胸腺肽a1对老年患者腹腔镜胰十二指肠切除术后并发症的影响

李颖; 梁平

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1001-5256.2021.08.028

胸腺肽a1对老年患者腹腔镜胰十二指肠切除术后并发症的影响

DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-5256.2021.08.028

李颖^,,
梁平

解放军陆军军医大学第二附属医院肝胆外科，重庆 400036

利益冲突声明：本研究不存在研究者、伦理委员会成员、受试者监护人以及与公开研究成果有关的利益冲突。

作者贡献声明：李颖负责课题设计，拟定写作思路，撰写文章并最后定稿；梁平负责资料分析，收集数据。

详细信息

通信作者:
李颖，15802370086@163.com

中图分类号: R576;R605
计量
- 文章访问数: 363
- HTML全文浏览量: 107
- PDF下载量: 23
- 被引次数: 0
出版历程
- 收稿日期: 2020-12-29
- 录用日期: 2021-03-04
- 出版日期: 2021-08-20

Effect of thymosin a1 on complications after laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy in elderly patients

Ying LI^,,
Ping LIANG

Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Army Medical University, PLA, Chongqing 400036, China

摘要

摘要: 目的研究腹腔镜胰十二指肠切除术(LPD)围手术期老年患者的免疫状态与术后感染并发症发生的关系，并探讨胸腺肽a1应用对术后并发症的影响。方法收集2014年6月—2018年6月解放军陆军军医大学第二附属医院收治的43例行LPD的老年患者(66~83岁)的临床资料。随机分成围手术期应用胸腺肽a1组(联合组，n=22)和未使用胸腺肽a1组(对照组，n=21)。观察围手术期患者术前、术后第3天、术后第7天患者的免疫功能指标，包括血清IgG、IgA、IgM、外周血中性粒细胞/淋巴细胞比值(NLP)、CD3⁺、CD4⁺、CD8⁺及CD4⁺/CD8⁺变化情况，术后感染并发症(肺部感染、胰漏、腹腔感染)发生情况。此外，检测术前、术后第3天、术后第7天患者血清CRP和炎症因子水平(IL-2、IL-10、TNFα、IFNγ)。计量资料2组间比较采用t检验，同一组内不同时间点间比较采用重复测量资料方差分析，进一步两两比较采用Duncan’s新复极差法；计数资料组间比较采用χ²检验。结果术后第3天、术后第7天联合组血清IgG、IgA、IgM、CD3⁺、CD4⁺、CD8⁺及CD4⁺/CD8⁺水平显著高于对照组(P值均＜0.05)，NLR均显著低于对照组(P值均＜0.05)。术后第7天，对照组血清IgG、IgA、IgM、CD3⁺、CD4⁺、CD8⁺及CD4⁺/CD8⁺水平较入院时均明显下降(P值均＜0.05)，NLR明显升高(P＜0.05)。联合组术后肺部感染、腹腔感染发生率均明显低于对照组(χ²值分别为1.44、1.65，P值均＜0.05)。与对照组术后第3天、第7天相比，联合组患者血清炎症因子IL-2、IL-10、IFNγ表达显著增高(P值均＜0.05)。结论手术创伤可导致老年患者免疫功能进一步降低，围手术期应用胸腺肽a1可增强患者免疫功能，并降低术后感染并发症发生率。
- 胰十二指肠切除术 /
- 老年人 /
- 围手术期 /
- 手术后并发症
Abstract: Objective To investigate the association between perioperative immune status and postoperative infectious complications in elderly patients undergoing laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD), as well as the effect of thymosin a1 on postoperative complications. Methods Related clinical data were collected from 43 elderly patients, aged 66-83 years, who underwent LPD in The Second Affiliated Hospital of Army Medical University, PLA from June 2014 to June 2018, and the patients were divided into combination group with 22 patients (with the application of thymosin a1 in the perioperative period) and control group with 21 patients (without the application of thymosin a1). Immune function parameters were observed before surgery and on days 3 and 7 after surgery, including serum levels of IgG, IgA, and IgM, peripheral blood neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), changes in CD3⁺, CD4⁺, CD8⁺, and CD4⁺/CD8⁺ ratio, and the incidence rate of postoperative infectious complications (pulmonary infection, pancreatic leakage, and abdominal infection). In addition, the serum levels of C-reactive protein, interleukin-2 (IL-2), interleukin-10 (IL-10), tumor necrosis factor-α, and interferon-γ (IFN-γ) were measured before surgery and on days 3 and 7 after surgery. The t-test was used for comparison of continuous data between two groups; a repeated measures analysis of variance was used for comparison within each group at different time points, and the Duncan's new multiple range test was used for further pairwise comparison. The chi-square test was used for comparison of categorical data between groups. Results Compared with the control group on days 3 and 7 after surgery, the combination group had significantly higher serum levels of IgG, IgA, IgM, CD3⁺, CD4⁺, CD8⁺, and CD4⁺/CD8⁺ ratio (all P < 0.05) and a significantly lower NLR (P < 0.05). From admission to day 7 after surgery, the control group had significant reductions in the serum levels of IgG, IgA, IgM, CD3⁺, CD4⁺, CD8⁺, and CD4⁺/CD8⁺ ratio (all P < 0.05) and a significant increase in NLR (P < 0.05). The combination group had significantly lower incidence rates of postoperative pulmonary infection and abdominal infection than the control group (χ²=1.44, 1.65, all P < 0.05). Compared with the control group on days 3 and 7 after surgery, the combination group had significant increases in the serum levels of IL-2, IL-10, and IFN-γ (all P < 0.05). Conclusion Surgical trauma can further reduce the immune function of elderly patients, and the use of thymosin a1 during the perioperative period can enhance the immune function of patients and reduce the incidence rate of postoperative infectious complications.
- Pancreaticoduodenectomy /
- Aged /
- Perioperative Period /
- Postoperative Complications

HTML全文

表 1 患者术前入院时、术后3天、术后7天的免疫功能指标情况

指标	联合组 (n=22)	对照组 (n=21)	F值	P值
IgG(g/L)
术前入院时	9.5±1.2	9.2±1.1	1.27	0.57
术后第3天	9.2±0.9	4.2±0.8¹⁾	4.42	0.01
术后第7天	11.1±0.8	4.3±0.5¹⁾	6.38	0.01
IgA(g/L)
术前入院时	1.9±0.6	1.8±0.7	1.83	0.41
术后第3天	1.7±0.5	1.1±0.5¹⁾	2.02	0.03
术后第7天	1.9±0.1	1.1±0.6¹⁾	3.55	0.02
IgM(g/L)
术前入院时	3.2±0.8	3.3±0.7	1.11	0.53
术后第3天	2.8±0.3	2.0±0.4¹⁾	3.07	0.02
术后第7天	3.1±0.5	1.9±0.1¹⁾	6.53	0.01
NLR
术前入院时	2.1±0.3	2.3±0.3	1.86	0.47
术后第3天	2.8±0.5¹⁾	6.0±0.7¹⁾	6.65	0.01
术后第7天	2.3±0.6	5.9±0.4¹⁾	5.94	0.01
CD3⁺(%)
术前入院时	59.4±3.3	61.2±3.2	0.98	0.58
术后第3天	54.9±6.5	46.7±2.5¹⁾	3.13	0.02
术后第7天	60.1±7.3	44.3±4.0¹⁾	7.26	0.01
CD4⁺(%)
术前入院时	35.4±2.1	37.2±2.0	1.95	0.43
术后第3天	33.8±3.2	27.8±1.5¹⁾	2.45	0.03
术后第7天	39.3±3.4	20.1±2.7¹⁾	7.17	0.01
CD8⁺(%)
术前入院时	29.7±3.4	31.7±3.3	2.12	0.33
术后第3天	27.6±2.7	23.2±2.4¹⁾	2.94	0.03
术后第7天	33.1±2.0	22.0±1.8¹⁾	6.12	0.01
CD4⁺/CD8⁺
术前入院时	1.34±0.15	1.36±0.14	1.08	0.56
术后第3天	1.27±0.13	1.05±0.09¹⁾	3.18	0.02
术后第7天	1.40±0.17	1.11±0.12¹⁾	3.41	0.02
注：与同组入院时相比，1) P＜0.05。

下载: 导出CSV

表 2 两组术后并发症的比较(例)

组别	例数	肺部感染	胰瘘	腹腔感染
联合组	22	4	6	3
对照组	21	9	7	7
χ²值		1.44	1.15	1.65
P值		0.02	0.21	0.02

下载: 导出CSV

表 3 患者术前入院时、术后3天、术后7天的CRP、炎症因子水平

时间	联合组 (n=22)	对照组 (n=21)	F值	P值
CRP(mg/L)
术前入院时	1.5±0.6	1.3±0.4	1.74	0.51
术后第3天	9.2±2.9¹⁾	16.2±4.8¹⁾	5.24	0.01
术后第7天	2.1±0.8	5.3±1.5¹⁾	3.93	0.02
IL-2(pg/ml)
术前入院时	38.9±10.6	32.9±12.7	1.89	0.48
术后第3天	73.7±15.5¹⁾	52.1±10.5¹⁾	2.25	0.03
术后第7天	82.9±16.1¹⁾	54.1±11.6¹⁾	3.36	0.02
IL-10(pg/ml)
术前入院时	38.9±8.6	42.9±9.7	1.14	0.38
术后第3天	52.7±15.5¹⁾	27.1±4.5¹⁾	5.12	0.01
术后第7天	56.9±15.1¹⁾	10.1±1.6¹⁾	7.36	0.01
TNFα(pg/ml)
术前入院时	10.2±10.8	10.4±21.7	0.95	0.61
术后第3天	40.8±10.3¹⁾	80.0±22.4¹⁾	5.02	0.01
术后第7天	80.1±10.5¹⁾	124.9±25.1¹⁾	6.35	0.01
IFNγ(pg/ml)
术前入院时	35.2±13.8	31.2±16.7	0.99	0.58
术后第3天	75.8±16.3¹⁾	54.0±14.4¹⁾	2.14	0.03
术后第7天	95.1±19.5¹⁾	67.9±17.1¹⁾	3.78	0.02
注：与同组入院时相比，1)P＜0.05。

下载: 导出CSV

参考文献(16)

[1]	UMEMURA A, NITTA H, TAKAHARA T, et al. Current status of laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy and pancreatectomy[J]. Asian J Surg, 2018, 41(2): 106-114. DOI: 10.1016/j.asjsur.2016.09.003.
[2]	CHEN ZC, LIU J. Current status and perspectives of laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenctomy[J]. J Clin Hepatol, 2018, 34(9): 2027-2032. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-5256.2018.09.042. 陈志诚, 刘军. 腹腔镜胰十二指肠切除术的应用现状及展望[J]. 临床肝胆病杂志, 2018, 34(9): 2027-2032. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-5256.2018.09.042.
[3]	SUKHARAMWALA P, THOENS J, SZUCHMACHER M, et al. Advanced age is a risk factor for post-operative complications and mortality after a pancreaticoduodenectomy: A meta-analysis and systematic review[J]. HPB (Oxford), 2012, 14(10): 649-657. DOI: 10.1111/j.1477-2574.2012.00506.x.
[4]	AREZZO A, PASSERA R, SALVAI A, et al. Laparoscopy for rectal cancer is oncologically adequate: A systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature[J]. Surg Endosc, 2015, 29(2): 334-348. DOI: 10.1007/s00464-014-3686-4.
[5]	BELLET MM, BORGHI M, PARIANO M, et al. Thymosin alpha 1 exerts beneficial extrapulmonary effects in cystic fibrosis[J]. Eur J Med Chem, 2021, 209: 112921. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejmech.2020.112921.
[6]	LIU Q, ZHAO Z, ZHANG X, et al. Robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy in elderly and younger patients: A retrospective cohort study[J]. Int J Surg, 2020, 81: 61-65. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2020.07.049.
[7]	PARK DJ, HAN SU, HYUNG WJ, et al. Long-term outcomes after laparoscopy-assisted gastrectomy for advanced gastric cancer: A large-scale multicenter retrospective study[J]. Surg Endosc, 2012, 26(6): 1548-53. DOI: 10.1007/s00464-011-2065-7.
[8]	WU JM, ZHAO LY, CHEN T, et al. Vascular injury and anatomy during laparoscopy - assisted distal gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy for gastric cancer[J]. Chin J Gastrointestinal Surg, 2019, 22(10): 955-960. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.1671-0274.2019.10.010. 吴佳明, 赵丽瑛, 陈韬, 等. 腹腔镜远端胃癌D2根治术中血管损伤及其解剖特点[J]. 中华胃肠外科杂志, 2019, 22(10): 955-960. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.1671-0274.2019.10.010.
[9]	CHOI M, HWANG HK, RHO SY, et al. Comparing laparoscopic and open pancreaticoduodenectomy in patients with pancreatic head cancer: Oncologic outcomes and inflammatory scores[J]. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci, 2020, 27(3): 124-131. DOI: 10.1002/jhbp.697.
[10]	PICA F, GAZIANO R, CASALINUOVO IA, et al. Serum thymosin alpha 1 levels in normal and pathological conditions[J]. Expert Opin Biol Ther, 2018, 18(sup1): 13-21. DOI: 10.1080/14712598.2018.1474197.
[11]	LIU M, JI S, XU W, et al. Laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy: Are the best times coming?[J]. World J Surg Oncol, 2019, 17(1): 81. DOI: 10.1186/s12957-019-1624-6.
[12]	ZHANG Y, HONG D, ZHANG C, et al. Total laparoscopic versus robot-assisted laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy[J]. Biosci Trends, 2018, 12(5): 484-490. DOI: 10.5582/bst.2018.01236.
[13]	PIETRASZ D, PITTAU G, SA CUNHA A. Laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy: Patients' interest should be the goal of health care[J]. Minerva Chir, 2019, 74(3): 237-240. DOI: 10.23736/S0026-4733.18.07956-7.
[14]	MAHER H, JIN W, MOU Y, et al. The prospective of laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy for cancer management[J]. Chin Clin Oncol, 2017, 6(1): 8. DOI: 10.21037/cco.2017.01.03.
[15]	KAMARAJAH SK, BUNDRED J, MARC OS, et al. Robotic versus conventional laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy a systematic review and meta-analysis[J]. Eur J Surg Oncol, 2020, 46(1): 6-14. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejso.2019.08.007.
[16]	ZHANG H, LAN X, PENG B, et al. Is total laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy superior to open procedure? A meta-analysis[J]. World J Gastroenterol, 2019, 25(37): 5711-5731. DOI: 10.3748/wjg.v25.i37.5711.