胃癌患者术后复发转移的预测价值及影响因素分析[J]. 癌症进展,2021,19(8):798-801.DOI:10.11877/j.issn.1672-1535.2021.19. 08.11.
[20] 孙卉,钱亚云. ESD与EMR治疗早期胃癌的临床效果及对并发症发生情况的影响[J]. 临床医学研究与实践,2021,6(32):63-65.DOI:10.19347/j.cnki.2096-1413.202132020.

ESD与EMR治疗早期胃癌的疗效及安全性分析

Analysis of the efficacy and safety of ESD and EMR in the treatment of early gastric cancer

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

参考文献

相关文章 10

编辑推荐

Metrics

[1]	李靓璐刘军娜石泽璇牛琼. 人工智能在早期胃癌诊断和治疗中的应用现状及未来展望 [J]. 国际医药卫生导报, 2023, 29(4): 445-448.
[2]	赵伟, 王毓麟. 消化内镜黏膜下注射药物相关研究进展[J]. 国际医药卫生导报, 2022, 28(5): 625-628.
[3]	吴珊珊, 马文君. 西妥昔单抗联合三维适形放疗在中晚期食管癌患者中的疗效[J]. 国际医药卫生导报, 2022, 28(4): 548-551.
[4]	张少朋. 西医方案与益气扶正解毒汤+足三里穴位注射治疗晚期胃癌患者的临床效果[J]. 国际医药卫生导报, 2022, 28(21): 3032-3036.
[5]	杨礼宾许汉标. 尿液膀胱肿瘤标志物的研究进展[J]. 国际医药卫生导报, 2022, 28(20): 2898-2902.
[6]	赵洁敏, 左万里, 廖悦华. 循环肿瘤细胞在非小细胞肺癌患者中的水平及其与肿瘤标志物的关系研究[J]. 国际医药卫生导报, 2022, 28(2): 212-214.
[7]	万英苗. 医护一体化护理应用于胃息肉行内镜下黏膜切除术患者的效果研究[J]. 国际医药卫生导报, 2022, 28(19): 2790-2793.
[8]	赵爱玲刘一品. 内镜诊断技术在早期胃癌诊断中的研究进展[J]. 国际医药卫生导报, 2022, 28(15): 2209-2214.
[9]	史文燕　朱建业　管东东. MRI联合肿瘤标志物在卵巢肿瘤诊断中的应用价值[J]. 国际医药卫生导报, 2022, 28(13): 1778-1783.
[10]	齐有涛　王东梅　白玉焕　孔令甲　敬长春　计蓓. 阿帕替尼联合替吉奥治疗晚期胃癌患者的疗效及对预后的影响[J]. 国际医药卫生导报, 2022, 28(13): 1815-1819.