中国癌症杂志 ›› 2013, Vol. 23 ›› Issue (9): 751-758.doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1007-3969.2013.09.010

• 论著 • 上一篇    下一篇

喉癌中央区淋巴结转移:11年喉癌手术病例回顾性分析

张凌,徐宽,嵇庆海,王卓颖,王宇,李端树,吴毅,朱永学   

  1. 复旦大学附属肿瘤医院头颈外科,复旦大学上海医学院肿瘤学系,上海 200032
  • 出版日期:2013-09-25 发布日期:2014-02-20
  • 通信作者: 朱永学 E-mail:zhuyongxue@shca.org.cn

Lymph nodes metastases in central compartment of laryngeal cancer: A 11-year review of surgical treatment cases

ZHANG Ling,XU Kuan,JI Qing-hai,WANG Zhuo-ying,WANG Yu,LI Duan-shu,WU Yi,ZHU Yong-xue   

  1. Department of Head and Neck Surgery, Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center, Department of Oncology, Shanghai Medical College, Fudan University, Shanghai 200032, China
  • Published:2013-09-25 Online:2014-02-20
  • Contact: ZHU Yong-xue E-mail: zhuyongxue@shca.org.cn

摘要:

背景与目的:对于喉癌患者是否常规行颈部中央区淋巴结清扫,目前尚存在争议。本研究探讨喉癌患者中央区和侧颈区淋巴结转移、颈部复发以及疾病预后生存情况。方法:回顾性分析19992009年复旦大学附属肿瘤医院收治的118例确诊为喉癌患者的临床病理资料。其中34例患者行颈部中央区淋巴结清扫。回顾分析肿瘤原发灶分级,中央区和侧颈区淋巴结转移临床资料,以及患者总生存率(overall survival, OS),无病生存率(diseas-free survival, DFS)和局控率(local control rate, LCR)结果:118例喉癌患者中,颈部中央区淋巴结转移率为11.9%(14/118),包括在34例中央区淋巴结清扫患者中证实10例,未作淋巴结清扫,在随访中发现中央区淋巴结转移4例。肿瘤声门下或者梨状窝侵犯是中央区转移以及中央区复发的危险因素(P=0.002)。中央区淋巴结转移与颈部IV区转移相关(P<0.001),侧颈区淋巴结包膜外侵犯(P=0.001)和血管侵犯(P=0.015)是中央区淋巴结转移、中央区复发和颈侧区复发的危险因素。中央区淋巴结转移阳性喉癌患者较阴性患者局控率低(P=0.035)。侧颈区淋巴结转移阳性患者较阴性患者无病生存率(P=0.014)和局控率(P=0.025)低。声门上喉癌更容易发生颈部Ⅱ区淋巴结转移(P=0.044)结论:喉癌患者应注意中央区淋巴结清扫。声门上喉癌患者应注意颈部Ⅱ区淋巴结清扫。中央区淋巴结转移阳性患者应注意颈部Ⅳ区淋巴结清扫。

关键词: 喉癌, 手术, 颈部淋巴结转移, 中央区淋巴结清扫

Abstract:

Background and purpose: The aim of this study was to determine the necessity of central compartment neck dissection in laryngeal cancer.Study Design: Retrospective study at a tertiary referral medical center. Methods: Patients with laryngeal squamous cell cancer who underwent neck dissection were evaluated, and a retrospective analysis of clinicopathologic factors and follow-up data were performed. Results: One hundred and eighteen patients from 1999 to 2009 were enrolled. There were 11.9% central compartment lymph node metastasis in all patients, including the 10 patients with central compartment lymph node metastasis in 34 patients underwent compartment neck dissection and 4 patients do not underwent compartment neck dissection but had central neck recurrence in the follow up time. Subglottic or pyriform extension were risk factors in central compartment lymph node metastasis and central neck recurrence (P=0.002). Central compartment lymph node metastasis had closed relationship with level metastasis (P<0.001), extracapsular extension (P=0.001), vascular extension (P=0.015) and poor local control rates (P=0.035) respectively. Patients who were positive for lateral neck lymph node metastasis had poor disease-free survival rate (P=0.014) and poor local control rates (P=0.025), and supraglottic cancer had a trend to metastases to level (P=0.044). Conclusion: Central compartment neck dissection might be considered a potential therapeutic approach for patients with laryngeal cancer.

Key words: Laryngeal cancer, Surgery, Neck metastasis, Central compartment, Neck dissection