外科理论与实践 ›› 2023, Vol. 28 ›› Issue (02): 147-151.doi: 10.16139/j.1007-9610.2023.02.11
高卫奇1, 张旭1, 王铮1, 朱一霏1, 黄佳慧1, 洪进1, 朱思吉1, 陈小松1, 黄欧1, 何建蓉1, 陈伟国1, 李亚芬1, 沈坤炜1, 徐华2(), 吴佳毅1()
收稿日期:
2022-08-24
出版日期:
2023-03-25
发布日期:
2023-06-06
通讯作者:
吴佳毅,E-mail: GAO Weiqi1, ZHANG Xu1, WANG Zheng1, ZHU Yifei1, HUANG Jiahui1, HONG Jin1, ZHU Siji1, CHEN Xiaosong1, HUANG Ou1, HE Jianrong1, CHEN Weiguo1, LI Yafen1, SHEN Kunwei1, XU Hua2(), WU Jiayi1()
Received:
2022-08-24
Online:
2023-03-25
Published:
2023-06-06
摘要:
目的:评估新辅助治疗后病人采用腹壁下深血管穿支(deep inferior epigastric perforator, DIEP)皮瓣行即刻乳房重建手术的安全性。方法:收集2019年1月至2021年2月瑞金医院普外科乳腺疾病诊治中心乳腺癌病人,行乳房全切联合DIEP皮瓣即刻乳房重建术的资料。比较新辅助治疗组与对照组病人的临床病理特征。单因素分析比较两组病人的手术并发症发生率。结果:共研究110例,新辅助治疗组23例(20.9%),对照组87例(79.1%)。相比于对照组,新辅助治疗组无原位癌(0比19.5%,P=0.003),pTNM分期较晚(P<0.001)。两组DIEP皮瓣穿支数(P=0.472)、双蒂皮瓣的占比(P=0.489)、手术时间(P=0.651)以及住院时间(P=0.275)差异均无统计学意义。两组术后并发症发生率差异亦无统计学意义。新辅助治疗组最常见的受区并发症为乳房血清肿(13.0%,3例),未见供区并发症。对照组最常见的受区并发症为脂肪坏死(12.6%,11例),最常见的供区并发症为腹部血清肿(3.4%,3例)。新辅助治疗组与对照组分别有1例(4.3%)和4例(4.6%)二次手术。对照组2例(2.3%)发生DIEP皮瓣坏死并丢失,新辅助治疗组未发生。结论:对于新辅助治疗后的乳腺癌病人,行游离腹壁皮瓣即刻乳房重建是安全的手术方案。
中图分类号:
高卫奇, 张旭, 王铮, 朱一霏, 黄佳慧, 洪进, 朱思吉, 陈小松, 黄欧, 何建蓉, 陈伟国, 李亚芬, 沈坤炜, 徐华, 吴佳毅. 新辅助治疗后腹壁下深血管穿支皮瓣即刻乳房重建手术的安全性研究[J]. 外科理论与实践, 2023, 28(02): 147-151.
GAO Weiqi, ZHANG Xu, WANG Zheng, ZHU Yifei, HUANG Jiahui, HONG Jin, ZHU Siji, CHEN Xiaosong, HUANG Ou, HE Jianrong, CHEN Weiguo, LI Yafen, SHEN Kunwei, XU Hua, WU Jiayi. Safety analysis of immediate breast reconstruction with deep inferior epigastric perforator after neoadjuvant treatment[J]. Journal of Surgery Concepts & Practice, 2023, 28(02): 147-151.
表1
两组临床病理指标[n(%)]
Characteristics | Control group (n =87) | Neoadjuvant group (n=23) | P value |
---|---|---|---|
Age | 0.048 | ||
<50 | 79 (90.8) | 23 (100.0) | |
≥50 | 8 (9.2) | 0 | |
BMI(kg/m2) | 0.036 | ||
<25 | 10 (11.5) | 7 (30.4) | |
≥25 | 77 (88.5) | 16 (69.6) | |
Smoking history | 1.000 | ||
No | 87 (100.0) | 23 (100.0) | |
Yes | 0 | 0 | |
Diabetes | 0.330 | ||
No | 85(97.7) | 23 (100.0) | |
Yes | 2 (2.3) | 0 | |
Histological type | 0.003 | ||
Carcinoma in situ | 17 (19.5) | 0 | |
Invasive carcinoma | 70 (80.5) | 23 (100.0) | |
pTNM stage | <0.001 | ||
0 | 17 (19.5) | 2 (8.7) a) | |
Ⅰ | 27 (31.0) | 1 (4.3) | |
Ⅱ | 36 (41.5) | 6 (26.1) | |
Ⅲ | 7 (8.0) | 14 (60.9) | |
Molecular subtype | 0.233 | ||
HR+?/HER2- | 58 (66.7) | 12 (52.2) | |
HR+?/HER2+ | 16 (18.4) | 3 (13.0) | |
HR-?/HER2- | 4 (4.6) | 3 (13.0) | |
HR-?/HER2+ | 9 (10.3) | 5 (21.8) | |
DIEP flap | 0.489 | ||
Unipedicle flap | 56 (64.4) | 13 (56.5) | |
Bipedicle flap | 31 (35.6) | 10 (43.5) |
表2
两组术后并发症[n(%)]
Surgical complications | Control group (n =87) | Neoadjuvant group(n=23) | P value |
---|---|---|---|
Reconstructed breast site complications | |||
Skin necrosis | 1 (1.1) | 1 (4.3) | 0.131 |
Seroma | 1 (1.1) | 3 (13.0) | 0.082 |
Hematoma | 1 (1.1) | 1 (4.3) | 0.358 |
Infection | 0 | 1 (4.3) | 0.075 |
Fat necrosis | 11 (12.6) | 1 (4.3) | 0.214 |
Loss and necrosis of flap | 2 (2.3) | 0 | 0.330 |
Donor site wound complications | |||
Seroma | 3 (3.4) | 0 | 0.232 |
Hematoma | 2 (2.3) | 0 | 0.330 |
Fat liquefaction | 0 | 0 | / |
Infection | 1 (1.1) | 0 | 0.492 |
Umbilicus necrosis | 0 | 0 | / |
Hernia | 0 | 0 | / |
Abdominal bulge | 1 (1.1) | 0 | 0.492 |
[1] | 刘春军, 栾杰. 腹部皮瓣:乳腺癌术后乳房再造的金标准[J]. 中华整形外科杂志, 2021, 37(7):709-711. |
LIU C J, LUAN J. Abdominal flap: gold standard in post-mastectomy breast reconstruction[J]. Chin J Plast Surg, 2021, 37(7):709-711. | |
[2] |
BURSTEIN H J, CURIGLIANO G, THÜRLIMANN B, et al. Customizing local and systemic therapies for women with early breast cancer: the St. Gallen International Consensus Guidelines for treatment of early breast cancer 2021[J]. Ann Oncol, 2021, 32(10):1216-1235.
doi: 10.1016/j.annonc.2021.06.023 pmid: 34242744 |
[3] |
ADACHI Y, OKUMURA S, SAWAKI M, et al. Effects of neoadjuvant chemotherapy on operative adverse events and chemotherapy and radiotherapy in patients under-going immediate breast reconstruction[J]. Breast Cancer, 2020, 27(4):716-723.
doi: 10.1007/s12282-020-01065-4 |
[4] |
DE LA CRUZ L, MOODY A M, TAPPY E E, et al. Overall survival, disease-free survival, local recurrence, and nipple-areolar recurrence in the setting of nipple-sparing mastectomy: a meta-analysis and systematic review[J]. Ann Surg Oncol, 2015, 22(10):3241-3249.
doi: 10.1245/s10434-015-4739-1 pmid: 26242363 |
[5] |
WU Z Y, KIM H J, Lee J W, et al. Long-term oncologic outcomes of immediate breast reconstruction vs. conventional mastectomy alone for breast cancer in the setting of neoadjuvant chemotherapy[J]. JAMA Surg, 2020, 155(12):1142-1150.
doi: 10.1001/jamasurg.2020.4132 URL |
[6] |
VVRGHESE J, GOHARI S S, RIZKI H, et al. A syste-matic review and meta-analysis on the effect of neoadjuvant chemotherapy on complications following immediate breast reconstruction[J]. Breast, 2021, 55:55-62.
doi: 10.1016/j.breast.2020.11.023 URL |
[7] |
KRACOFF S, ALLWEIS T M, BEN-BARUCH N, et al. Neo-adjuvant chemotherapy does not affect the immediate postoperative complication rate after breast reconstruction[J]. Breast J, 2019, 25(3):528-530.
doi: 10.1111/tbj.2019.25.issue-3 URL |
[8] |
ZWEIFEL-SCHLATTER M, DARHOUSE N, ROBLIN P, et al. Immediate microvascular breast reconstruction after neoadjuvant chemotherapy: complication rates and effect on start of adjuvant treatment[J]. Ann Surg Oncol, 2010, 17(11):2945-2950.
doi: 10.1245/s10434-010-1195-9 URL |
[9] | 李日涵, 韩思源, 金锋. 新辅助化疗对假体或扩张器植入即刻乳房重建术患者预后的影响[J]. 中国医科大学学报, 2022, 51(4):370-374. |
LI R H, HAN S Y, JIN F. Effect of neoadjuvant chemotherapy on the prognosis of patients with implant-or expender-based immediate breast reconstruction[J]. J Chin Med Univ, 2022, 51(4):370-374. | |
[10] | 陈铭, 吴炅. 乳腺癌新辅助治疗与乳房重建研究进展[J]. 中国癌症防治杂志, 2020, 12(5):516-520. |
CHEN M, WU J. Research progress of neoadjuvant therapy and breast reconstruction for breast cancer[J]. Chin J Oncol Prev Treat, 2020, 12(5):516-520. | |
[11] |
YANG J R, KUO W L, YU C C, et al. Reconstructive outcome analysis of the impact of neoadjuvant chemotherapy on immediate breast reconstruction: a retrospective cross-sectional study[J]. BMC Cancer, 2021, 21(1):522.
doi: 10.1186/s12885-021-08256-y |
[12] |
MEHRARA B J, SANTORO T D, ARCILLA E, et al. Complications after microvascular breast reconstruction: experience with 1195 flaps[J]. Plast Reconstr Surg, 2006, 118(5):1100-1109.
doi: 10.1097/01.prs.0000236898.87398.d6 pmid: 17016173 |
[13] |
BEUGELS J, MEIJVOGEL J L W, TUINDER S M H, et al. The influence of neoadjuvant chemotherapy on complications of immediate DIEP flap breast reconstructions[J]. Breast Cancer Res Treat, 2019, 176(2):367-375.
doi: 10.1007/s10549-019-05241-9 |
[1] | 朱丹丽 鲍婉婷 魏昊 郭善禹.
乳腺癌术后乳房缺损修复的研究进展
[J]. 组织工程与重建外科杂志, 2023, 19(2): 201-. |
[2] | 邢颖, 程石. 胆囊癌新辅助治疗的现状和争议[J]. 外科理论与实践, 2023, 28(02): 110-114. |
[3] | 张小丽 李赞 宋达疆 王业成 海涛. 带蒂胸外侧动脉穿支皮瓣在保乳术后即刻乳房重建中的临床应用[J]. 组织工程与重建外科杂志, 2022, 18(5): 382-. |
[4] | 宋达疆 李赞 章一新. 带蒂腹直肌皮瓣联合游离腹壁下动脉穿支皮瓣移植重建胸壁巨大缺损的手术策略[J]. 组织工程与重建外科杂志, 2022, 18(5): 386-. |
[5] | 祝旭龙 刘鑫淼 吴姝涵 李建辉. 适用于乳房组织工程的支架材料及制备工艺[J]. 组织工程与重建外科杂志, 2022, 18(5): 413-. |
[6] | 姚成才 陈明 刘长春 黄传蔷 冼家仪 严国标 陈庞洲. 硅凝胶乳房假体联合钛网补片在早期乳腺癌即刻乳房重建中的应用[J]. 组织工程与重建外科杂志, 2022, 18(3): 247-. |
[7] | 廖晓明 蒋奕 唐玮 杨华伟 姬逸男 韦莉颖. 薄层血管化腹股沟淋巴结皮瓣移植联合反向淋巴显影在继发性上肢淋巴水肿手术中的应用[J]. 组织工程与重建外科杂志, 2022, 18(1): 8-. |
[8] | 宋景涌 汤鹏 钟晓捷 刘侠 孙洋 亢玉 王遥佳 陈安玥 陈怡安 吉训通 周艳虹 蒋曼妃 修骋 穆籣. 吻合口通畅性量化分析应用于乳腺癌腋窝淋巴结清扫术同期预防性淋巴管静脉吻合1例[J]. 组织工程与重建外科杂志, 2022, 18(1): 34-. |
[9] | 陈小松, 沈坤炜, 李宏为. 早期可手术乳腺癌的诊治现状与展望[J]. 外科理论与实践, 2022, 27(05): 385-386. |
[10] | 吴佳毅, 陆裕杰, 何金光, 沈坤炜, 徐华. 乳腺癌术后植入物乳房重建技术[J]. 外科理论与实践, 2022, 27(05): 387-391. |
[11] | 陈益定, 吴世杰. 遗传性乳腺癌外科治疗[J]. 外科理论与实践, 2022, 27(05): 392-395. |
[12] | 谢妍妍, 吕青, 杜正贵. 乳腺腔镜和机器人手术的现状及未来之路——华西医院经验分享[J]. 外科理论与实践, 2022, 27(05): 396-402. |
[13] | 周文斌, 唐新宇, 王水. 局部微波消融技术在乳腺癌治疗中的应用[J]. 外科理论与实践, 2022, 27(05): 403-405. |
[14] | 曹璐, 郑思悦, 陈佳艺. 早期乳腺癌区域淋巴结局部处理[J]. 外科理论与实践, 2022, 27(05): 406-410. |
[15] | 黄蔚, 李恒宇, 丁晓毅. 晚期乳腺癌介入诊疗的价值及应用[J]. 外科理论与实践, 2022, 27(05): 411-415. |
阅读次数 | ||||||
全文 |
|
|||||
摘要 |
|
|||||