摘要
目的:探讨细针穿刺细胞学(FNAC),空心针穿刺活检(CNB)、麦默通旋切活检3种常用非手术病理诊断方式在乳腺癌新辅助化疗(NAC)前临床病理诊断应用中的优缺点。方法:选取临床有NAC指征且最终诊断为乳腺癌患者224名,最少通过上述3种方法中的一种进行检测,并对检查结果分类分析。结果:在一次性确诊乳腺癌的实际效果和准确性上,CNB和麦默通活检均优于FNAC,差异具有显著性(P<0.05)。而CNB和麦默通之间相比,不存在显著性差异(P>0.05)。FNAC无法进行免疫组化诊断,而麦默通活检在免疫组化的判断上优于CNB,差异具有显著性(P<0.05)。在荧光原位杂交(FISH)检测方面,麦默通成功率高于CNB,但无显著性差异(P>0.05)。结论:FNAC不适合NAC患者的术前确诊。CNB和麦默通活检在诊断有NAC指征的乳腺癌患者时,具有基本相同的检出效率和准确性,麦默通在免疫组化检测方面优于其他检测方式。
Objective： To investigate the use and actual value of three non-operative pathological biopsy methods., fine needle aspiration cytology （FNAC）, core needle biopsy（CNB） and Mammotome biopsy before neo-adjuvant chemotherapy （NAC） on breast cancer. Methods. One or more of the three biopsy methods were performed in 224 patients with NAC clinical indications who were finally confirmed as breast cancer, then the results were classified for analyzing. Results. Both CNB and Mammotome biopsy were more effective and accurate than FNAC in one-time diagnosis （P〈0.05）, and no significant differences were found between CNB and Mammotome biopsy （P 〉0.05）. Immunohistochemical （IH） analysis was not performed in FNAC, and Mammotome biopsy was better than CNB in IH analysis（P〈0.05）. Mammotome biopsy was accurate in fluorescence in situ hybridization（FISH） test, but there were no significant differences between CNB and Mammotome biopsy （P〉0.05）. Conclusion; FNAC is not a proper pathological method for pre-NAC diagnosis. CNB and Mammotome biopsy are both effective and accurate in pre-NAC diagnosis. However, Mammotome biopsy is much better in IH analysis than any other methods.
出处
《武汉大学学报（医学版）》
CAS
北大核心
2014年第5期781-784,共4页
Medical Journal of Wuhan University
关键词
乳腺癌
细针穿刺细胞学
空心针穿刺活检
麦默通
新辅助化疗
Breast Cancer
Fine-Needle Aspiration Cytology
Core-Needle Biopsy
Mammotome
Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy
