-
在我国,原发性支气管癌(简称肺癌)的发病率和病死率逐年上升[1],肺癌患者在治疗前必须有明确的病理诊断,及时准确地进行病理学诊断是临床的迫切要求。CT引导下经皮肺穿刺活检术作为一种微创诊断技术,在对周围型肺癌诊断中的价值已得到认可[2]。我们对275例周围型肺占位患者行SPECT的同机定位CT引导下经皮肺穿刺活检术,并联合肺癌血清肿瘤标志物检测,旨在探讨其对周围型肺癌的诊断价值。
-
275例患者均穿刺成功,成功率100%,包括58例肺小结节(图 1)。穿刺病理结果显示,恶性组198例,包括肺癌193例(NSCLC 166例:腺癌133例、鳞癌32例、腺鳞癌1例;SCLC 23例;找到癌细胞但未明确病理类型4例)、肉瘤样癌2例、恶性淋巴瘤2例、转移瘤1例;良性组77例,包括肺炎42例(真菌性肺炎1例、机化性肺炎4例、肉芽肿性炎2例、其他急慢性肺炎35例)、肺结核8例、炎性假瘤5例、尘肺3例,肺泡组织、坏死组织、纤维组织或组织细胞浸润19例。
-
根据良恶性判定方法,恶性组198例患者全部获得正确诊断。良性组77例患者中,71例经手术、治疗好转或随访诊断为良性病变;6例误诊病例中,3例穿刺结果为坏死组织,经支气管镜或痰涂片找到恶性肿瘤细胞并确诊肺癌,1例穿刺结果为慢性炎症,纤支镜确诊为鳞癌,2例穿刺结果为纤维组织,手术病理确诊为腺癌。肺穿刺的灵敏度、特异度和准确率分别为97.01%(198/204)、100%(71/71)和97.82%(269/275)。
-
所有患者穿刺后均未出现严重并发症。气胸发生率为5.45%(15/275),其中2例行胸腔穿刺抽气后治愈,其余自行吸收;出血发生率为12.73%(35/275),其中针道渗血28例,少量咳血7例,予止血药物后症状好转;胸闷、心慌、出汗等轻度胸膜反应发生率为3.64%(10/275),10例患者均经休息后症状好转。
-
166例NSCLC与23例SCLC的肿瘤标志物水平进行比较,4例未明确病理类型的肺癌被排除。NSCLC与SCLC血清CEA、CYFRA21-1值之间的差异无统计学意义(t=1.081、0.666,均P>0.05),SCLC的NSE值高于NSCLC,两者之间的差异有统计学意义(t=3.671,P < 0.05)(表 1)。通过受试者工作特征曲线评估NSE值对SCLC与NSCLC的鉴别诊断效能,得到曲线下面积为0.935(图 2),根据统计结果中自动生成的各截断点的灵敏度和1-特异度,采用Youden指数法计算出最佳诊断界值点为26.86 ng/mL,取26.86 ng/mL作为阈值鉴别SCLC与NSCLC,所得灵敏度、特异度分别为91.34%、84.92%。
组别 CEA/(ng/mL) NSE/(ng/mL) CYFRA21-1/(ng/mL) 非小细胞肺癌组(n=166) 49.87±148.65Δ 19.79±17.65 8.95±19.44 小细胞肺癌组(n=23) 16.20±25.53 97.49±101.29 6.23±4.42 t值 1.081 3.671 0.666 P值 0.281 0 0.506 注:表中,△表示方差不齐,采用近似t检验,余两组方差齐,两组间比较采用t检验;CEA:癌胚抗原;NSE:神经元特异烯醇化酶;CYFRA21-1:细胞角蛋白19片段21-1。 表 1 非小细胞肺癌与小细胞肺癌CEA、NSE、CYFRA21-1水平的比较(x± s)
Table 1. Comparison of CEA, NSE and CYFRA21-1 levels in non-small cell lung cancer and small cell lung cancer(x± s)
SPECT同机定位CT引导经皮肺穿刺活检术联合肿瘤标志物检测对周围型肺癌的诊断价值
Diagnostic value of lung biopsy through SPECT with CT-guided percutaneous paracentesis and tumor markers for peripheral lung cancer
-
摘要:
目的探讨SPECT的同机定位CT引导经皮肺穿刺活检术联合肿瘤标志物检测对周围型肺癌的诊断价值。 方法回顾性分析275例周围型肺占位患者,均行SPECT同机定位CT引导下肺穿刺活检术,取材样本长1.0~1.5 cm,并结合肿瘤标志物检测,评价其在周围型肺癌诊断中的价值。采用SPSS13.0软件进行统计学分析,组间比较采用t检验或是近似t检验。 结果275例经皮肺穿刺活检术均穿刺成功,穿刺成功率为100%。肺穿刺活检诊断周围型肺癌的灵敏度、特异度、准确率分别为97.01%、100%、97.82%。非小细胞肺癌(NSCLC)与小细胞肺癌(SCLC)的血清癌胚抗原、细胞角蛋白19片段21-1值之间的差异无统计学意义(t=1.081、0.666,均P > 0.05),SCLC的神经元特异烯醇化酶(NSE)值高于NSCLC,差异有统计学意义(t=3.671,P < 0.05);NSE值受试者工作特征曲线下面积为0.935,最佳诊断界值点为26.86 ng/mL,取26.86 ng/mL作为阈值鉴别SCLC与NSCLC所得的灵敏度、特异度分别为91.34%、84.92%。 结论SPECT同机定位CT引导下经皮肺穿刺活检术是可行的,对周围型肺癌具有较高的诊断准确率,NSE值有助于鉴别SCLC和NSCLC。 -
关键词:
- 体层摄影术, 发射型计算机, 单光子 /
- 体层摄影术, X线计算机 /
- 肺肿瘤 /
- 穿刺活检术 /
- 肿瘤标志物
Abstract:ObjectiveTo explore the diagnostic value of SPECT localization and CT-guided percutaneous lung biopsy and tumor markers in peripheral lung cancer. MethodsA total of 275 patients with peripheral lung neoplasms were retrospectively analyzed. Pathological diagnosis was performed by SPECT with localizable CT-guided lung biopsy. The value of this imaging modality in combination with tumor markers in diagnosing lung cancer was evaluated. T-test or approximate t-test were used for data analysis using SPSS13.0 software. ResultsAll of the lung biopsies were successful. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy for lung cancer diagnosis were 97.01%, 100%, and 97.82%, respectively. No significant difference in carcino-embryonic antigen and CYFRA21-1 values was detected between non-small-cell lung cancer and small-cell lung cancer(t=1.081, 0.666, both P>0.05). However, the neuron-specific enolase(NSE) value of small-cell lung cancer(SCLC) was significantly higher than that of non-small-cell lung cancer(NSCLC), and the difference was statistically significant(t=3.671, P < 0.05). The area under the receiver operating curve of NSE was 0.935. The cut-off value of the diagnostic critical of NSE was 26.86 ng/mL, with a sensitivity of 91.34% and specificity of 84.92%. ConclusionsSPECT with localizable CT-guided percutaneous lung biopsy is feasible and highly accurate for diagnosis of peripheral lung cancer. In addition, NSE is useful in the identification of SCLC and NSCLC. -
表 1 非小细胞肺癌与小细胞肺癌CEA、NSE、CYFRA21-1水平的比较(x± s)
Table 1. Comparison of CEA, NSE and CYFRA21-1 levels in non-small cell lung cancer and small cell lung cancer(x± s)
组别 CEA/(ng/mL) NSE/(ng/mL) CYFRA21-1/(ng/mL) 非小细胞肺癌组(n=166) 49.87±148.65Δ 19.79±17.65 8.95±19.44 小细胞肺癌组(n=23) 16.20±25.53 97.49±101.29 6.23±4.42 t值 1.081 3.671 0.666 P值 0.281 0 0.506 注:表中,△表示方差不齐,采用近似t检验,余两组方差齐,两组间比较采用t检验;CEA:癌胚抗原;NSE:神经元特异烯醇化酶;CYFRA21-1:细胞角蛋白19片段21-1。 -
[1] 万书友, 侯明杰, 马丽. CT引导下肺部肿块穿刺技术的临床应用[J].中国社区医师, 2014, 30(4):93, 95. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1007-614x.2014.4.60.
Wan SY, Hou MJ, Ma L. Clinical application of CT guided lung mass puncture technique[J]. Chin Comm Doctors, 2014, 30(4):93, 95. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1007-614x.2014.4.60[2] 韦莉, 刘航, 秦志强, 等. CT引导经皮肺穿刺活检对肺周围型病变的诊断价值与安全性[J].微创医学, 2014, 9(1):40-42. DOI:10.11864/j.issn.1673.2014.01.13.
Wei L, Liu H, Qin ZQ, et al. Diagnostic value and safety of CT-guided percutaneous puncture biopsy in diagnosis of peripheral pulmonary disease[J]. J Minimally Invasive Med, 2014, 9(1):40-42. doi: 10.11864/j.issn.1673.2014.01.13[3] 杨雯, 李倩, 孙文逵, 等. CT引导下经皮肺穿刺活检在老年孤立性肺结节中的应用[J].临床肿瘤学杂志, 2014, 19(11):1015-1018. DOI:1009-0460(2014)11-1015-04.
Yang W, Li Q, Sun WK, et al. CT-guided percutaneous lung biopsy for the elderly pulmonary nodules[J]. Chin Clin Oncol, 2014, 19(11):1015-1018.[4] 杨志英, 郑浩, 张琦, 等.超声引导经皮肺穿刺在周围型肺部病变诊断中的价值[J].临床肿瘤学杂志, 2014, 19(5):449-451. DOI:1009-0460(2014)05-0449-03.
Yang ZY, Zheng H, Zhang Q, et al. Clinical application of ultrasound-guided percutaneous lung biopsy in peripheral pulmonary masses[J]. Chin Clin Oncol, 2014, 19(5):449-451.[5] Laspas F, Roussakis A, Efthimiadou R, et al. Percutaneous CT-guided fine-needle aspiration of pulmonary lesions:Results and complications in 409 patients[J]. J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol, 2008, 52(5):458-462. DOI:10.1111/j.1440-1673.2008.01990.x. [6] Battafarano RJ, Fernandez FG, Ritter J, et al. Large cell neuroendocrine carcinoma:an aggressive form of non-small cell lung cancer[J]. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg, 2005, 130(1):166-172. DOI:10.1016/j.jtcvs.2005.02.064. [7] Montaudon M, Latrabe V, Pariente A, et al. Factors influencing accuracy of CT-guided percutaneous biopsies of pulmonary lesions[J]. Eur Radiol, 2004, 14(7):1234-1240. DOI:10.1007/s00330-004-2250-3. [8] 李凤, 谢雪梅, 徐洪涛. CT引导经皮肺穿刺活检诊断效果评估和并发症原因分析[J].西部医学, 2015, 27(10):1572-1574. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1672-3551.2015.10.039.
Li F, Xie XM, Xu HT. Diagnostic efficiency of CT-guided percutaneous for lung biopsies[J]. Med J West China, 2015, 27(10):1572-1574. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1672-3551.2015.10.039[9] Yao X, Gomes MM, Tsao MS, et al. Fine-needle aspiration biopsy versus core-needle biopsy in diagnosing lung cancer:a systematic review[J]. Curr Oncol, 2012, 19(1):e16-e27. DOI:10.3747/co.19.871. [10] Beslic S, Zukic F, Milisic S. Percutaneous transthoracic CT guided biopsies of lung lesions; fine needle aspiration biopsy versus core biopsy[J]. Radiol Oncol, 2012, 46(1):19-22. DOI:10.2478/v10019-012-0004-4. [11] Baselga J. Why the epidermal growth factor receptor? The rationale for cancer therapy[J]. Oncologist, 2002, 7(Suppl 4):S2-8. DOI:10.1634/theoncologist.7-suppl-4-2. [12] 高淑艳, 叶斌, 蒲高波. CT引导下经皮肺穿刺活检并发症的相关因素研究[J].临床肺科杂志, 2013, 18(12):2258-2259. DOI:10.3969/J.issn.1009-6636.2013.12.061.
Gao SY, Ye B, Pu GB. Research of related factors of CT-guided percutaneous lung biopsy complications[J]. J Clin Pulm Med, 2013, 18(12):2258-2259. doi: 10.3969/J.issn.1009-6636.2013.12.061[13] Collins LG, Haines C, Perkel R, et al. Lung cancer:diagnosis and management[J]. Am Fam Physician, 2007, 75(1):56-63. [14] 潘清, 陈卉, 马宇晶, 等.影像学诊断评价中的参数法ROC曲线分析[J].中国医学影像技术, 2011, 27(8):1694-1697. DOI:1003-3289(2011)08-1694-04.
Pan Q, Chen H, Ma YJ, et al. Parametric ROC curve analysis for the performance evaluation of radiological diagnosis[J]. Chin J Med Imaging Technol, 2011, 27(8):1694-1697.