Comparative analysis of anal functions in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer receiving preoperative versus postoperative chemoradiotherapy
-
摘要:目的
探讨不同放化疗时机(术前或术后)对局部进展期直肠癌(LARC)患者根治性直肠癌切除术后肛门功能及造口结局的影响。
方法回顾性纳入2000年1月-2020年5月于我院接受放化疗联合根治性直肠癌切除术的LARC患者。将患者分为术前放化疗组(术前接受新辅助放化疗)与术后放化疗组(术后接受辅助放化疗)。主要研究终点为术后2年的肛门功能(采用Wexner肛门失禁评分评估),次要研究终点为接受回肠造口还纳手术的患者比例。
结果共562例患者符合纳入条件并完成2年及以上随访,包括术前放化疗组247例、术后放化疗组315例。共422例完整填写了Wexner肛门失禁评分量表,术后2年随访时,术后放化疗组Wexner肛门失禁评分低于术前放化疗组[(2.3±4.3)分vs(5.3±3.5)分,P<0.01],表明术后放化疗组在肛门功能方面表现更优。经倾向评分匹配平衡混杂因素后,术后放化疗组与术前放化疗组Wexner肛门失禁评分差异依然存在[(2.3±4.3)分vs(5.3±3.5)分,P<0.01]。完成2年及以上随访的患者中有481例接受了临时性回肠造口术,其中369例在术后2年内成功还纳。多因素logistic回归分析表明,放化疗时机是临时性回肠造口术及后续造口还纳的独立预测因素(OR=0.07,95%CI 0.03~0.18,P<0.01;OR=3.45,95%CI 2.08~5.56,P<0.01)。
结论在LARC患者中,术后辅助放化疗较术前新辅助放化疗降低了临时性回肠造口率、提高了造口还纳率,并与更好的长期肛门功能相关。
Abstract:ObjectiveTo explore the effects of different chemoradiotherapy timing (preoperative or postoperative) on anal functions and stoma outcomes after radical resection for locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC).
MethodsLARC patients who received chemoradiotherapy combined with radical rectal cancer resection at our hospital between Jan. 2000 and May 2020 were retrospectively enrolled. Patients were assigned to preoperative chemoradiotherapy group (receiving neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy before surgery) or postoperative chemoradiotherapy group (receiving adjuvant chemoradiotherapy after surgery). The primary endpoint was overall anorectal function at 2 years postoperatively, assessed using the Wexner incontinence score. Secondary endpoints were the proportion of patients undergoing ileostomy reversal surgery.
ResultsA total of 562 patients were enrolled and completed follow-up of at least 2 years, including 247 in the preoperative chemoradiotherapy group and 315 in the postoperative chemoradiotherapy group. The Wexner incontinence scale was fully completed by 422 patients. The 2-year postoperative Wexner score was significantly lower in the postoperative chemoradiotherapy group than in the preoperative group (2.3±4.3 vs 5.3±3.5, P<0.01), indicating better anal function in the postoperative chemoradiotherapy group. After confounding factors were balanced via propensity score matching, the significant difference in Wexner scores remained between the 2 groups (2.3±4.3 vs 5.3±3.5, P<0.01). Among all patients followed up, 481 underwent temporary ileostomy, and 369 underwent successful stoma reversal within 2 years after surgery. Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that chemoradiotherapy timing was an independent predictor of temporary ileostomy (OR=0.07, 95%CI 0.03-0.18, P<0.01) and subsequent stoma reversal (OR=3.45, 95%CI 2.08-5.56, P<0.01).
ConclusionIn LARC patients, postoperative adjuvant chemoradiotherapy, compared to preoperative neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy, significantly reduces temporary ileostomy rates, improves stoma reversal rates, and is associated with better long-term anal function.
-
结直肠癌是全球第三大常见的恶性肿瘤[1]。目前,全直肠系膜切除术联合新辅助治疗是局部进展期直肠癌(locally advanced rectal cancer,LARC)的标准治疗模式[2],这种模式能有效降低肿瘤分期、减少局部复发并提高患者生存率[3-5],但术后并发症发生率仍高达35.4%,其中排便功能异常最为常见[6]。大量研究证实,放化疗会引起远期肛门直肠功能障碍,如肛门失禁、便急、排便困难及频次增加等一系列低位前切除术综合征症状,严重影响患者生活质量[7-8]。尽管其发病机制尚未完全阐明,但通常认为肛门外括约肌损伤是关键因素之一[9]。放化疗引发的慢性炎症与纤维化可对盆底神经、直肠壁及肛门括约肌复合体造成损害,使术后吻合口处于血供差、顺应性低的环境中,导致术后肛门功能持续障碍[10],临床上可表现为直肠狭窄、容量下降及生活质量降低[11-12]。
理论上,手术时会将术前放疗照射的直肠切除,可能减少对残留肠道的直接损伤,但术后放疗则针对手术区域,可能加重已因手术而受损的盆底和神经的功能障碍[13]。然而,根据我们的临床实践经验,术后接受放化疗的患者在肛门直肠功能保留方面反而表现更好。目前大多数比较术前与术后放化疗效果的研究主要关注肿瘤学结局、治疗耐受性、急性毒性及括约肌保留率[14],尚缺乏对肛门功能的系统比较。因此,本研究旨在系统评估并比较术前与术后接受放化疗的LARC患者的肛门功能。
1 资料和方法
1.1 研究对象
本研究为回顾性队列研究。纳入2000年1月-2020年5月在我院接受放化疗联合根治性直肠癌切除术的患者。研究方案经我院伦理委员会审批通过,并在Research Registry临床研究注册平台注册(注册编号为researchregist 8686)。
患者纳入标准:(1)经病理学确诊为直肠腺癌;(2)临床诊断为LARC;(3)盆腔MRI显示肿瘤下缘距肛缘≤10 cm;(4)接受术前或术后放化疗;(5)于我院行根治性直肠癌切除术;(6)手术为保留肛门括约肌功能的方式(包括临时性回肠造口)。排除标准:(1)随访时间不足2年,或根治性切除术后2年内出现复发或转移;(2)伴有同时性或异时性结直肠癌;(3)患有林奇综合征、家族性腺瘤性息肉病等遗传性结直肠癌综合征;(4)同时接受术前和术后放化疗。
1.2 放化疗及造口还纳方案
虽然我院常规建议所有临床分期cT3~4或cN+直肠癌患者接受术前放化疗,但部分患者因个人意愿选择拒绝,仅在术后病理确认为高危(病理分期pT3~4或pN+)直肠癌后才接受术后放化疗。术前放化疗采用三维适形放疗25次,每次2.0 Gy,总剂量50.0 Gy,同步口服卡培他滨化疗;新辅助治疗结束后,通常间隔6~8周施行根治性手术。对于直接手术的患者,若术后病理符合高危标准,则在术后1~3个月内开始术后辅助放化疗,术后辅助化疗以5-氟尿嘧啶为基础方案,放疗方案与术前放化疗组相同。所有患者全程系统治疗周期均统一控制在6个月左右。对于接受临时性回肠造口术的患者,建议患者在根治性直肠癌切除术后3~6个月内接受回肠造口还纳。
1.3 随访
术后前2年每3个月随访1次,随后3年每6个月随访1次,此后转为每年随访1次。术后2年时,对患者的回肠造口还纳情况及肛门功能(采用Wexner肛门失禁评分评估)进行随访评估。
1.4 纳入变量的定义
距肛缘距离指通过结肠镜测量的肿瘤下缘至肛缘的距离;术前临床分期与术后病理分期均依照美国癌症联合委员会第8版TNM癌症分期系统进行判定;年龄指患者确诊直肠癌时的年龄。
1.5 统计学处理
使用SAS9.4软件进行统计学分析。本研究中,分类变量用频数和百分比表示,组间比较采用χ2检验。符合正态分布或近似正态分布的连续变量以x±s表示,组间比较采用独立样本t检验。为减少混杂因素影响,采用倾向评分匹配平衡可能影响治疗时机选择及Wexner肛门失禁评分的基线变量(包括年龄、性别、BMI、距肛缘距离、临床T分期和N分期),按1∶1比例进行匹配,卡钳值设定为0.05。将单因素分析中具有统计学意义的变量纳入多因素logistic回归模型来识别独立预测因素。检验水准(α)为0.05。
本研究结果报告遵循提高外科队列研究报告质量(strengthening the reporting of cohort studies in surgery,STROCSS)指南[15]。
2 结果
2.1 患者纳入情况
共562例患者符合纳入条件并完成2年及以上随访,其中术前放化疗组247例,术后放化疗组315例。有481例接受了临时性回肠造口术,其中369例在术后2年内成功还纳。
2.2 两组患者临床病理特征和造口还纳结局的比较
两组患者的临床病理特征及造口还纳结果见表 1。
表 1 术前和术后放化疗组局部进展期直肠癌患者倾向评分匹配前后的临床病理特征和造口还纳结局Table 1 Clinicopathological features and stoma closure status of locally advanced rectal cancer patients receiving preoperative or postoperative chemoradiotherapy before and after propensity score matchingParameter Before matching After matching Preoperative N=247 Postoperative N=315 Statistic P value Preoperative N=182 Postoperative N=182 Statistic P value Gender, n (%) χ2=3.06 0.08 χ2=0.11 0.74 Male 171 (69.2) 196 (62.2) 123 (67.6) 120 (65.9) Female 76 (30.8) 119 (37.8) 59 (32.4) 62 (34.1) Age/year, x±s 56.2±11.5 56.9±11.5 t=-0.79 0.43 56.2±11.2 56.6±11.8 t=-0.36 0.72 BMI/(kg·m-2), x±s 23.3±3.3 23.5±3.1 t=-0.72 0.47 23.4±3.3 23.5±3.2 t=-0.18 0.86 Tumor height, n (%) χ2=35.43 <0.01 χ2=0.02 0.90 ≤5 cm 197 (79.8) 183 (58.1) 140 (76.9) 139 (76.4) >5 cm 50 (20.2) 132 (41.9) 42 (23.1) 43 (23.6) Clinical T stagea, n (%) χ2=6.63 0.01 χ2=0.01 1.00 cT1-2 35 (16.7) 73 (26.4) 34 (18.7) 34 (18.7) cT3-4 174 (83.3) 204 (73.6) 148 (81.3) 148 (81.3) Clinical N stagea, n (%) χ2=0.31 0.58 χ2=0.11 0.74 cN0-1 140 (67.0) 192 (69.3) 120 (65.9) 117 (64.3) cN2 69 (33.0) 85 (30.7) 62 (34.1) 65 (35.7) Pathological T stagea, n (%) χ2=57.25 <0.01 χ2=49.63 <0.01 pT0-2 125 (52.3) 58 (21.3) 93 (51.7) 34 (18.9) pT3-4 114 (47.7) 214 (78.7) 87 (48.3) 146 (81.1) Pathological N stagea, n (%) χ2=69.42 <0.01 χ2=51.12 <0.01 pN0-1 223 (93.3) 176 (64.7) 167 (92.8) 110 (61.1) pN2 16 (6.7) 96 (35.3) 13 (7.2) 70 (38.9) Temporary ileostomy, n (%) χ2=51.12 <0.01 χ2=15.23 <0.01 No 5 (2.0) 76 (24.1) 2 (1.1) 22 (12.1) Yes 242 (98.0) 239 (75.9) 180 (98.9) 160 (87.9) Ileostomy reversal, n (%) χ2=41.23 <0.01 χ2=28.41 <0.01 No 84 (34.7)b 28 (11.7)c 61 (33.9)d 21 (13.1)e Yes 158 (65.3)b 211 (88.3)c 119 (66.1)d 139 (86.9)e Anastomotic leakage, n (%) χ2=3.92 <0.05 χ2=2.15 <0.05 No 226 (91.5) 299 (94.9) 166 (91.2) 173 (95.1) Yes 21 (8.5) 16 (5.1) 16 (8.8) 9 (4.9) a: Some data were missing. b: N=242; c: N=239; d: N=180; e: N=160. BMI: Body mass index. 倾向评分匹配前,术后放化疗组与术前放化疗组相比肿瘤距肛缘距离更远、临床T分期更早,而病理T分期与N分期更晚(均P<0.05);同时,术后放化疗组临时回肠造口率较低(75.9% vs 98.0%),而造口还纳率更高(88.3% vs 65.3%),差异均有统计学意义(均P<0.01)。采用倾向评分匹配控制年龄、性别、BMI、肿瘤距肛缘距离、临床T分期和N分期等因素的潜在影响后,术后放化疗组仍保持较低的临时性回肠造口率(87.9% vs 98.9%)与较高的造口还纳率(86.9% vs 66.1%),差异依然具有统计学意义(均P<0.01)。值得注意的是,无论匹配前后,术前放化疗组的吻合口漏发生率均高于术后放化疗组(匹配前8.5% vs 5.1%,匹配后8.8% vs 4.9%,均P<0.05)。
2.3 两组患者Wexner肛门失禁评分的比较
422例患者在术前及术后2年均完整填写了Wexner肛门失禁评分量表。这422例患者的临床特征见表 2。倾向评分匹配前,两组患者的基线Wexner肛门失禁评分差异无统计学意义(P>0.05),但术后2年随访时术后放化疗组的Wexner肛门失禁评分低于术前放化疗组[(2.3±4.3)分vs(5.3±3.5)分,P<0.01]。采用倾向评分匹配控制年龄、性别、BMI、肿瘤距肛缘距离、临床T分期和N分期等因素的潜在影响后,术后放化疗组的Wexner肛门失禁评分依然低于术前放化疗组[(2.3±4.3)分vs(5.3±3.5)分,P<0.01]。
表 2 术前和术后放化疗组局部进展期直肠癌患者倾向评分匹配前后的临床病理特征和Wexner肛门失禁评分Table 2 Clinicopathological features and Wexner incontinence score of locally advanced rectal cancer patients receiving preoperative or postoperative chemoradiotherapy before and after propensity score matchingParameter Before matching After matching Preoperative N=149 Postoperative N=273 Statistic P value Preoperative N=125 Postoperative N=125 Statistic P value Gender, n (%) χ2=3.06 0.08 χ2=0.18 0.67 Male 105 (70.5) 169 (61.9) 91 (72.8) 88 (70.4) Female 44 (29.5) 104 (38.1) 34 (27.2) 37 (29.6) Age/year, x±s 55.9±11.4 56.9±11.3 t=-0.86 0.39 56.9±10.9 56.5±11.0 t=0.32 0.75 BMI/(kg·m-2), x±s 23.4±3.3 23.4±3.0 t=0.10 0.92 23.4±3.2 23.3±2.9 t=0.23 0.82 Tumor height, n (%) χ2=22.15 <0.01 χ2=0.02 0.88 ≤5 cm 114 (76.5) 149 (54.6) 96 (76.8) 97 (77.6) >5 cm 35 (23.5) 124 (45.4) 29 (23.2) 28 (22.4) Clinical T stagea, n (%) χ2=2.31 0.13 χ2=0.37 0.54 cT1-2 26 (20.0) 64 (27.0) 25 (20.0) 29 (23.2) cT3-4 104 (80.0) 173 (73.0) 100 (80.0) 96 (76.8) Clinical N stagea, n (%) χ2=0.21 0.65 χ2=0.02 0.89 cN0-1 94 (72.3) 166 (70.0) 89 (71.2) 88 (70.4) cN2 36 (27.7) 71 (30.0) 36 (28.8) 37 (29.6) Pathological T stagea, n (%) χ2=49.63 <0.01 χ2=29.63 <0.01 pT0-2 79 (55.2) 51 (22.0) 67 (54.5) 26 (20.8) pT3-4 64 (44.8) 181 (78.0) 56 (45.5) 99 (79.2) Pathological N stagea, n (%) χ2=37.42 <0.01 χ2=28.41 <0.01 pN0-1 135 (94.4) 154 (66.4) 116 (94.3) 83 (66.4) pN2 8 (5.6) 78 (33.6) 7 (5.7) 42 (33.6) Wexner score, x±s Pre-treatment 1.2±0.2 1.3±0.1 t=-0.14 0.89 2 years after surgery 5.3±3.5 2.3±4.3 t=7.14 <0.01 5.3±3.5 2.3±4.3 t=5.48 <0.01 a: Some data were missing. BMI: Body mass index. 2.4 临时性回肠造口术的预测因素分析
单因素分析显示,性别、年龄、肿瘤距肛缘距离及放化疗时机与是否施行临时性回肠造口术有关(均P<0.05,表 3)。多因素logisitic回归分析进一步证实,上述因素均为是否施行临时性回肠造口术的独立预测因素,表现为女性患者的造口风险低于男性患者(OR=0.45,95%CI 0.25~0.80,P=0.01),年龄>65岁患者的造口风险高于年龄≤65岁患者(OR=1.05,95%CI 1.02~1.08,P<0.01),肿瘤距肛缘距离>5 cm患者的造口风险低于肿瘤距肛缘距离≤5 cm患者(OR=0.12,95%CI 0.07~0.22,P<0.01),术后放化疗患者的造口风险低于术前放化疗患者(OR=0.07,95%CI 0.03~0.18,P<0.01)。
表 3 局部进展期直肠癌患者临时性回肠造口术影响因素的单因素分析Table 3 Univariate analysis of influencing factors for preventive ileostomy in locally advanced rectal cancer patientsParameter Without a ileostomy N=81 With ileostoma N=481 Statistic P value Gender, n (%) χ2=6.63 0.01 Male 43 (53.1) 324 (67.4) Female 38 (46.9) 157 (32.6) Age/year, x±s 52.3±12.1 57.3±11.2 t=-3.42 0.03 BMI/(kg·m-2), x±s 22.8±2.7 23.5±3.2 t=-1.96 0.05 Tumor height, n (%) χ2=55.23 <0.01 ≤5 cm 21 (25.9) 359 (74.6) >5 cm 60 (74.1) 122 (25.4) Clinical T stagea, n (%) χ2=0.91 0.34 cT1-2 15 (27.3) 93 (21.6) cT3-4 40 (72.7) 338 (78.4) Clinical N stagea, n (%) χ2=0.57 0.45 cN0-1 40 (72.7) 292 (67.7) cN2 15 (27.3) 139 (32.3) Timing of chemoradiotherapy, n (%) χ2=76.41 <0.01 Preoperative 5 (6.2) 242 (50.3) Postoperative 76 (93.8) 239 (49.7) a: Some data were missing. BMI: Body mass index. 2.5 回肠造口还纳结局的预测因素分析
单因素分析显示,临床T分期、放化疗时机与回肠造口是否还纳有关(均P<0.05,表 4)。多因素logistic回归分析进一步证实,两者均为造口还纳的独立预测因素,表现为临床T分期cT3~4患者的还纳概率低于cT1~2期患者(OR=0.50,95%CI 0.26~0.99,P=0.04),术后放化疗患者的还纳概率高于术前放化疗患者(OR=3.45,95%CI 2.08~5.56,P<0.01)。
表 4 局部进展期直肠癌患者回肠造口还纳影响因素的单因素分析Table 4 Univariate analysis of influencing factors for ileostoma reversal in locally advanced rectal cancer patientsParameter Unreversed N=112 Reversed N=369 Statistic P value Gender, n (%) χ2=0.62 0.43 Male 72 (64.3) 252 (68.3) Female 40 (35.7) 117 (31.7) Age/year, x±s 57.3±12.3 57.3±10.9 t=0.01 0.99 BMI/(kg·m-2), x±s 23.6±3.3 23.5±3.2 t=0.15 0.88 Tumor height, n (%) χ2=3.27 0.07 ≤5 cm 91 (81.3) 268 (72.6) >5 cm 21 (18.8) 101 (27.4) Clinical T stagea, n (%) χ2=6.63 0.01 cT1-2 12 (12.4) 81 (24.3) cT3-4 85 (87.6) 253 (75.7) Clinical N stagea, n (%) χ2=2.71 0.10 cN0-1 59 (60.8) 233 (69.8) cN2 38 (39.2) 101 (30.2) Pathological T stagea, n (%) χ2=0.14 0.71 pT0-2 44 (39.6) 131 (37.6) pT3-4 67 (60.4) 217 (62.4) Pathological N stagea, n (%) χ2=0.99 0.32 pN0-1 91 (82.0) 270 (77.6) pN2 20 (18.0) 78 (22.4) Timing of chemoradiotherapy, n (%) χ2=38.41 <0.01 Preoperative 84 (75.0) 158 (42.8) Postoperative 28 (25.0) 211 (57.2) a: Some data were missing. BMI: Body mass index. 3 讨论
近年来,术前放化疗已逐渐取代术后放化疗成为直肠癌的主流辅助治疗方案,既能降低局部复发风险,还可缩小肿瘤,提升保肛手术可行性[10]。尽管多项研究已证实术前放化疗可能对患者的肛门功能产生不利影响[16-21],但对于LARC,目前多项指南均推荐将术前放疗或放化疗联合全直肠系膜切除术作为标准治疗模式[22-23]。本研究结果显示,术后放化疗组与术前放化疗组相比肿瘤距肛缘距离更远、临床T分期更早,且病理T分期与N分期更晚(均P<0.05)。在临床实践中,早期直肠癌患者通常直接手术治疗,若术后病理证实为pT3~4或pN+再补充术后放化疗,因此,接受术后放化疗的患者临床分期通常早于接受术前放化疗的患者,而病理分期通常较晚。此外,术前放化疗可使肿瘤降期,这可能也是导致其病理分期早于术后放化疗组的原因之一。
本研究结果显示,术后放化疗组临时性回肠造口率较低(75.9% vs 98.0%),而造口还纳率更高(88.3% vs 65.3%),差异均具有统计学意义(均P<0.01);采用倾向评分匹配控制年龄、性别、BMI、肿瘤距肛缘距离、临床T分期和N分期等因素的潜在影响后,术后放化疗组仍保持较低的临时性回肠造口率(87.9% vs 98.9%)与较高的造口还纳率(86.9% vs 66.1%),差异依然具有统计学意义(均P<0.01)。多因素logistic回归分析显示,术后放化疗会降低实施临时性回肠造口术的风险(OR=0.07),同时提高其成功还纳的可能性(OR=3.45),证实放化疗时机是临时性回肠造口决策及还纳结局的独立预测因素。其潜在机制可能与新辅助治疗引发的盆腔组织改变有关。术前放化疗可导致直肠及周围组织纤维化与微血管损伤,削弱吻合口的血供与愈合能力;此外,它还可能抑制白细胞生成、减少胶原积累,增加伤口愈合不良、感染及吻合口漏的发生风险[24]。因此,外科医生更倾向于为接受术前放化疗的患者常规施行预防性造口。然而,上述组织改变也会增加术后并发症的发生风险,并可能因组织弹性下降、盆腔粘连等因素,使后续造口还纳手术难度增加,最终导致还纳率降低。本研究结果也显示,无论倾向评分匹配前后,术前放化疗组的吻合口漏发生率均高于术后放化疗组(匹配前8.5% vs 5.1%,匹配后8.8% vs 4.9%,均P<0.05),这提示新辅助放化疗可能对术后吻合口愈合产生不利影响。
目前尚未有研究深入探讨术前与术后放化疗对LARC患者肛门功能影响的差异。本研究证实,放化疗时机对患者长期肛门功能具有重要影响。在平衡年龄、性别、BMI、肿瘤距肛缘距离、临床T分期和N分期等混杂因素后,术后放化疗组术后2年的Wexner肛门失禁评分低于术前放化疗组[(2.3±4.3)分vs(5.3±3.5)分,P<0.01]。这提示术前放化疗可能对肛门括约肌功能及直肠顺应性造成更为显著的长期损伤,其机制可能与放疗对组织的直接作用范围有关。在术前放化疗模式下,放疗靶区覆盖包括肛门括约肌复合体、盆腔神经及直肠在内的完整解剖区域,这些结构在手术前即接受全程放疗照射,导致损伤;而在术后放化疗模式下,手术已切除大部分靶区直肠,部分肛管及盆底结构可能避开高剂量照射区域,从而有助于肛门功能的保留。此外,有研究表明造口至还纳的时间间隔延长与肛门功能不良相关[25],本研究中术前放化疗组2年内造口还纳率低于术后放化疗组,可能也是导致术前放化疗组肛门功能较差的原因之一。
对于LARC患者,术前与术后放化疗均为安全有效的治疗选择,临床决策应基于患者特征进行个体化权衡[26]。术前放化疗在降低局部复发率、实现肿瘤降期及提高保肛率方面具有明确优势,尤其适用于局部复发风险高、存在壁外血管侵犯、直肠系膜筋膜受累、肿瘤位置低或体积较大难以直接切除的患者[27]。对于治疗反应显著、达到临床完全缓解或接近完全缓解者,甚至可考虑“等待观察”或局部切除等保器官策略,其肛门功能可能优于接受术后放化疗的患者。然而,对于多数仍需接受根治性切除手术的患者而言,本研究提示术后放化疗在长期肛门功能保留方面可能更具优势。由于术前MRI判断TNM分期的准确性仅为60%~80%[28],因此基于术前分期选择新辅助放化疗可能会导致部分患者治疗不足或过度治疗。相比之下,术后放化疗的决策基于术中探查和术后病理结果,其准确性更高[29]。在美国,仅约50%的LARC患者接受了术前放化疗[30]。因此,从改善患者长期生活质量的角度出发,对部分经评估复发风险相对可控且高度重视肛门功能保留的患者,采用术后放化疗策略可能有助于在保证肿瘤学疗效的同时获得更优的功能性结局。
本研究仍存在一定的局限性。首先,作为一项回顾性研究,尽管采用了倾向评分匹配以控制混杂因素,但仍无法完全避免选择偏倚或记忆偏倚等。例如,两组患者在病理T分期与N分期等基线特征上的差异,本身反映了临床实践中依据病情特点选择治疗模式的倾向。其次,肛门功能评估仅依赖于Wexner肛门失禁评分,缺乏肛门直肠测压等客观生理学数据支持,且问卷应答可能存在选择偏倚。此外,本研究未报告两组患者的局部复发率和无病生存率,这两项是评价和比较直肠癌不同治疗模式时不可或缺的肿瘤学终点指标,因此本研究在肿瘤学结局评估方面尚不够全面。
尽管存在上述局限,本研究结果仍为LARC患者放化疗时机的选择提供了重要参考。就肛门功能保留而言,术前放化疗可能并非对所有患者均为最优选择,尤其是局部复发风险较低的患者。相比之下,基于术后病理的放化疗决策更为精准,可能获得更好的肛门功能预后。然而,必须指出的是,术前放化疗具有明确的肿瘤降期优势,能为部分初始不可切除的患者创造手术机会。因此,在临床决策时,应综合权衡肿瘤学疗效与功能保留这两方面目标。此外,术前放化疗导致肛门功能更差的深层机制尚未完全阐明,未来仍需通过大样本前瞻性随机对照试验进一步验证本研究的结论。
-
表 1 术前和术后放化疗组局部进展期直肠癌患者倾向评分匹配前后的临床病理特征和造口还纳结局
Table 1 Clinicopathological features and stoma closure status of locally advanced rectal cancer patients receiving preoperative or postoperative chemoradiotherapy before and after propensity score matching
Parameter Before matching After matching Preoperative N=247 Postoperative N=315 Statistic P value Preoperative N=182 Postoperative N=182 Statistic P value Gender, n (%) χ2=3.06 0.08 χ2=0.11 0.74 Male 171 (69.2) 196 (62.2) 123 (67.6) 120 (65.9) Female 76 (30.8) 119 (37.8) 59 (32.4) 62 (34.1) Age/year, x±s 56.2±11.5 56.9±11.5 t=-0.79 0.43 56.2±11.2 56.6±11.8 t=-0.36 0.72 BMI/(kg·m-2), x±s 23.3±3.3 23.5±3.1 t=-0.72 0.47 23.4±3.3 23.5±3.2 t=-0.18 0.86 Tumor height, n (%) χ2=35.43 <0.01 χ2=0.02 0.90 ≤5 cm 197 (79.8) 183 (58.1) 140 (76.9) 139 (76.4) >5 cm 50 (20.2) 132 (41.9) 42 (23.1) 43 (23.6) Clinical T stagea, n (%) χ2=6.63 0.01 χ2=0.01 1.00 cT1-2 35 (16.7) 73 (26.4) 34 (18.7) 34 (18.7) cT3-4 174 (83.3) 204 (73.6) 148 (81.3) 148 (81.3) Clinical N stagea, n (%) χ2=0.31 0.58 χ2=0.11 0.74 cN0-1 140 (67.0) 192 (69.3) 120 (65.9) 117 (64.3) cN2 69 (33.0) 85 (30.7) 62 (34.1) 65 (35.7) Pathological T stagea, n (%) χ2=57.25 <0.01 χ2=49.63 <0.01 pT0-2 125 (52.3) 58 (21.3) 93 (51.7) 34 (18.9) pT3-4 114 (47.7) 214 (78.7) 87 (48.3) 146 (81.1) Pathological N stagea, n (%) χ2=69.42 <0.01 χ2=51.12 <0.01 pN0-1 223 (93.3) 176 (64.7) 167 (92.8) 110 (61.1) pN2 16 (6.7) 96 (35.3) 13 (7.2) 70 (38.9) Temporary ileostomy, n (%) χ2=51.12 <0.01 χ2=15.23 <0.01 No 5 (2.0) 76 (24.1) 2 (1.1) 22 (12.1) Yes 242 (98.0) 239 (75.9) 180 (98.9) 160 (87.9) Ileostomy reversal, n (%) χ2=41.23 <0.01 χ2=28.41 <0.01 No 84 (34.7)b 28 (11.7)c 61 (33.9)d 21 (13.1)e Yes 158 (65.3)b 211 (88.3)c 119 (66.1)d 139 (86.9)e Anastomotic leakage, n (%) χ2=3.92 <0.05 χ2=2.15 <0.05 No 226 (91.5) 299 (94.9) 166 (91.2) 173 (95.1) Yes 21 (8.5) 16 (5.1) 16 (8.8) 9 (4.9) a: Some data were missing. b: N=242; c: N=239; d: N=180; e: N=160. BMI: Body mass index. 表 2 术前和术后放化疗组局部进展期直肠癌患者倾向评分匹配前后的临床病理特征和Wexner肛门失禁评分
Table 2 Clinicopathological features and Wexner incontinence score of locally advanced rectal cancer patients receiving preoperative or postoperative chemoradiotherapy before and after propensity score matching
Parameter Before matching After matching Preoperative N=149 Postoperative N=273 Statistic P value Preoperative N=125 Postoperative N=125 Statistic P value Gender, n (%) χ2=3.06 0.08 χ2=0.18 0.67 Male 105 (70.5) 169 (61.9) 91 (72.8) 88 (70.4) Female 44 (29.5) 104 (38.1) 34 (27.2) 37 (29.6) Age/year, x±s 55.9±11.4 56.9±11.3 t=-0.86 0.39 56.9±10.9 56.5±11.0 t=0.32 0.75 BMI/(kg·m-2), x±s 23.4±3.3 23.4±3.0 t=0.10 0.92 23.4±3.2 23.3±2.9 t=0.23 0.82 Tumor height, n (%) χ2=22.15 <0.01 χ2=0.02 0.88 ≤5 cm 114 (76.5) 149 (54.6) 96 (76.8) 97 (77.6) >5 cm 35 (23.5) 124 (45.4) 29 (23.2) 28 (22.4) Clinical T stagea, n (%) χ2=2.31 0.13 χ2=0.37 0.54 cT1-2 26 (20.0) 64 (27.0) 25 (20.0) 29 (23.2) cT3-4 104 (80.0) 173 (73.0) 100 (80.0) 96 (76.8) Clinical N stagea, n (%) χ2=0.21 0.65 χ2=0.02 0.89 cN0-1 94 (72.3) 166 (70.0) 89 (71.2) 88 (70.4) cN2 36 (27.7) 71 (30.0) 36 (28.8) 37 (29.6) Pathological T stagea, n (%) χ2=49.63 <0.01 χ2=29.63 <0.01 pT0-2 79 (55.2) 51 (22.0) 67 (54.5) 26 (20.8) pT3-4 64 (44.8) 181 (78.0) 56 (45.5) 99 (79.2) Pathological N stagea, n (%) χ2=37.42 <0.01 χ2=28.41 <0.01 pN0-1 135 (94.4) 154 (66.4) 116 (94.3) 83 (66.4) pN2 8 (5.6) 78 (33.6) 7 (5.7) 42 (33.6) Wexner score, x±s Pre-treatment 1.2±0.2 1.3±0.1 t=-0.14 0.89 2 years after surgery 5.3±3.5 2.3±4.3 t=7.14 <0.01 5.3±3.5 2.3±4.3 t=5.48 <0.01 a: Some data were missing. BMI: Body mass index. 表 3 局部进展期直肠癌患者临时性回肠造口术影响因素的单因素分析
Table 3 Univariate analysis of influencing factors for preventive ileostomy in locally advanced rectal cancer patients
Parameter Without a ileostomy N=81 With ileostoma N=481 Statistic P value Gender, n (%) χ2=6.63 0.01 Male 43 (53.1) 324 (67.4) Female 38 (46.9) 157 (32.6) Age/year, x±s 52.3±12.1 57.3±11.2 t=-3.42 0.03 BMI/(kg·m-2), x±s 22.8±2.7 23.5±3.2 t=-1.96 0.05 Tumor height, n (%) χ2=55.23 <0.01 ≤5 cm 21 (25.9) 359 (74.6) >5 cm 60 (74.1) 122 (25.4) Clinical T stagea, n (%) χ2=0.91 0.34 cT1-2 15 (27.3) 93 (21.6) cT3-4 40 (72.7) 338 (78.4) Clinical N stagea, n (%) χ2=0.57 0.45 cN0-1 40 (72.7) 292 (67.7) cN2 15 (27.3) 139 (32.3) Timing of chemoradiotherapy, n (%) χ2=76.41 <0.01 Preoperative 5 (6.2) 242 (50.3) Postoperative 76 (93.8) 239 (49.7) a: Some data were missing. BMI: Body mass index. 表 4 局部进展期直肠癌患者回肠造口还纳影响因素的单因素分析
Table 4 Univariate analysis of influencing factors for ileostoma reversal in locally advanced rectal cancer patients
Parameter Unreversed N=112 Reversed N=369 Statistic P value Gender, n (%) χ2=0.62 0.43 Male 72 (64.3) 252 (68.3) Female 40 (35.7) 117 (31.7) Age/year, x±s 57.3±12.3 57.3±10.9 t=0.01 0.99 BMI/(kg·m-2), x±s 23.6±3.3 23.5±3.2 t=0.15 0.88 Tumor height, n (%) χ2=3.27 0.07 ≤5 cm 91 (81.3) 268 (72.6) >5 cm 21 (18.8) 101 (27.4) Clinical T stagea, n (%) χ2=6.63 0.01 cT1-2 12 (12.4) 81 (24.3) cT3-4 85 (87.6) 253 (75.7) Clinical N stagea, n (%) χ2=2.71 0.10 cN0-1 59 (60.8) 233 (69.8) cN2 38 (39.2) 101 (30.2) Pathological T stagea, n (%) χ2=0.14 0.71 pT0-2 44 (39.6) 131 (37.6) pT3-4 67 (60.4) 217 (62.4) Pathological N stagea, n (%) χ2=0.99 0.32 pN0-1 91 (82.0) 270 (77.6) pN2 20 (18.0) 78 (22.4) Timing of chemoradiotherapy, n (%) χ2=38.41 <0.01 Preoperative 84 (75.0) 158 (42.8) Postoperative 28 (25.0) 211 (57.2) a: Some data were missing. BMI: Body mass index. -
[1] Bray F, Laversanne M, Sung H, et al. Global cancer statistics 2022:GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries[J]. CA Cancer J Clin, 2024, 74(3):229-263. DOI: 10.3322/caac.21834. [2] Sauer R, Becker H, Hohenberger W, et al. Preoperative versus postoperative chemoradiotherapy for rectal cancer[J]. N Engl J Med, 2004, 351(17): 1731-1740. DOI: 10.1056/nejmoa040694. [3] 王英斌, 徐兴伟, 邵泉, 等. 新辅助化疗在局部进展期直肠癌中的应用效果[J]. 中华普通外科杂志, 2020, 35(10): 768-772. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.cn113855-20200227-00132. [4] 梁骁, 宝莹娜, 赵建国. 直肠癌新辅助放化疗疗效及围手术期并发症的研究进展[J]. 癌症进展, 2021, 19(2): 118-123. DOI: 10.11877/j.issn.1672-1535.2021.19.02.03. [5] Krook J E, Moertel C G, Gunderson L L, et al. Effective surgical adjuvant therapy for high-risk rectal carcinoma[J]. N Engl J Med, 1991, 324(11): 709-715. DOI: 10.1056/nejm199103143241101. [6] Gachabayov M, Tulina I, Bergamaschi R, et al. Does transanal total mesorectal excision of rectal cancer improve histopathology metrics and/or complication rates? A meta-analysis[J]. Surg Oncol, 2019, 30: 47-51. DOI: 10.1016/j.suronc.2019.05.012. [7] Marinello F G, Frasson M, Baguena G, et al. Selective approach for upper rectal cancer treatment: total mesorectal excision and preoperative chemoradiation are seldom necessary[J]. Dis Colon Rectum, 2015, 58(6): 556-565. DOI: 10.1097/DCR.0000000000000349. [8] Kim E, Kim K, Oh H, et al. Differential effect of concurrent chemotherapy regimen on clinical outcomes of preoperative chemoradiotherapy for locally advanced rectal cancer[J]. J BUON, 2019, 24(2): 470-478. [9] Zhu X, Lou Z, Gong H, et al. Influence of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy on the anal sphincter: ultrastructural damage may be critical[J]. Int J Colorectal Dis, 2016, 31(8): 1427-1430. DOI: 10.1007/s00384-016-2618-2. [10] 马慧颖, 唐源, 金晶. 直肠癌患者放化疗相关肛门功能研究现状[J]. 中华放射肿瘤学杂志, 2022, 31(11): 1076-1080. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.cn113030-20210528-00209. [11] Wang B, Wei J, Meng L, et al. Advances in pathogenic mechanisms and management of radiation-induced fibrosis[J]. Biomedecine Pharmacother, 2020, 121: 109560. DOI: 10.1016/j.biopha.2019.109560. [12] Matzel K E, Bittorf B, Günther K, et al. Rectal resection with low anastomosis: functional outcome[J]. Colorectal Dis, 2003, 5(5): 458-464. DOI: 10.1046/j.1463-1318.2003.t01-1-00503.x. [13] Lundby L, Krogh K, Jensen V J, et al. Long-term anorectal dysfunction after postoperative radiotherapy for rectal cancer[J]. Dis Colon Rectum, 2005, 48(7): 1343-1349. DOI: 10.1007/s10350-005-0049-1. [14] Song J H, Jeong J U, Lee J H, et al. Preoperative chemoradiotherapy versus postoperative chemoradiotherapy for stage Ⅱ-Ⅲ resectable rectal cancer: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials[J]. Radiat Oncol J, 2017, 35(3): 198-207. DOI: 10.3857/roj.2017.00059. [15] Agha R, Abdall-Razak A, Crossley E, et al. STROCSS 2019 guideline: strengthening the reporting of cohort studies in surgery[J]. Int J Surg, 2019, 72: 156-165. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2019.11.002. [16] Lim J F, Tjandra J J, Hiscock R, et al. Preoperative chemoradiation for rectal cancer causes prolonged pudendal nerve terminal motor latency[J]. Dis Colon Rectum, 2006, 49(1): 12-19. DOI: 10.1007/s10350-005-0221-7. [17] Gervaz P, Rotholtz N, Pisano M, et al. Quantitative short-term study of anal sphincter function after chemoradiation for rectal cancer[J]. Arch Surg, 2001, 136(2): 192-196. DOI: 10.1001/archsurg.136.2.192. [18] Ammann K, Kirchmayr W, Klaus A, et al. Impact of neoadjuvant chemoradiation on anal sphincter function in patients with carcinoma of the midrectum and low rectum[J]. Arch Surg, 2003, 138(3): 257-261. DOI: 10.1001/archsurg.138.3.257. [19] Canda A E, Terzi C, Gorken I B, et al. Effects of preoperative chemoradiotherapy on anal sphincter functions and quality of life in rectal cancer patients[J]. Int J Colorectal Dis, 2010, 25(2): 197-204. DOI: 10.1007/s00384-009-0807-y. [20] De Nardi P, Testoni S G, Corsetti M, et al. Manometric evaluation of anorectal function in patients treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer[J]. Dig Liver Dis, 2017, 49(1): 91-97. DOI: 10.1016/j.dld.2016.09.005. [21] Ihnát P, Slívová I, Tulinsky L, et al. Anorectal dysfunction after laparoscopic low anterior rectal resection for rectal cancer with and without radiotherapy (manometry study)[J]. J Surg Oncol, 2018, 117(4): 710-716. DOI: 10.1002/jso.24885. [22] Benson A B, Venook A P, Al-Hawary M M, et al. Rectal cancer, version 2.2022, NCCN clinical practice guidelines in oncology[J]. J Natl Compr Canc Netw, 2022, 20(10): 1139-1167. DOI: 10.6004/jnccn.2022.0051. [23] Hofheinz R D, Fokas E, Benhaim L, et al. Localised rectal cancer: ESMO clinical practice guideline for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up[J]. Ann Oncol, 2025, 36(9): 1007-1024. DOI: 10.1016/j.annonc.2025.05.528. [24] Johnson L B, Jorgensen L N, Adawi D, et al. The effect of preoperative radiotherapy on systemic collagen deposition and postoperative infective complications in rectal cancer patients[J]. Dis Colon Rectum, 2005, 48(8): 1573-1580. DOI: 10.1007/s10350-005-0066-0. [25] Gadan S, Floodeen H, Lindgren R, et al. Does a defunctioning stoma impair anorectal function after low anterior resection of the rectum for cancer? A 12-year follow-up of a randomized multicenter trial[J]. Dis Colon Rectum, 2017, 60(8): 800-806. DOI: 10.1097/DCR.0000000000000818. [26] Lee B C, Park I J, Kim C W, et al. Matched casecontrol analysis comparing oncologic outcomes between preoperative and postoperative chemoradiotherapy for rectal cancer[J]. Ann Surg Treat Res, 2017, 92(4): 200-207. DOI: 10.4174/astr.2017.92.4.200. [27] Glimelius B L. The role of preoperative and postoperative radiotherapy in rectal cancer[J]. Clin Colorectal Cancer, 2002, 2(2): 82-92. DOI: 10.3816/CCC.2002.n.014. [28] Kim N K, Kim M J, Park J K, et al. Preoperative staging of rectal cancer with MRI: accuracy and clinical usefulness[J]. Ann Surg Oncol, 2000, 7(10): 732-737. DOI: 10.1007/s10434-000-0732-3. [29] Kim J H. Controversial issues in radiotherapy for rectal cancer: a systematic review[J]. Radiat Oncol J, 2017, 35(4): 295-305. DOI: 10.3857/roj.2017.00395. [30] Sineshaw H M, Jemal A, Thomas C R Jr, et al. Changes in treatment patterns for patients with locally advanced rectal cancer in the United States over the past decade: an analysis from the National Cancer Data Base[J]. Cancer, 2016, 122(13): 1996-2003. DOI: 10.1002/cncr.29993.