Grossman H Barton, Gomella Leonard, Fradet Yves, Morales Alvaro, Presti Joseph, Ritenour Chad, Nseyo Unyime, Droller Michael J
University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA, and L'Hotel-Dieu de Québec, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Québec, Canada.
J Urol. 2007 Jul;178(1):62-7. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2007.03.034. Epub 2007 May 11.
We compared hexaminolevulinate fluorescence cystoscopy with white light cystoscopy for detecting Ta and T1 papillary lesions in patients with bladder cancer.
A total of 311 patients with known or suspected bladder cancer underwent bladder instillation with 50 ml 8 mM HAL for 1 hour. The bladder was inspected using white light cystoscopy, followed by blue light (fluorescence) cystoscopy. Papillary lesions were mapped and resected for histological examination.
Noninvasive pTa tumors were found in 108 of 196 evaluable patients (55.1%). In 31 patients (29%) at least 1 more tumor was detected by HAL than by white light cystoscopy (p<0.05). Six of these patients had no lesions detected by white light, 12 had 1 lesion detected by white light and more than 1 by HAL, and 13 had multiple Ta lesions detected by the 2 methods. Conversely at least 1 more tumor was detected by white light cystoscopy than by HAL cystoscopy in 10 patients (9%, 95% CI 5-16). Tumors invading the lamina propria (T1) were found in 20 patients (10.2%). At least 1 additional T1 tumor was detected by HAL but not by white light cystoscopy in 3 of these patients (15%), while at least 1 more T1 tumor was detected by white light cystoscopy than by HAL cystoscopy in 1 patient (5%, 95% CI 0-25). Detection rates for Ta tumors were 95% for HAL cystoscopy and 83% for white light cystoscopy (p=0.0001). Detection rates were 95% and 86%, respectively, for T1 tumors (p=0.3). HAL instillation was well tolerated with few local or systemic side effects.
HAL fluorescence cystoscopy detected at least 1 more Ta and T1 papillary tumor than white light cystoscopy in approximately a third of the patients with such tumors. Whether this would translate to improved patient outcomes has yet to be determined.
我们比较了六氨基乙酰丙酸荧光膀胱镜检查与白光膀胱镜检查在检测膀胱癌患者Ta和T1期乳头状病变中的效果。
共有311例已知或疑似膀胱癌患者接受膀胱灌注50ml 8mM六氨基乙酰丙酸1小时。先用白光膀胱镜检查膀胱,随后进行蓝光(荧光)膀胱镜检查。对乳头状病变进行标记并切除以进行组织学检查。
196例可评估患者中有108例(55.1%)发现非侵袭性pTa肿瘤。在31例患者(29%)中,六氨基乙酰丙酸检测到的肿瘤比白光膀胱镜检查至少多1个(p<0.05)。其中6例患者白光检查未发现病变,12例白光检查发现1个病变而六氨基乙酰丙酸检查发现多个病变,13例两种方法均检测到多个Ta病变。相反,10例患者(9%,95%可信区间5-16)白光膀胱镜检查发现的肿瘤比六氨基乙酰丙酸荧光膀胱镜检查至少多1个。20例患者(10.2%)发现肿瘤侵犯固有层(T1)。其中3例患者(15%)六氨基乙酰丙酸检测到至少1个额外的T1期肿瘤而白光膀胱镜检查未发现,而1例患者(5%,95%可信区间0-25)白光膀胱镜检查发现的T1期肿瘤比六氨基乙酰丙酸荧光膀胱镜检查至少多1个。Ta期肿瘤六氨基乙酰丙酸荧光膀胱镜检查的检出率为95%,白光膀胱镜检查为83%(p=0.0001)。T1期肿瘤的检出率分别为95%和86%(p=0.3)。六氨基乙酰丙酸灌注耐受性良好,局部或全身副作用较少。
在大约三分之一患有此类肿瘤的患者中,六氨基乙酰丙酸荧光膀胱镜检查发现的Ta和T1期乳头状肿瘤比白光膀胱镜检查至少多1个。这是否会转化为改善患者预后尚待确定。