机构地区:[1]驻马店市中心医院普外二科,463000 [2]驻马店市中心医院消化内科,463000 [3]天津市第一中心医院血管外科,300192
出 处:《中华实验外科杂志》2018年第6期1043-1046,共4页Chinese Journal of Experimental Surgery
基 金:2014天津市卫生局科技基金(2014KZ024)
摘 要:目的探讨覆盖全病灶的容积灌注CT(VPCT)用于肝癌裸鼠移植瘤抗血管生成后肿瘤灌注改变情况的可行性。方法无特定病原体(SPF)级BALB/cA-nu裸鼠40只,接种人肝癌HepG-2细胞建立肝癌裸鼠移植瘤模型。采用随机数字表法将大鼠分为治疗组和对照组,每组20只。治疗组尾静脉注射贝伐单抗(10mg/kg),对照组注射等量生理盐水。两组于处理前、处理后第3、6、9天各随机选择5只小鼠行VPCT检测,检测完成处死小鼠后取瘤,免疫组织化学检On,0仅一平滑肌肌动蛋白(OL.SMA)和CD31表达,并检测血管成熟度指数(VMI)和微血管密度(MVD)的变化。结果两组实验建模成功率均为100%,未发生感染、死亡情况。治疗第3、6、9天,治疗组肿瘤平均体积分别为(1.15±0.35)、(1.61±0.43)、(1.76±0.59)cm3,对照组分别为(1.72±0.53)、(2.96±0.86)、(3.984-1.02)cm^3,两组比较差异有统计学意义(t=2.102、2.251、2.357,P=0.039、0.025、0.016)。治疗前,两组血流量(BF)和血容量(BV)比较差异无统计学意义(P=0.358、0.259)。治疗第3、6、9天,治疗组BF分别为(18.57±4.27)、(26.15±10.78)和(13.05±3.72)ml/(100ml·min),BV分别为(3.35±0.85)、(5.56±2.38)、(3.02±0.99)ml/100ml,与对照组比较差异有统计学意义(t=2.351、5.102、3.561、2.133、2.963、3.512,P=0.030、0.000、0.000、0.038、0.000)。随着时间的进展,治疗组肿瘤组织的MVD逐渐下降,对照组肿瘤组织的MVD值逐渐增多,治疗第3、6、9天,治疗组MVD均低于对照组(t=3.591、4.632、4.215,P=0.000、0.000、0.000)。随着时间的进展,治疗组肿瘤组织的VMI呈先上升后下降趋势,对照组肿瘤组织的VMI值无明显变化,治疗第3、6、9天,治疗组VMI均高于对照组(t=Objective To analyze the feasibility of volume perfusion CT (VPCT) in the transplanted tumor of hepatocellular carcinoma after antiangiogenesis. Methods Hepatocellular carcinoma HepG - 2 cells were inoculated with 40 BALB/c A - nu nude mice. The rats were divided into treatment group and control group by random number table method. The control group was injected with bevaciznmab (10 mg/kg), and the control group was injected with the same amount of saline. On the 3rd, 6th and 9th day after treatment, 5 mice were randomly selected for VPCT detection. The mice were sacrificed and the ct- SMA and CD31 was detected by immunohistochemistry. And changes in vascular maturity index (VMI) and microvessel density (MVD) were detected. Results The success rate of both experimental modeling was 100% , and no infection or death occurred. On the 3rd, 6th, and 9th day of treatment, the average tumor volume of the treatment group was (1.15 ±0.35), (1.61 ±0.43), and (1.76 ± 0. 59) cm3, respectively; the control group was (1.72±0. 53), (2. 96 ±0. 86) and (3.98 ± 1.02) cm3, there was a significant difference between the two groups (t = 2. 102, 2. 251, 2. 357, P = 0. 039, 0. 025, 0. 016 ). Before treatment, there was no significant difference in BF and BV between the two groups (P =O. 358, O. 259). On the 3rd, 6th, and 9th days of treatment, the BF in the treatment group was ( 18.57 ± 4. 27), (26.15 ± 10.78), and (13.05 ±3.72) ml/(100 ml·min), respectively. BV were (3.35 ± 0. 85) , (5.56±2.38), and (3.02±0. 99) ml/100 ml, respectively, and there was a significant differ- encefrom the control group (t= 2.351, 5.102, 3.561, 2. 133, 2.963, 3.512, P=O. 030, 0.000, O. 000, O. 038, O. 000). As time progressed, the MVD of the tumor tissues in the treatment group gradual- ly decreased, and the MVD value of the control group gradually increased. On the 3rd, 6th, and 9th days of treatment, the MVD of the treatment group was lower than that of the contr
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...