Application value of diameter change of superior rectal vein and inferior mesenteric vein by CT examination in the efficacy evaluation of neoadjuvant therapy for locally advanced rectal cancer / 中华消化外科杂志

ABSTRACT

Objective To investigate the application value of diameter change of superior rectal vein (SRV) and inferior mesenteric vein (IMV) by CT examination in the efficacy evaluation of neoadjuvant therapy for locally advanced rectal cancer.Methods The retrospective descriptive study was conducted.The clinicopathological data of 40 patients with locally advanced rectal carcer who underwent neoadjuvant therapy in the First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University were collected.There were 28 males and 12 females,aged from 12 to 75 years,with the age of (55± 12)years.All patients underwent radical resection of rectal cancer according to the principle of total mesorectal resection after neoadjuvant therapy.Observation indicators:(1) MRI examination;(2) CT examination;(3) surgical situations;(4) follow-up.Follow-up was performed using outpatient examination to detect postoperative complications up to June 2019.The measurement data with normal distribution were represented as Mean±SD,and paired sample t test was used for intra-group comparison.Count data were described as absolute numbers or percentages.Results (1) MRI examination:there were 22 patients with positive extramural vascular invasion (EMVI) and 18 with negative EMVI.(2) CT examination:the diameter of SRV was (3.9 ± 0.9) mm and (3.0 ± 0.6) mm before and after neoadjuvant therapy,showing a significant difference (t=5.75,P＜0.05).Subgroup analysis:for the 30 patients with response to neoadjuvant therapy,the diameter of SRV changed significantly after neoadjuvant therapy [(4.1 ± 1.0) mm vs.(3.4±0.7) mm,t =6.20,P＜0.05];for the 10 patients without response to neoadjuvant therapy,the diameter of SRV showed no significant difference after neoadjuvant treatment [(3.6±0.6)mm vs.(3.5±0.8)mm,t=1.13,P＞0.05].The diameter of SRV was (4.2±0.8)mm in 22 patients with EMVI and (3.7±0.8)mm in 18 patients with negative EMVI,showing a significant difference between the two groups (t =2.45,P＜0.05).The diameter of IMV was (5.1 ± 0.9)mm and (4.2±0.9)mm before and after neoadjuvant therapy,showing a significant difference (t=4.16,P＜ 0.05).Subgroup analysis:for the 30 patients with response to neoadjuvant therapy,the diameter of IMV changed significantly after neoadjuvant treatment [(5.1 ± 0.9) mm vs (4.6± 0.8) mm,t =0.76,P＜ 0.05];for the 10 patients without response to neoadjuvant therapy,the diameter of SRV showed no significant difference after neoadjuvant treatment [(5.0±0.9)mm vs (4.8±1.0)mm,t=0.76,P＞0.05].The diameter of IMV was (4.8± 0.9) mm in 22 patients with EMVI and (4.6±0.8) mm in 18 patients with negative EMVI,showing no significant difference between the two groups (t =2.45,P＞ 0.05).(3) Surgical situations:40 patients underwent radical resection of rectal cancer,including 4 with synchronous liver metastases undergoing resection of metastases.(4) Follow-up:40 patients were followed up for 3.0-6.0 months,with a median follow-up time of 4.5 months.One of 40 patients with perineal incision infection was improved and discharged after dressing change,1 with anastomotic leakage on the 5th day after operation was improved and discharged after conservative treatment,1 of 2 with adhesive intestinal obstruction was improved after surgery and 1 was improved after conservative treatment,other 36 patients were discharged and no obvious abnormality occured during the follow-up.Conclusions The diameters of SRV and IMV in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer can be significantly decreased significantly after neoadjuvant therapy.The diameters of SRV and IMV can be used as potential indices to evaluate the effects of neoadjuvant therapy for rectal cancer,and the SRV had a higher evaluation value.