賈苗苗 梁至潔 陳 欽 綜述 曹旭晨 審校
·綜 述·
降低乳腺癌術(shù)后淋巴水腫新技術(shù)
——腋窩反向淋巴制圖的研究進(jìn)展*
賈苗苗 梁至潔 陳 欽 綜述 曹旭晨 審校
腋窩反向淋巴制圖(axillary reverse mapping,ARM)技術(shù)是指在腋窩淋巴結(jié)切除術(shù)(axillary lymph node dissection,ALND)和/或前哨淋巴結(jié)切除術(shù)(sentinel lymph node dissection,SLND)中顯示上肢淋巴管道并對其予以保護(hù),從而降低術(shù)后上肢淋巴水腫發(fā)生率,是針對乳腺癌手術(shù)治療的一項(xiàng)新興技術(shù),目前仍處于臨床試驗(yàn)階段。本文回顧了近年來國外相關(guān)臨床試驗(yàn),分析ARM淋巴結(jié)和淋巴管的顯示方法,評估保留ARM淋巴結(jié)和淋巴管的可行性,評價ARM技術(shù)對降低乳腺癌術(shù)后上肢淋巴水腫發(fā)生率的臨床意義。
乳腺癌 腋窩反向淋巴制圖 淋巴結(jié) 淋巴管 上肢淋巴水腫
The First Department of Breast Cancer,Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital,National Clinical Research Cen
ter of Cancer,Key Laboratory of Breast Cancer Prevention and Therapy,Tianjin Medical University,Ministry of Education Key
Laboratory of Cancer Prevention and Therapy,Tianjin 300060,China.
This study was supported by the Tianjin Natural Science Foundation of China(Grant No.11JCZDJC28000).
乳腺癌是女性最常見的惡性腫瘤之一,發(fā)病率逐年上升,躍居女性惡性腫瘤首位,嚴(yán)重威脅女性的身心健康[1],以手術(shù)為主的綜合治療策略仍然是目前主要的治療手段[2]。然而術(shù)后并發(fā)癥,尤其是上肢淋巴水腫,給患者帶來極大的痛苦,嚴(yán)重影響了患者的生活質(zhì)量。近年來,腋窩反向淋巴制圖(axillary re?verse mapping,ARM)技術(shù)在國外臨床試驗(yàn)中興起,以期解決這一問題。
從1894年Halsted提出乳腺癌根治術(shù)至今,乳腺癌外科術(shù)式經(jīng)歷了一個多世紀(jì)的演變,ALND一直是乳腺癌手術(shù)的常規(guī)組成部分。然而,有研究報(bào)道ALND術(shù)后上肢淋巴水腫的發(fā)生率為7%~77%[3-10],許多學(xué)者一度質(zhì)疑早期乳腺癌行ALND的必要性[11]。
SLND是由Morton等[12]于1992年首先提出,最初用于臨床I期的皮膚黑色素瘤,之后用于其他腫瘤[13-14],并逐漸被引用作為乳腺癌外科治療的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)程序。SLN活檢用于評估腋窩淋巴結(jié)轉(zhuǎn)移情況,進(jìn)而決定術(shù)中是否行ALND。若SLN活檢陰性,則不必行ALND,可避免大范圍的淋巴清掃對上肢淋巴管道的破壞。但是一些研究結(jié)果表明在僅行SLND的患者中,上肢淋巴水腫的發(fā)生率仍有2%~7%[15-16]。
2007年,Hama等[17]在小鼠模型中通過雙色熒光光譜淋巴管造影術(shù)證實(shí)了乳腺和上肢兩組不同的淋巴引流通路?;谶@種概念,同年提出了ARM這一新技術(shù)。該技術(shù)的提出主要是為了顯示上肢淋巴結(jié)和淋巴管,以避免在行ALND或SLND時傷及這些結(jié)構(gòu),從而降低術(shù)后上肢淋巴水腫的發(fā)生率[18-19]。
3.1 ARM淋巴結(jié)和淋巴管的顯示
Thompson等[18]在同側(cè)上臂內(nèi)側(cè)肌間溝的皮內(nèi)或皮下注射2.5 mL藍(lán)色染料后按摩注射部位,并將上肢抬高5 min以促進(jìn)上肢淋巴引流及示蹤劑顯影。結(jié)果在18例患者中有11例顯示ARM淋巴結(jié)或淋巴管;同年,Nos等[19]采用相同技術(shù)在21例患者中發(fā)現(xiàn)了15例患者的ARM淋巴結(jié)和淋巴管。這一技術(shù)經(jīng)過其他研究人員重復(fù)驗(yàn)證發(fā)現(xiàn)ARM淋巴結(jié)和淋巴管的識別率為61%~91%[18-26]。
為了提高識別率,有報(bào)道采用放射性同位素法顯示ARM淋巴結(jié)和淋巴管,識別率分別為100%(15/ 15)和91%(21/23)[27-28]。Tausch等[29]比較了藍(lán)色染料和放射性同位素的顯示效果,二者識別率分別為65%和100%,聯(lián)合使用時識別率為95%。
注射吲哚菁綠(ICG)并應(yīng)用熒光成像系統(tǒng)顯示ARM淋巴結(jié)和淋巴管。在行SLNB的患者中,ARM淋巴結(jié)或淋巴管的識別率為75%(9/12)[30];在行ALND的患者中,ARM淋巴結(jié)識別率為88%(22/25),淋巴管識別率為76%[31];同時行SLNB和ALND的患者中,ARM淋巴結(jié)識別率為74%(26/35),淋巴管識別率為86%[31]??梢?,熒光成像技術(shù)在ARM技術(shù)中具有應(yīng)用價值。
ARM的有效顯示是保證術(shù)中最大程度識別并保護(hù)上肢淋巴結(jié)和淋巴管的前提。雖然嘗試了各種示蹤劑,但是仍然有部分患者的ARM淋巴結(jié)或淋巴管無法顯示。原因可能是[22]:第一,從注射示蹤劑到開始尋找ARM淋巴結(jié)或淋巴管之間間隔時間太短,使ARM得不到充分顯示,降低識別率[32]。第二,試驗(yàn)統(tǒng)計(jì)數(shù)據(jù)推測[30-31]:與SLN比較,ARM淋巴結(jié)或淋巴管的位置較深,這也解釋了行ALND患者比僅行SLNB患者ARM檢出率高的現(xiàn)象。其他可能原因,如BMI、年齡、術(shù)前新輔助化療、廣泛淋巴轉(zhuǎn)移等與識別率的關(guān)系[32]。
3.2 保留ARM淋巴結(jié)和淋巴管的可行性
綜合已有臨床試驗(yàn)結(jié)果[18-20,25,27,31-34]可見,并非所有被示蹤的ARM淋巴結(jié)和淋巴管都有保留的價值。多項(xiàng)研究對其臨床統(tǒng)計(jì)結(jié)果發(fā)現(xiàn)ARM淋巴結(jié)陽性率分別為2.5%(2/80)、13%(4/30)、22%(11/50)、13%(2/ 15)、14%(3/21)、24%(6/25)、11.1%(3/27),這些患者均有明顯的腋窩腫瘤負(fù)荷[22-25,28,31-32]。對于這部分患者,ARM技術(shù)的應(yīng)用并不能使之從中獲益,這也限制了該技術(shù)在臨床中的應(yīng)用。
對于ARM淋巴結(jié)發(fā)生轉(zhuǎn)移的原因可能有:第一,據(jù)相關(guān)臨床試驗(yàn)數(shù)據(jù)統(tǒng)計(jì),SLN與ARM淋巴結(jié)重合率為2.8%~27.5%[22,24,35,36],若這些淋巴結(jié)發(fā)生轉(zhuǎn)移,則殃及ARM淋巴結(jié)的風(fēng)險將大大增加。第二,在以前的研究中,ARM淋巴結(jié)和/或淋巴管在SLND區(qū)域的概率為38%~75%[30,33,35]。對于這類患者,即使低位腋窩淋巴結(jié)轉(zhuǎn)移,也會出現(xiàn)ARM淋巴結(jié)陽性。第三,Nos等[28]發(fā)現(xiàn),ALND術(shù)中取出的淋巴結(jié)纏繞在一起,并且有淋巴結(jié)破裂出現(xiàn)結(jié)外轉(zhuǎn)移情況。綜合已有臨床試驗(yàn)數(shù)據(jù)統(tǒng)計(jì)可見,腋窩淋巴結(jié)腫瘤負(fù)荷與ARM淋巴結(jié)陽性率呈正相關(guān)。
在SLNB和/或ALND情況下,引入ARM技術(shù)以保護(hù)引流上肢的淋巴結(jié)或淋巴管并不總是可行的。在進(jìn)展型乳腺癌和廣泛腋窩淋巴轉(zhuǎn)移患者中,保留ARM淋巴結(jié)可能會增加腋窩復(fù)發(fā)或遠(yuǎn)處轉(zhuǎn)移的風(fēng)險,所以不得不切除這些淋巴結(jié)。為了最大程度保護(hù)ARM淋巴結(jié),Ikeda等[31]對處于ALND區(qū)域的ARM淋巴結(jié)行術(shù)中細(xì)針穿刺活檢(fine needle aspiration cy?tology,F(xiàn)NAC),結(jié)果證實(shí)術(shù)中穿刺細(xì)胞學(xué)診斷與術(shù)后組織病理學(xué)診斷相符。使用FNAC評價ARM淋巴結(jié)癌轉(zhuǎn)移狀態(tài)具有一定價值,有利于保留安全的淋巴結(jié),但是有可能會出現(xiàn)因穿刺取樣不足或不準(zhǔn)確所致的假陰性,從而導(dǎo)致錯誤的保留發(fā)生轉(zhuǎn)移的淋巴結(jié)。為了解決ARM淋巴結(jié)陽性患者上肢水腫的問題,Casabona等[21,35]用上肢的集合淋巴管和腋靜脈的分支進(jìn)行顯微淋巴管-靜脈吻合術(shù)(microsurgical lym?phatic-venous procedure),將上肢淋巴液引入靜脈,結(jié)果證實(shí)對8例切除ARM淋巴結(jié)的患者實(shí)施該方法后,術(shù)后隨訪9個月期間未出現(xiàn)上肢水腫。這種淋巴管的顯微外科技術(shù)已經(jīng)被證明對外周淋巴水腫是有效的[37],然而仍需大樣本量臨床試驗(yàn)及長期術(shù)后隨訪驗(yàn)證其臨床價值。
3.3 ARM與術(shù)后上肢淋巴水腫
實(shí)施ARM技術(shù)的最終目的是為了預(yù)防術(shù)后上肢淋巴水腫,多個臨床試驗(yàn)結(jié)果顯示保留ARM淋巴結(jié)或淋巴管可降低術(shù)后上肢水腫發(fā)生率,但是切除ARM淋巴結(jié)或淋巴管并不是導(dǎo)致術(shù)后上肢水腫的充分必要條件。
Thompson等[18]術(shù)后隨訪8個月,保留ARM淋巴結(jié)或淋巴管的18例患者均未發(fā)生上肢淋巴水腫;另有研究也發(fā)現(xiàn)了類似的結(jié)果,但是切除ARM淋巴結(jié)和淋巴管的患者中,上肢水腫發(fā)生率分別為7.7%(1/13)[22]、15.4%(2/12)[33]、13%(2/15)[34]。從這些結(jié)果中可以發(fā)現(xiàn),切除ARM淋巴結(jié)不一定會導(dǎo)致上肢淋巴水腫的發(fā)生,原因尚不明??赡艿慕忉專旱谝?,引流上肢的淋巴結(jié)不止一個,切除其中任何一個不會對上肢淋巴回流造成太大影響,不至發(fā)生上肢水腫。Han等[22]在隨訪中回顧性分析發(fā)現(xiàn),術(shù)后發(fā)生上肢水腫的患者的ARM淋巴結(jié)位于腋窩下內(nèi)側(cè),可能是由于該淋巴結(jié)為引流上肢的優(yōu)勢淋巴結(jié)。第二,術(shù)后隨訪時間太短。由于存在個體差異性,患者出現(xiàn)上肢淋巴水腫的時間也不同,延長隨訪時間可能會有新的上肢水腫出現(xiàn),所以仍需長期隨訪研究。
破壞上肢淋巴通道并不是造成術(shù)后上肢水腫的唯一原因,還有其他重要的影響因素:如術(shù)前或術(shù)后放療、體型、患肢功能鍛煉情況等[38-40]。為了更準(zhǔn)確地評價ARM技術(shù)對術(shù)后上肢水腫發(fā)生率的影響,需與這些因素進(jìn)行鑒別。
區(qū)域淋巴結(jié)的狀態(tài)是影響患者預(yù)后的關(guān)鍵因素,治療方案的選擇則取決于腋窩淋巴結(jié)是否有癌細(xì)胞轉(zhuǎn)移。ARM的提出一方面為乳腺癌治療提供了新的技術(shù),另一方面也為改善術(shù)后生存質(zhì)量做出了重要的貢獻(xiàn)。ARM的應(yīng)用是為了降低SLND或ALND術(shù)后上肢淋巴水腫的發(fā)生率,許多臨床試驗(yàn)證實(shí)了其臨床價值,但是Tausch等[29]經(jīng)過19個月的隨訪發(fā)現(xiàn)ARM技術(shù)并不能降低腋窩淋巴結(jié)陽性患者術(shù)后上肢水腫的發(fā)生率。除此之外該技術(shù)在臨床治療中的廣泛應(yīng)用仍然存在一定的局限性,比如,現(xiàn)有的示蹤技術(shù)不能保證顯示每位患者的ARM淋巴結(jié)或淋巴管;在廣泛腋窩淋巴轉(zhuǎn)移或者ARM淋巴結(jié)與SLN重合的患者中,ARM淋巴結(jié)可能發(fā)生了轉(zhuǎn)移,這種情況下保留ARM淋巴結(jié)或淋巴管是不可行的。Ikeda等[31]應(yīng)用術(shù)中FNAC診斷ARM淋巴結(jié)轉(zhuǎn)移狀況以保留安全的ARM淋巴結(jié)或淋巴管,Casebona等[21]采用術(shù)中顯微淋巴管-靜脈吻合術(shù)解決上肢淋巴水腫的問題。這些技術(shù)可能會使上述患者獲益,但仍需長期隨訪研究以評價其有效性。
1 Yang SE,Zhao B.Research progress in the use of drugs for breast cancer targeted therapy[J].Chin J Clin Oncol,2008,5:320-325.
2 Tsai RJ,Dennis LK,Lynch CF,et al.The risk of developing arm lymphedemaamong breast cancer survivors:a meta-analysis of treatment factors[J].Ann Surg Oncol,2009,16(7):1959-1972.
3 Schijven MP,Vingerhoets AJ,Rutten HJ,et al.Comparison of mor?bidity between axillary lymph node dissection and sentinel node bi?opsy[J].Eur J Surg Oncol,2003,29(4):341-350.
4 Swenson KK,Nissen MJ,Ceronsky C,et al.Comparison of side ef?fects between sentinel lymph node and axillary lymph node dissec?tion for breast cancer[J].Ann Surg Oncol,2002,9(8):745-753.
5 Leidenius M,Leivonen M,Vironen J,et al.The consequences of long-time arm morbidity in node-negative breast cancer patients with sentinel node biopsy or axillary clearance[J].J Surg Oncol, 2005,92(1):23-31.
6 Schrenk P,Rieger R,Shamiyeh A,et al.Morbidity following senti?nel lymph node biopsy versus axillary lymph node dissection for pa?tients with breast carcinoma[J].Cancer,2000,88(3):608-614.
7 Haid A,Koberle-Wuhrer R,Knauer M,et al.Morbidity of breast cancer patients following complete axillary dissection or sentinel node biopsy only:a comparative evaluation[J].Breast Cancer Res Treat,2002,73(1):31-36.
8 Ronka R,von Smitten K,Tasmuth T,et al.One-year morbidity af?ter sentinel node biopsy and breast surgery[J].Breast,2005,14(1): 28-36.
9 Mansel RE,Fallowfield L,Kissin M,et al.Randomized multicenter trial of sentinel node biopsy versus standard axillary treatment in operable breast cancer:the ALMANAC Trial[J].J Natl Cancer Inst, 2006,98(9):599-609.
10 Blanchard DK,Donohue JH,Reynolds C,et al.Relapse and mor?bidity in patients undergoing sentinel lymph node biopsy alone or with axillary dissection for breast cancer[J].Arch Surg,2003,138 (5):482-487.
11 Cady B.The need to reexamine axillary lymph node dissection in invasive breast cancer[J].Cancer,1994,73(3):505-508.
12 Morton DL,Wen DR,Wong JH,et al.Technical details of intraop?erative lymphatic mapping for early stage melanoma[J].Arch Surg, 1992,127(4):392-399.
13 Reintgen D,Cruse CW,Wells K,et al.The orderly progression of melanoma nodal metastases[J].Ann Surg,1994,220(6):759-767.
14 Thompson JF,McCarthy WH,Bosch CM,et al.Sentinel lymph node status as an indicator of the presence of metastatic melanoma in regional lymph nodes[J].Melanoma Res,1995,5(4):255-260.
15 Sakorafas GH,Peros G,Cataliotti L,et al.Lymphedema following axillary lymph node dissection for breast cancer[J].Surg Oncol,2006, 15(3):153-165.
16 Wilke LG,McCall LM,Posther KE,et al.Surgical complications as?sociated with sentinel lymph node biopsy:Results from a prospec?tive international cooperative group trial[J].Ann Surg Oncol,2006, 13(4):491-500.
17 Hama Y,Koyama Y,Urano Y,et al.Simultaneous two-color spec?tral fluorescence lymphangiography with near infrared quantum dots to map two lymphatic flows from the breast and the upper ex?tremity[J].Breast Cancer Res Treat,2007,103(1):23-28.
18 Thompson M,Korourian S,Henry-Tillman R,et al.Axillary re?verse mapping(ARM):A new concept to identify and enhance lym?phatic preservation[J].Ann Surg Oncol,2007,14(6):1890-1895.
19 Nos C,Leiseur B,Clough KB,et al.Blue dye injection in the arm in order to conserve the lymphatic drainage of the arm in breast cancer patients requiring an axillary dissection[J].Ann Surg Oncol,2007,14(9): 2490-2496.
20 Ponzone R,Mininanni P,Cassina E,et al.Axillary reverse mapping in breast cancer:can we spare what we find[J].Ann Surg Oncol,2008,15 (1):390-391.
21 Casabona F,Bogliolo S,Ferrero S,et al.Axillary reverse mapping in breast cancer:A new microsurgical lymphatic-venous procedure in the prevention of arm lymphedema[J].Ann Surg Oncol,2008,15 (11):3318-3319.
22 Han JW,Seo YJ,Choi JE,et al.The efficacy of arm node preserv?ing surgery using axillary reverse mapping for preventing lymph?edema in patients with breast cancer[J].J Breast Cancer,2012,15(1): 91-97.
23 Rubio IT,Cebrecos I,Peg V,et al.Extensive nodal involvement in?creases the positivity of blue nodes in the axillary reverse mapping procedure in patients with breast cancer[J].J Surg Oncol,2012,106 (1):89-93.
24 Gobardhan PD,Wijsman JH,van Dalen T,et al.ARM:axillary re?verse mapping-The need for selection of patients[J].Euro J Surg Oncol,2012,38(8):657-661.
25 Bedrosian I,Babiera GV,Mittendorf EA,et al.A phase I study to assess the feasibility and oncologic safety of axillary reverse map?ping in breast cancer patients[J].Cancer,2010,116(11):2543-2548.
26 Kang SH,Choi JE,Jeon YS,et al.Preservation of lymphatic drain?age from arm in breast cancer surgery:is it safe[J]?Cancer Res, 2009,69(2):87S-87S.
27 Britton TB,Sokanki CK,Pinder SE,et al.Lymphatic drainage path?ways of the breast and the upper limb[J].Nucl Med Comm,2009, 30(6):427-430.
28 Nos C,Kaufmann G,Clough KB,et al.Combined axillary map?ping(ARM)technique for breast cancer patients requiring axillary dissection[J].Ann Surg Oncol,2008,15(9):2550-2555.
29 Tausch C,Baege A,Dietrich D,et al.Can axillary reverse mapping avoid lymphedema in node positive breast cancer patients[J]?Euro J Surg Oncol,2013,39(8):880-886.
30 Noguchi M,Yokoi M,Nakano Y,et al.Axillary reverse mapping with indocyanine fluorescence imaging in patients with breast can?cer[J].J Surg Oncol,2012,105(3):229-234.
31 Ikeda K,Ogawa Y,Komatsu H,et al.Evaluation of the metastatic status of lymph nodes identified using axillary reverse mapping in breast cancer patients[J].World J Surg Oncol,2012,10:233.
32 Ponzone R,Cont NT,Maggiorotto F,et al.Extensive nodal disease may impair axillary reverse mapping in patients with breast cancer [J].J Clin Oncol,2009,27(33):5547-5551.
33 Boneti C,Korourian S,Bland K,et al.Axillary reverse mapping: mapping and preserving arm lymphatics may be important in pre?venting lymphedema during sentinel lymph node biopsy[J].J Am Coll Surg,2008,206(5):1038-1042.
34 Boneti C,Korourian S,Diaz Z,et al.Scientific Impact Award:axillary reverse mapping(ARM)to identify and protect lymphatics draining the arm during axillary lymphadenectomy[J].Am J Surg,2009,198(4): 482-487.
35 Casabona F,Bogliolo S,Valenzano Menada M,et al.Feasibility of axillary reverse mapping during sentinel lymph node biopsy in breast cancer patients[J].Ann Surg Oncol,2009,16(9):2459-2463.
36 Deng H,Chen L,Jia W,et al.Safety study of axillary reverse map?ping in the surgical treatment for breast cancer patients[J].J cancer Res Clin Oncol,2011,137(12):1869-1874.
37 Campisi C,Eretta C,Pertile D,et al.Microsurgery for treatment of peripheral lymphedema:long-term outcome and future perspectives [J].Microsurgery,2007,27(4):333-338.
38 Ahmed RL,Schmitz KH,Prizment AE,et al.Risk factors for lymph?edema in breast cancer survivors,the lowa Women's Health Study [J].Breast Cancer Res Treat,2011,130(3):981-991.
39 Kwan ML,Darbibian J,Schmitz KH,et al.Risk factors for lymph?edema in a prospective breast cancer survivorship study:the Path?ways Study[J].Arch Surg,2010,145(11):1055-1063.
40 Shah C,Wilkinson JB,Baschnagel A,et al.Factors associated with the development of breast cancer-related lymphedema after whole?breast irradiation[J].Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys,2012,83(4): 1095-1100.
(2013-05-07收稿)
(2013-09-18修回)
(本文編輯:鄭莉)
Research progress of axillary reverse mapping:Anew technique to minimize arm lymphedema after breast cancer surgery
Miaomiao JIA,Zhijie LIANG,Qin CHEN,Xuchen CAO
Correspondence to:Xuchen CAO;E-mail:CXC@medmail.com.cn
Axillary reverse mapping(ARM)is a technique used to map and preserve arm lymphatic drainage during axillary lymph node dissection(ALND)and/or sentinel lymph node dissection(SLND).As a result,the risk of arm lymphedema is reduced. ARM is an emerging technology for breast cancer surgery and currently in the clinical trial phase.In this article,related clinical trials conducted in recent years were reviewed and the displaying methods of ARM lymph nodes and lymphatic vessels were analyzed.The feasibility of retained ARM lymph nodes and lymphatic vessels was also evaluated.Furthermore,the clinical significance of ARM was evaluated in terms of the reduction of the incidence of upper extremity lymphedema after breast cancer surgery.
breast cancer,axillary reverse mapping,lymph node,lymphatic vessel,upper extremity lymphedema
10.3969/j.issn.1000-8179.20130708
賈苗苗 在讀碩士研究生,主要研究方向?yàn)槿橄倌[瘤外科。
天津醫(yī)科大學(xué)腫瘤醫(yī)院乳腺腫瘤一科,國家腫瘤臨床醫(yī)學(xué)研究中心,乳腺癌防治教育部重點(diǎn)實(shí)驗(yàn)室(天津市300060)
*本文課題受天津市自然科學(xué)基金項(xiàng)目(編號:11JCZDJC28000)資助
曹旭晨 CXC@medmail.com.cn
E-mail:mmiona@126.com