肿瘤防治研究  2018, Vol. 45 Issue (3): 163-166
本刊由国家卫生和计划生育委员会主管,湖北省卫生厅、中国抗癌协会、湖北省肿瘤医院主办。
0

文章信息

皮瓣点式缝合联合万特普安防治乳腺癌术后皮下积液疗效观察
Efficacy of Pseudomonas Aeruginosa Preparation (PAP) Combined with Flap Point Suturing in Reducing Seroma Formation After Breast Cancer Surgery
肿瘤防治研究, 2018, 45(3): 163-166
Cancer Research on Prevention and Treatment, 2018, 45(3): 163-166
http://www.zlfzyj.com/CN/10.3971/j.issn.1000-8578.2018.17.1061
收稿日期: 2017-08-25
修回日期: 2017-11-15
皮瓣点式缝合联合万特普安防治乳腺癌术后皮下积液疗效观察
喻满成, 王伟, 范威, 许娟, 吴新红, 冯尧军     
430079 武汉,湖北省肿瘤医院乳腺科
摘要: 目的 探讨皮瓣点式缝合联合万特普安防治乳腺癌术后皮下积液的有效性和安全性。方法 回顾性分析2015年3月—2017年3月收治的236例乳腺癌手术患者临床资料,依据是否使用万特普安分为两组,术中使用了万特普安的为试验组104例,另一组为对照组132例。比较两组术后总引流量、留管天数、术后皮下积液发生率、皮下积液量、发热率及并发症等。结果 试验组总引流量(486.78±32.54)ml少于对照组(502.56±40.12)ml(P=0.001),试验组留管天数、术后皮下积液发生率及皮下积液量均明显少于对照组(均P < 0.05),而试验组并没有明显增加发热率及术后并发症发生率(P > 0.05)。结论 在乳腺癌常规术后皮瓣点式缝合基础上,局部使用万特普安可明显减少术后皮下积液的产生,促进伤口愈合,不良反应少。
关键词: 铜绿假单胞菌注射液     皮瓣点式缝合     乳腺癌     皮下积液    
Efficacy of Pseudomonas Aeruginosa Preparation (PAP) Combined with Flap Point Suturing in Reducing Seroma Formation After Breast Cancer Surgery
YU Mancheng, WANG Wei, FAN Wei, XU Juan, WU Xinhong, FENG Yaojun     
Department of Breast Cancer, Hubei Cancer Hospital, Wuhan 430079, China
Corresponding author: FENG Yaojun, E-mail: 774242785@qq.com.
Abstract: Objective To evaluate the efficacy and safety of pseudomonas aeruginosa preparation(PAP) combined with flap point suturing in reducing seroma formation after breast cancer surgery. Methods We retrospectively analyzed the clinical data of 236 patients after breast cancer resection in our department from March 2015 to March 2017. According to whether pseudomonas aeruginosa preparation was used or not, the patients were divided into two groups: the experimental group (PAP group, n=104) and the control group(n=132). The volume of drainage, the duration of drainage, the incidence of seroma formation, the volume of seroma, the rates of heating and the rates of complications were compared. Results The experimental group had a lower drainage volume than the control group (486.78±32.54ml vs. 502.56±40.12 ml, P=0.001); the experimental group showed less days of drainage, lower incidence of seroma formation and less volume of seroma (P < 0.05), however, PAP did not increase the rates of heating or complications (P > 0.05). Conclusion Basis on flap point suturing, the local use of PAP is a feasible and safe option for reducing or preventing seroma formation and promoting wound healing.
Key words: Pseudomonas aeruginosa preparation     Flap point suturing     Breast cancer     Seroma    
0 引言

乳腺癌是严重威胁女性健康的恶性肿瘤[1],自上世纪90年代以来,我国乳腺癌发病率逐年上升,每年新发病人数达世界新发病人数的12.2%[2]。乳腺癌的治疗手段较多,其中外科手术仍是重要的治疗手段,乳腺癌手术范围日趋缩小,如Z001试验[3],但一部分患者仍需接受腋窝淋巴结清扫术。皮下积液是腋窝淋巴结清扫术后早期最常见的并发症,有6%~52%的患者术后会出现该并发症[4]。皮下积液一般不会造成严重的后果,但皮下积液的出现可增加伤口感染的风险、延长伤口愈合时间、延长住院时间及影响整体治疗方案进程等。为了减少皮下积液的发生,临床上有多种治疗手段,如超声刀、滑石粉粘连剂及纤维胶原蛋白剂等的使用[5-7],有学者研究表明沙培林(灭活A型溶血性链球菌冻干品)在抗肿瘤的同时,在减少乳腺癌术后皮下积液方面有明显的优势[8-10],而铜绿假单胞菌注射液(pseudomonas aeruginosa preparation, PAP,万特普安)作用与沙培林作用类似,亦有研究表明PAP在抗肿瘤的同时能减少积液的发生[11-13],基于此,本研究收集了湖北省肿瘤医院乳腺科所接受腋窝淋巴结清扫术的乳腺癌患者临床资料,在乳腺癌术后常规皮瓣点式缝合的基础上,对是否使用PAP的两组患者术后情况进行对比分析,探讨PAP在防治乳腺癌患者术后皮下积液的临床效果,以期为临床治疗提供帮助。

1 资料与方法 1.1 临床资料

收集2015年3月—2017年3月住院的原发性乳腺癌手术患者临床资料,共236例。纳入标准:(1)原发性乳腺癌女性患者,均为单侧乳腺癌,无严重心、肺及脑等基础疾病;(2)无骨、肺及肝等远处转移等;(3)手术均为治疗性开放手术,为保乳术和改良根治术,均行腋窝淋巴结清扫术;(4)手术均为同一医疗小组施行;术后护理均相同。按照纳入标准共筛选出病例236例,依据术中是否使用万特普安分为两组,使用万特普安的患者为试验组,共104例,未使用万特普安的患者为对照组,共132例。两组患者的年龄、BMI指数、腋窝淋巴结情况等见表 1

表 1 两组乳腺癌患者围手术期一般情况 Table 1 Baseline characteristics of two groups of breast cancer patients
1.2 方法

1.2.1 研究方法

本文采用回顾性研究的方法,制定相关的纳入标准,依据术中是否使用万特普安将患者分为两组,比较两组患者术后相关结果。

1.2.2 手术创面的处理方式

两组患者均为同一医疗小组完成手术,切除标本过程相同,标本离体后,对照组常规使用蒸馏水500 ml冲洗手术创面,充分止血,使用圆针3~0丝线将腋下局部皮肤内缝合1~2针固定于腋窝相应的侧胸壁,下胸壁游离皮肤缝合2~3针固定于下胸壁,上胸壁游离皮肤缝合2~3针固定于上胸壁,将15F负压引流装置置入腋窝,自下胸壁腋前线位置穿出固定于皮肤,常规缝合手术切口。试验组在对照组的基础上,常规均匀喷洒万特普安(规格:1.0 ml/支,国药准字S20043022,北京万特尔生物制药有限公司)1支在腋窝创面,若是改良手术,均匀喷洒2支在胸大肌等其他创面。术后常规使用胸带加压包扎,换药间隔时间为3天左右,注意观察皮瓣颜色,随时调整胸带加压的力度,若连续2天引流量少于10 ml则拔除引流管,观察有无皮下积液等并发症,若皮下积液面积较小则使用注射器抽吸,若面积较大可置入桥管引流,必要时在积液腔内注入一只万特普安,并加压包扎手术创面,持续换药。

1.2.3 观察指标

主要观察指标:患者术后总引流量、留管天数、术后发生皮下积液的例数、皮下积液的量;次要观察指标:术后发热的例数及术后总并发症发生数等。

1.3 统计学方法

本研究数据应用SPSS19.0统计软件包进行分析,计量资料使用平均数±标准差(x±s)表示,采用独立样本t检验,计量资料使用χ2检验。以P < 0.05为差异有统计学意义。

2 结果

本研究共纳入236例乳腺癌患者,围手术期均无严重并发症。两组患者术前年龄、BMI指数、是否行新辅助化疗及肿瘤类型等差异均无统计学意义(P > 0.05);术后腋窝淋巴结数目、阳性淋巴结数目及清扫水平等差异均无统计学意义(P > 0.05),两组基线一致,有可比性,见表 1

试验组术后总引流量、留管天数及术后皮下积液发生率明显少于对照组,两组差异有统计学意义(P < 0.05)。试验组有13例(12.50%)术后发热,对照组有14例(10.61%)术后发热,两组比较差异无统计学意义(P > 0.05),但对照组发生率低于试验组,发热患者给予对症处理均逐渐恢复正常,均未给予抗生素治疗。术后试验组中有5例发生皮瓣坏死,3例伤口愈合延迟,2例上肢静脉血栓,对照组中有9例皮瓣坏死,6例伤口愈合延迟,2例上肢静脉血栓,皮瓣坏死患者术后均不需植皮处理,通过换药逐渐愈合。具体情况见表 2

表 2 两组乳腺癌患者术后情况比较 Table 2 Postoperative results of two groups of breast cancer patients
3 讨论

在乳腺癌腋窝淋巴结清扫术后,皮下积液是术后早期最常见的并发症[14-15]。它的发生可能主要来源于两个方面:(1)早期手术创面的渗出,术后创面越大,炎性反应越重,损伤的细小管道越多,加上皮瓣贴合不良,促进了皮下积液的发生,所以乳房改良根治术皮下积液的发生率明显高于保乳术的患者[16-17]。(2)晚期术后淋巴管漏,在腋窝淋巴结清扫时需离断部分淋巴管,淋巴管闭合不良常常导致腋窝皮下积液的发生,对于皮下积液经久不愈的患者,淋巴漏是后期皮下积液的主要原因[18]。另外肥胖、糖尿病及术后患肢活动情况均可促进皮下积液的发生[19]。为了减少皮下积液的发生,不同方法均有报道[6, 20-23],但目前仍没有一种方法能够完全减少皮下积液的发生,本试验通过观察分析在常规皮瓣点式缝合基础上使用PAP的临床效果,来探讨PAP在防治乳腺癌术后皮下积液的作用。

PAP是通过基因重组技术制造出的新型菌类制剂,在保留自然界铜绿假单胞菌的完整菌体基础下,可通过其表面甘露糖敏感血凝菌毛识别并结合肿瘤细胞表面的甘露糖生长因子受体(epidermal growth factor receptor, EGFR),影响肿瘤细胞内信号转导,进而抑制肿瘤细胞的生长[24]。PAP不仅可用于恶性肿瘤的辅助治疗,延长肿瘤患者无病生存期,还可通过调节机体免疫来治疗一些反复发作的疾病,如慢性肝炎、肺结核及减少恶性胸腹水等[25],另外PAP可促进局部无菌性炎性反应的发生,可促进乳腺癌术后皮瓣的贴合,减少皮下积液的产生,但同时可能有增加患者发热的风险[13, 26]。皮瓣点式缝合是指将游离皮瓣点式固定于胸壁,限制皮瓣的活动性,能减少死腔的形成,促进皮瓣与胸壁的粘连。

在临床工作中,为了促进乳腺癌术后伤口的愈合,使用加压包扎和负压引流的较多,而使用皮瓣点式缝合的较少[8, 20, 27],本研究对照组的术后总引流量少于其他单纯负压引流研究的引流量[8, 10]。本研究中试验组术后总引流量明显少于对照组(P=0.001),缩短了拔管时间(P < 0.05),在一定程度上减少了伤口感染的风险,促进了伤口的愈合。另外,试验组有7例(6.73%)患者术后出现了皮下积液,皮下积液量明显少于对照组的例数(24例)和积液量(P < 0.05),说明PAP在预防乳腺癌术后皮下积液方面效果明显。PAP为细菌制剂,最常出现的就是发热,本研究中大于38.5℃的患者总数差异不显著(P > 0.05),并且均经过对症处理后缓解,但对照组发热率低于试验组。两组患者均未发生严重的不良反应,两组总的并发症发生率差异不显著(P > 0.05),PAP的使用并没有增加患者术后并发症的发生率。

目前,沙培林(灭活A型溶血性链球菌冻干品)用于防治乳腺癌皮下积液的文献报告较多,但关于PAP的文献较少,我们通过对近两年的病例进行统计分析发现,在皮瓣点式缝合的基础上,加用PAP可明显减少乳腺癌术后皮下积液的产生,促进伤口的愈合,是一种安全有效的细菌制剂。究其原因:(1)皮瓣点式缝合限制了皮肤的移动,减少了运动造成创面的二次撕脱,促进皮肤与胸壁的贴合,同时创面喷洒PAP促进了局部纤维蛋白的渗出,形成粘连,进一步减少死腔形成,从而减少渗出。(2)皮瓣点式缝合限制了皮肤的移动,减少了细小管道断端电刀痂的脱落,并且PAP通过刺激机体淋巴细胞及中性粒细胞的产生和聚集,可堵塞重新开放的细小血管和淋巴管,进一步减少了皮下积液的发生。但由于本研究是回顾性分析,有一定的局限性,并且没有对两组术后肿瘤学效用作一分析,以期将来大样本随机试验证实,对临床运用有所帮助。

参考文献
[1] Torre LA, Bray F, Siegel RL, et al. Global cancer statistics, 2012[J]. CA Cancer J Clin, 2015, 65(2): 87–108. DOI:10.3322/caac.21262
[2] Fan L, Strasser-Weippl K, Li JJ, et al. Breast cancer in China[J]. Lancet Oncol, 2014, 15(7): e279–89. DOI:10.1016/S1470-2045(13)70567-9
[3] Giuliano AE, Ballman K, Mccall L, et al. Locoregional Recurrence After Sentinel Lymph Node Dissection With or Without Axillary Dissection in Patients With Sentinel Lymph Node Metastases: Long-term Follow-up From the American College of Surgeons Oncology Group (Alliance) ACOSOG Z0011 Randomized Trial[J]. Ann Surg, 2016, 264(3): 413–20. DOI:10.1097/SLA.0000000000001863
[4] Faisal M, Abu-Elela ST, Mostafa W, et al. Efficacy of axillary exclusion on seroma formation after modified radical mastectomy[J]. World J Surg Oncol, 2016, 14(1): 39. DOI:10.1186/s12957-016-0801-0
[5] Turner EJ, Benson JR, Winters ZE. Techniques in the prevention and management of seromas after breast surgery[J]. Future Oncol, 2014, 10(6): 1049–63. DOI:10.2217/fon.13.257
[6] Hart AM, Duggal C, Pinell-White X, et al. A Prospective Randomized Trial of the Efficacy of Fibrin Glue, Triamcinolone Acetonide, and Quilting Sutures in Seroma Prevention after Latissimus Dorsi Breast Reconstruction[J]. Plast Reconstr Surg, 2017, 139(4): 854e–63e. DOI:10.1097/PRS.0000000000003213
[7] Khan S, Khan S, Chawla T, et al. Harmonic scalpel versus electrocautery dissection in modified radical mastectomy: a randomized controlled trial[J]. Ann Surg Oncol, 2014, 21(3): 808–14. DOI:10.1245/s10434-013-3369-8
[8] Zhao J, Su F, Hu Y, et al. Prospective comparison of Sapylin and Avitene for reducing hydrops after axillary lymphadenectomy in breast cancer patients[J]. J Surg Res, 2017, 210: 8–14. DOI:10.1016/j.jss.2016.10.032
[9] Kong D, Liu Y, Li Z, et al. OK-432(sapylin) reduces seroma formation after axillary lymphadenectomy in breast cancer[J]. J Invest Surg, 2017, 30(1): 1–5. DOI:10.1080/08941939.2016.1204386
[10] Yang Y, Chen Y, Qu J, et al. The use of OK-432 to prevent seroma in extended latissimus dorsi flap donor site after breast reconstruction[J]. J Surg Res, 2015, 193(1): 492–6. DOI:10.1016/j.jss.2014.08.010
[11] Wei T, Liu F, Li Z, et al. Novel management of intractable cervical chylous fistula with local application of pseudomonas aeruginosa injection[J]. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg, 2015, 153(4): 561–5. DOI:10.1177/0194599815584917
[12] Zhang Z, Wang LP, Zhao XL, et al. Pseudomonas aeruginosa injection enhanced antitumor cytotoxicity of cytokine-induced killer cells derived from cord blood[J]. Biomed Pharmacother, 2014, 68(8): 1057–63. DOI:10.1016/j.biopha.2014.10.024
[13] 张蓉, 曹茵, 张爱玲, 等. 万特普安在乳腺癌术后淋巴漏中的应用[J]. 中国现代医生, 2015(3): 71–3. [ Zhang R, Cao Y, Zhang AL, et al. Application of pseudomonas aerugin osa preparation in lymph leakage after breast carcinoma operation[J]. Zhongguo Xian Dai Yi Sheng, 2015(3): 71–3. ]
[14] Woodworth PA, Mcboyle MF, Helmer SD, et al. Seroma formation after breast cancer surgery: incidence and predicting factors[J]. Am Surg, 2000, 66(5): 444–51.
[15] van Bastelaar J, van Roozendaal L, Granzier R, et al. A systematic review of flap fixation techniques in reducing seroma formation and its sequelae after mastectomy[J]. Breast Cancer Res Treat, 2018, 167(2): 409–16. DOI:10.1007/s10549-017-4540-x
[16] Zielinski J, Jaworski R, Irga N, et al. Analysis of selected factors influencing seroma formation in breast cancer patients undergoing mastectomy[J]. Arch Med Sci, 2013, 9(1): 86–92.
[17] Iovino F, Auriemma PP, Ferraraccio F, et al. Preventing seroma formation after axillary dissection for breast cancer: a randomized clinical trial[J]. Am J Surg, 2012, 203(6): 708–14. DOI:10.1016/j.amjsurg.2011.06.051
[18] Srivastava V, Basu S, Shukla VK. Seroma formation after breast cancer surgery: what we have learned in the last two decades[J]. J Breast Cancer, 2012, 15(4): 373–80. DOI:10.4048/jbc.2012.15.4.373
[19] van Bastelaar J, Theunissen LLB, Snoeijs MGL, et al. Flap fixation using tissue glue or sutures appears to reduce seroma aspiration after mastectomy for breast cancer[J]. Clin Breast Cancer, 2017, 17(4): 316–21. DOI:10.1016/j.clbc.2017.01.005
[20] van Bemmel AJ, van de Velde CJ, Schmitz RF, et al. Prevention of seroma formation after axillary dissection in breast cancer: a systematic review[J]. Eur J Surg Oncol, 2011, 37(10): 829–35. DOI:10.1016/j.ejso.2011.04.012
[21] Ouldamer L, Bonastre J, Brunet-Houdard S, et al. Dead space closure with quilting suture versus conventional closure with drainage for the prevention of seroma after mastectomy for breast cancer (QUISERMAS): protocol for a multicentre randomised controlled trial[J]. BMJ Open, 2016, 6(4): e9903.
[22] Pergialiotis V, Kontzoglou K, Dimitroulis D, et al. Electrosurgical bipolar vessel sealing during axillary lymphadenectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis[J]. Breast Dis, 2015, 35(1): 5–11. DOI:10.3233/BD-140383
[23] 陈军, 曹亚丽, 吴晓波, 等. 手术切口选择对乳腺癌行前哨淋巴结活检成功率及皮下积液发生的影响[J]. 肿瘤防治研究, 2016, 43(7): 606-8. [ Effect of Operation Incision Selection on Success rate of Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy and Subcutaneous Hydrops in Breast Cancer[J]. Zhong Liu Fang Zhi Yan Jiu, 2016, 43(7): 606-8. ] http://www.zlfzyj.com/CN/abstract/abstract8798.shtml
[24] Liu ZB, Hou YF, Min-Dong, et al. PA-MSHA inhibits proliferation and induces apoptosis through the up-regulation and activation of caspases in the human breast cancer cell lines[J]. J Cell Biochem, 2009, 108(1): 195–206. DOI:10.1002/jcb.v108:1
[25] Chang J, Liu Y, Han B, et al. Pseudomonas aeruginosa preparation plus chemotherapy for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: a randomized, multicenter, double-blind phase Ⅲ study[J]. Med Oncol, 2015, 32(5): 139. DOI:10.1007/s12032-015-0583-1
[26] Jia L, Wang C, Kong H, et al. Effect of PA-MSHA vaccine on plasma phospholipids metabolic profiling and the ratio of Th2/Th1 cells within immune organ of mouse IgA nephropathy[J]. J Pharm Biomed Anal, 2007, 43(2): 646–54. DOI:10.1016/j.jpba.2006.07.040
[27] Selvendran S, Cheluvappa R, Tr Ng VK, et al. Efficacy of harmonic focus scalpel in seroma prevention after axillary clearance[J]. Int J Surg, 2016, 30: 116–20. DOI:10.1016/j.ijsu.2016.04.041