Archives

  • 2018-07
  • 2020-07
  • 2020-08
  • br Among the cases we collected there

    2020-08-12


    Among the 1315 cases we collected, there were 1148 cases of laparoscopic surgeries and 167 cases of open surgeries. Besides,1244 patients underwent radical operations, and the remaining 71 patients received palliative operations.
    1.2 Clinical variables and postoperative follow-up
    Collect and analyze patient information on oncological outcomes, gender, age, primary tumor location, serum tumor markers and postoperative pathological findings including depth of tumor invasion, SP 600125 node metastasis, distant metastasis, pathological type and differentiation, tumor diameter, and neurovascular invasion. Postoperative follow-up of the patients included outpatient visits and telephone interviews. The deadline of all follow-ups was June 2019.
    1.3 Selection criteria of CRC tumor markers
    The pathological stage was determined as I/II/III/IV according to
    the 8th edition of the TNM Classification for colorectal cancer. The degree of pathological differentiation was divided into well-differentiated (highly-differentiated, moderately-differentiated and moderately-highly differentiated) and poorly-
    differentiated (lowly-differentiated, moderately-lowly differentiated and undifferentiated). Specimens containing mucinous adenocarcinoma and signet ring cell carcinoma were classified as poor-differentiation as well. The serum levels SP 600125 of tumor markers that we considered as positive were as follows: carcinoembryonic antigen
    1.4 Statistical analysis
    Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS 24.0 software. Measurement data were expressed as mean ± standard deviation, and one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to analyze multiple mean comparisons. Pairwise comparison test was used for exploring intergroup differencesMANUSCRIPT.Enumerationdatawereexpressedaspercentage,andChi-squaretestwasusedforcomparativeanalysis.<0.05wasconsideredstatisticallysignificant.
    2 Results
    2.1 General profile of patients
    The average age of patients in the RCC group was the oldest compared with that of the LCC group and the RC group. One-way ANOVA revealed significant differences among the three groups ( =0.002) (Table 1). There was also significant difference in age between the RCC group and the LCC group, as well as between the RCC group and the RC group. There was no significant difference in age between the LCC group and the RC group.
    2.2 Serum tumor markers
    The positive rates of serum CEA in the RCC group, the LCC group and the RC group
    respectively. The positive rate of serum CA199 in the RCC group was the highest and one-way ANOVA showed significant differences among the three groups (P=0.015). There was no significant difference in the expression of CEA, CA242 and CA724 among the three groups (P>0.05) (Table 2).
    2.3 Postoperative pathological findings of patients
    The number of poorly differentiated adenocarcinomas accounted for 23.2% in the RCC group, followed by the LCC groupMANUSCRIPT(12.2%)andtheRCgroup(15.5%).he number of poorly differentiated adenocarcinomas of the RCC group was the highest
    compared to that of the LCC group and the RC group. One-way ANOVA demonstrated significant differences among the three groups (P<0.05). No significant difference was found in perineural invasion among the three groups (P>0.05). The positive rate of vascular invasion was the highest in the RC group (42.9%), followed by the LCC group
    (36.0%) and the RCC group (33.9%). One-way ANOVA showed significant differences in vascular invasion among the three groups ( <0.05). For depth of invasion, the number of patients with stage T1-T2 adenocarcinoma in the RC group was the highest compared with that of the RCC and the LCC group. One-way ANOVA found significant differences among the three groups (P <0.05). For distant metastasis, the number of patients in stage M1 from RC group was the highest and the difference was statistically significant among the three groups (P<0.05). For clinical staging, the number of stage I patients in RC group was the highest (19%) among all stage I patients and one-way ANOVA discovered significant differences among the three groups (P<0.05). However, the number of stage IV patients in RC group was also the highest among all stage IV patients (3.9%). This anomaly could be caused by selection bias. There was no significant difference among the three groups in N stage (P=0.058) (Table 3).
    Average maximum tumor diameter in the RCC group was larger than that in both the LCC group and the RC group and the difference was statistically significant among the three groups (P<0.05). There was no significant difference between the LCC group and the RC group (Table 3).