彻底与非彻底病灶清除术治疗脊柱结核疗效的Meta分析

目的:通过Meta分析比较病灶彻底清除术与病灶非彻底清除术对脊柱结核的临床疗效。方法:系统检索Medline、EMBASE、Cochrane Library、Web of Science、CBM、CNKI和万方7个数据库,查找所有比较彻底与非彻底病灶清除术治疗脊柱结核的随机对照试验与非随机对照试验(RCT or non-RCT),检索时间均为建库至2017年7月17日。按纳入排除标准由两名研究人员独立筛选文献、提取数据、评价纳入研究的偏倚风险。采用Revman 5.3软件进行Meta分析,并采用GRADE系统对证据质量进行分级。对两种清除术的复发率、不良反应发生率、治愈时间、化疗时间、脊柱畸形矫正角度、椎间界面融合时间、术后ESR及CRP进行比较。结果:共纳入9篇文献,5篇RCT,4篇NON-RCT,共1 302例患者。与病灶非彻底清除术比较,病灶彻底清除术有更低的复发率[OR=0.14,95%CI(0.08,0.22),P0.000 01]和不良反应发生率[OR=0.18,95%CI(0.12,0.27),P0.000 01],治愈时间[MD=-4.80,95%CI(-5.14,-4.45),P0.000 01]与化疗时间[MD=-5.25,95%CI(-5.64,-4.86),P0.000 01]更短,术后脊柱畸形能矫正的角度更大[MD=4.88,95%CI(3.55,6.27),P0.000 01],术后的ESR[MD=-8.74,95%CI(-11.99,-5.49),P0.000 01]及CRP[MD=-4.75,95%CI(-8.61～-0.88),P=0.02]更低。但是两组在椎间界面骨性融合时间方面差异无统计学意义[MD=-0.19,95%CI(-0.50,0.12),P=0.23]。结论 :病灶彻底清除术治疗脊柱结核与非彻底清除术相比,术后复发率显著降低,不良反应发生率少,且能明显缩短化疗时间及治愈时间,患者术后康复得更快。选择哪种手术方式主要根据患者的适应证,但是在相同适应证的情况下病灶彻底清除术应该被推荐。     

Current management of DCIS: a review

Ductal carcinoma in-situ (DCIS) is a heterogeneous disease, in terms of its radiological characteristics, histological morphology and molecular attributes. This diversity is reflected in its natural history and influences optimal treatment strategy. A significant proportion of DCIS lesions behave in a clinically benign fashion and do not progress to invasive disease. Reliable identification of these patients could allow treatment to be less radical or safely omitted. Management should be tailored to the individual within the context of a multidisciplinary team. Approaches such as biological profiling and molecular analysis represent an opportunity to improve our understanding of the tumour biology of this condition and rationalise its treatment. This article reviews the management strategies for DCIS in the context of recent randomized trials, including the role of sentinel lymph node biopsy, adjuvant radiotherapy and tamoxifen.     

MR增强延迟扫描成像在保乳术后俯卧位照射患者瘤床靶区勾画中的应用

目的 基于形变配准探讨保乳术后术腔血清肿不可见或低可见度(CVS≤2)患者行俯卧位照射时MR增强延迟扫描成像在瘤床(LC)勾画中的应用。方法 26例患者入组。分别在俯卧位CT定位图像、俯卧位MR定位T2WI成像及增强延迟2、5、10min的T1WI成像上勾画LC并分别定义为LCCT、LCT2、LC2T1、LC5T1和LC10T1。基于形变配准进行CT与MR图像LC间体积与位置的比较。结果 LCT2、LC2T1、LC5T1、LC10T1体积似均大于LCCT体积,且LC2T1、LC5T1与LCCT间体积差异有统计学意义(均P<0.05)。LC10T1与LCCT间的包含度(DI)、适形指数(CI)、相似度指数(DSC)、靶区中心距离(COM)均似优于LCT2与LCCT、LC2T1与LCCT及LC5T1与LCCT,但差异均无统计学意义(均P>0.05)。结论 基于俯卧位MR定位增强延迟扫描成像勾画低CVS患者LC靶区是可行的,无论是靶区体积大小还是靶区空间位置,基于T1WI增强延迟10min扫描所勾画LC靶区与基于俯卧位CT图像上金属钛夹所勾画的最接近。     

Breast-conserving therapy can be offered to women with prior breast augmentation

IntroductionBreast cancer in women with cosmetic breast implants is increasingly common. Over the past decade, there has been a push for mastectomy and reconstruction in these patients, based on a fear of poor aesthetic results from small breast volume, and radiation-induced capsular contracture. At the Paris Breast Centre, augmented women routinely undergo lumpectomy with whole-breast irradiation (BCT).Materials and methodsA consecutive cohort of 50 augmented women, who had attempted BCT for early breast cancer at our institution between 2003 and 2018, were retrospectively identified. Post-treatment complications, oncologic outcomes, capsular contracture rates, long-term cosmetic outcomes, and patient-reported outcomes were evaluated.ResultsThe median follow-up was 51 months. Margins were involved in 7 women (14%); 4 of whom underwent successful re-excision, and 3 had a mastectomy, for an early mastectomy rate of 6%. There were no early complications, nor cases of early implant loss. Long-term aesthetic results were evaluated using our 5-point scale: An excellent (5), or good (4) result was obtained in 68%. Significant capsular contracture (Baker grade 3 or 4) developed in 34%, of which, 5 women underwent capsulotomy and fat grafting; 4 of 5 downstaging their Baker grade. The estimated 5-year local recurrence rate was 2.3%. Ninety-five percent of participants would recommend BCT to augmented women.ConclusionBCT is feasible and safe in augmented women with good long-term aesthetic results, and should be considered to avoid unnecessary mastectomy.     

Comparison of Radioactive Seed Localized Excision and Wire Localized Excision of Breast Lesions: A Community Hospital’s Experience

Background

Most data comparing wire localized excision (WLE) and radioactive seed localized excision (RSLE) derive from academic institutions with limited data from community hospitals. This study aimed to compare positive margin rates between WLE and RSLE and to determine if there were any differences in specimen volume and operation time.

保乳术前肿瘤MRI体积与术后标本体积及基于金属夹勾画术腔体积比较研究

目的 探讨保乳患者术前MRI肿瘤体积与术后标本测量体积及基于金属夹勾画的瘤床体积间的差异性与相关性.方法 2014—2015年间50例乳腺癌保乳患者入组.基于术前MRI勾画GTV并定义为GTVMRI,其边界外扩1.0 cm得到GTVMRI+1.测量切除标本体积并测量和计算病理体积,分别定义为GTVES和GTVPAT.在定位CT图像上基于术腔边界金属夹勾画GTV,并定义为GTVTB.Friedman检验,Wilcoxon法两两比较,Spearman等级相关分析.结果 GTVMRI、GTVMRI+1、GTVPAT、GTVES、GTVTB中位数(范围)分别为0.97(0.01~6.88)、12.58(3.90~34.13)、0.97(0.01~2.36)、15.46(1.15~70.69)、19.24(4.72~54.33)cm3.GTVMRI与GTVPAT、GTVMRI+1与GTVES、GTVTB与GTVES差异均无统计学意义(P=0.188、0.07、0.264).GTVTB、GTVES与GTVMRI均无相关性(P=0.378、0.071),GTVTB、GTVES与GTVMRI+1也均无相关性(P=0.375、0.068),而GTVTB与GTVES呈正相关(r=0.488,P=0.004).结论 在非影像引导情况下,保乳治疗的患者基于触诊范围行局部肿瘤切除术时,切除标本体积及基于金属夹勾画的术腔体积与基于术前MRI图像所勾画与构建的肿瘤体积均无相关性.