臂围测量和水置换法评估乳腺癌相关淋巴水肿的一致性

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1006-9771.2019.09.019

《中国康复理论与实践》 ›› 2019, Vol. 25 ›› Issue (9): 1089-1093.doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-9771.2019.09.019

臂围测量和水置换法评估乳腺癌相关淋巴水肿的一致性

李振生, 耿文慧, 尹俊普, 张钧, 张媛媛, 李姗姗

河北医科大学第四医院放疗科，河北石家庄市 050035

收稿日期:2018-12-17 修回日期:2019-04-09 出版日期:2019-09-25 发布日期:2019-09-25
通讯作者: 李振生，E-mail: ZhenshengL@hotmail.com E-mail:ZhenshengL@hotmail.com
作者简介:李振生(1966-)，男，汉族，河北石家庄市人，博士，副主任医师，主要研究方向：肿瘤放射治疗。
基金资助:
河北省卫计委医学科学研究重点课题计划(No. 1020140251)

Consistency between Arm Circumference and Water Drainage Volume in Measurements of Breast Cancer Related Lymphedema

LI Zhen-sheng, GENG Wen-hui, YIN Jun-pu, ZHANG Jun, ZHANG Yuan-yuan, LI Shan-shan

Department of Radiation Oncology, the Fourth Hospital of Hebei Medical University, Shijiazhuang, Hebei 050035, China

Received:2018-12-17 Revised:2019-04-09 Published:2019-09-25 Online:2019-09-25
Contact: LI Zhen-sheng, E-mail: ZhenshengL@hotmail.com E-mail:ZhenshengL@hotmail.com
Supported by:
Supported by Hebei Health Planning Commission Medical Science Research Key Project (No. 1020140251)

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 目的观察臂围(AC)测量和上肢体积(ULV)测量评估乳腺癌相关淋巴水肿(BCRL)的相关性。方法 2013年11月至2015年2月，连续收集女性单侧乳腺癌术后放疗患者281例。以肘关节鹰突中心水平下5 cm和上10 cm处臂围测量值的均值为AC；以上肢浸没水面至鹰突中心上15 cm处的排水体积为ULV。对AC和ULV进行单因素和多因素线形回归，计算Kappa系数。结果放疗前后，两侧AC与In(ULV)的Pearson和Spearman相关系数均> 0.959 (P < 0.001)。线性回归方程R² > 0.90。两者对BCRL诊断一致率> 90% (Kappa系数> 0.492, P < 0.001)。结论 AC和In(ULV)线性关系显著。单独利用AC诊断和评估术后放疗BCRL可靠实用。

Abstract: Objective To compare arm circumference (AC) and upper limb volume (ULV) in assessment of breast cancer related lymphedema (BCRL). Methods From November, 2013 to February, 2015, 281 women with one-sided breast cancer accepting radiotherapy were consecutively enrolled. AC was measured as the means of circumference 10 cm above and 5 cm below the most eminent midpoint of olecranon. ULV was measured as the water displacement volume when the water surface reached at 15 cm above the midpoint of olecranon. Univariate and multivariable linear regressions were used between AC and ULV. Results All the correlated coefficients between AC and In(ULV) were above 0.959 (P < 0.001). For linear equations, the R² > 0.90. The consistency of diagnoses of BCRL with AC and ULV were above 90% (Kappa > 0.492, P < 0.001). Conclusions AC and ULV are consistent in measurement of BCRL. AC is reliable and easier.

Key words: breast cancer related lymphedema, arm circumference, upper limb volume, diagnosis, evaluation

中图分类号:

R737.9

李振生, 耿文慧, 尹俊普, 张钧, 张媛媛, 李姗姗. 臂围测量和水置换法评估乳腺癌相关淋巴水肿的一致性[J]. 《中国康复理论与实践》, 2019, 25(9): 1089-1093.

LI Zhen-sheng, GENG Wen-hui, YIN Jun-pu, ZHANG Jun, ZHANG Yuan-yuan, LI Shan-shan. Consistency between Arm Circumference and Water Drainage Volume in Measurements of Breast Cancer Related Lymphedema[J]. 《Chinese Journal of Rehabilitation Theory and Practice》, 2019, 25(9): 1089-1093.

参考文献

1 GillespieT C, SayeghH E, BrunelleC L, et al. Breast cancer-related lymphedema: risk factors, precautionary measures, and treatments [J]. Gland Surg, 2018, 7(4): 379-403.
2 PintoM, GimiglianoF, TatangeloF, et al. Upper limb function and quality of life in breast cancer related lymphedema: a cross-sectional study [J]. Eur J Phys Rehabil Med, 2013, 49(5): 665-673.
3 ShigakiC L, MadsenR, WanchaiA, et al. Upper extremity lymphedema: presence and effect on functioning five years after breast cancer treatment [J]. Rehabil Psychol, 2013, 58(4): 342-349.
4 NguyenT T, HoskinT L, HabermannE B, et al. Breast cancer-related lymphedema risk is related to multidisciplinary treatment and not surgery alone: results from a large cohort study [J]. Ann Surg Oncol, 2017, 24(10): 2972-2980.
5 GrossJ P, SachdevS, HelenowskiI B, et al. Radiation therapy field design and lymphedema risk after regional nodal irradiation for breast cancer [J]. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys, 2018, 102(1): 71-78.
6 McLaughlinS A, StaleyA C, ViciniF, et al. Considerations for clinicians in the diagnosis, prevention, and treatment of breast cancer-related lymphedema: recommendations from a multidisciplinary expert ASBrS panel: Part 1: definitions, assessments, education, and future directions [J]. Ann Surg Oncol, 2017, 24(10): 2818-2826.
7 McLaughlinS A, de SnyderS M, KlimbergS, et al. Considerations for clinicians in the diagnosis, prevention, and treatment of breast cancer-related lymphedema, recommendations from an expert panel: Part 2: preventive and therapeutic options [J]. Ann Surg Oncol, 2017, 24(10): 2827-2835.
8 SewardC, SkolnyM, BrunelleC, et al. A comprehensive review of bioimpedance spectroscopy as a diagnostic tool for the detection and measurement of breast cancer-related lymphedema [J]. J Surg Oncol, 2016, 114(5): 537-542.
9 ShahC, ArthurD W, WazerD, et al. The impact of early detection and intervention of breast cancer-related lymphedema: a systematic review [J]. Cancer Med, 2016, 5(6): 1154-1162.
10 赵赛,孟繁洁. 乳腺癌术后上肢淋巴水肿的测量和评估研究现状[J]. 中华护理杂志, 2013, 48(6): 558-560.
11 AdriaenssensN, BuylR, LievensP, et al. Comparative study between mobile infrared optoelectronic volumetry with a Perometer and two commonly used methods for the evaluation of arm volume in patients with breast cancer related lymphedema of the arm [J]. Lymphology, 2013, 46(3): 132-143.
12 RidnerS H, MontgomeryL D, HepworthJ T, et al. Comparison of upper limb volume measurement techniques and arm symptoms between healthy volunteers and individuals with known lymphedema [J]. Lymphology, 2007, 40(1): 35-46.
13 CzerniecS A, WardL C, RefshaugeK M, et al. Assessment of breast cancer-related arm lymphedema-comparison of physical measurement methods and self-report [J]. Cancer Invest, 2010, 28(1): 54-62.
14 Lopez PenhaT R, SlangenJ J, HeutsE M, et al. Prevalence of lymphoedema more than five years after breast cancer treatment [J]. Eur J Surg Oncol, 2011, 37(12): 1059-1063.

[1]	张瑞明, 王凯, 尹锐, 王海亮, 莫言. 失重条件下舱外手套外骨骼助力效果的评估方法[J]. 《中国康复理论与实践》, 2023, 29(7): 856-861.
[2]	闫媚, 江华, 董理权, 柳博飞, 贺炜洁, 吴小高, 郭智洋. 中国辅助技术的需求、供给和满意度研究：基于快速辅助技术评估数据[J]. 《中国康复理论与实践》, 2023, 29(4): 373-380.
[3]	杨亚茹, 杨剑. 基于ICD-11和ICF的活动和参与与生活质量测量工具的内容比较[J]. 《中国康复理论与实践》, 2023, 29(12): 1454-1464.
[4]	伊文超, 高秋野, 范亚蓓, 丁薇, 陈欣, 赵小龙, 曹蓉. 加拿大作业表现量表结合作业活动分析在手部损伤患者中的应用[J]. 《中国康复理论与实践》, 2023, 29(1): 88-92.
[5]	尹敏敏,凌星,杨亚茹,戴蘅钰,葛胜男,黄昭鸣. 基于WHO-FICs构建言语流畅性障碍的诊断、评估和整体康复方案[J]. 《中国康复理论与实践》, 2022, 28(6): 630-636.
[6]	葛胜男,王勇丽,尹敏敏,万勤,杨亚茹,黄昭鸣. 脑性瘫痪并发言语障碍的诊断、评估与康复：基于WHO-FICs研究[J]. 《中国康复理论与实践》, 2022, 28(6): 637-645.
[7]	邱卓英, 郭键勋, 孙宏伟, 吴世彩, 吕军, 姚梅林, 王国祥, 邱服冰, 卢雁, 许光旭, 季林红, 井淇, 陈迪, 郝传萍, 李安巧, 王少璞, 肖晓飞. 世界卫生组织康复胜任力架构及其在康复领域的系统应用：理论架构、方法和应用领域[J]. 《中国康复理论与实践》, 2022, 28(3): 265-274.
[8]	王龙平,杨学宁,曾斌,徐光青. 6分钟步行试验在肺叶切除术患者术前评估中的应用[J]. 《中国康复理论与实践》, 2022, 28(2): 242-248.
[9]	叶绿,王斌. 健康服务视域下健康促进学校及身体活动监测与评估研究[J]. 《中国康复理论与实践》, 2022, 28(12): 1400-1407.
[10]	蒋嘉蕊,牛振东. 深度学习在阿尔茨海默病诊断中应用近5年文献的可视化分析[J]. 《中国康复理论与实践》, 2022, 28(11): 1318-1324.
[11]	范韫仪,郑晓瑛. 我国残疾人精准康复服务行动实施效果评估[J]. 《中国康复理论与实践》, 2022, 28(10): 1117-1125.
[12]	陈莉琳,黄牡丹,郑海清. 脑卒中后肢体痉挛的识别与评估：Scoping综述[J]. 《中国康复理论与实践》, 2022, 28(1): 62-68.
[13]	陈萍,印正,何志杰,贾晋瑄,贾杰,吴毅,蒋红. 重度脑外伤患者通过阶段性评估计划性拔除导管1例报道[J]. 《中国康复理论与实践》, 2021, 27(7): 864-868.
[14]	刘静娅,张文强,杨絮,黄富表. 个体化作业治疗对精神分裂症患者作业表现的影响[J]. 《中国康复理论与实践》, 2021, 27(6): 724-729.
[15]	谢杨,陈振波,杨吉刚. 肾小球滤过率评估公式在脊髓损伤患者中的应用进展[J]. 《中国康复理论与实践》, 2021, 27(2): 145-149.

臂围测量和水置换法评估乳腺癌相关淋巴水肿的一致性

Consistency between Arm Circumference and Water Drainage Volume in Measurements of Breast Cancer Related Lymphedema

PDF (PC)

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

参考文献

相关文章 15

Metrics

本文评价

推荐阅读 0