切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"

中华介入放射学电子杂志 ›› 2026, Vol. 14 ›› Issue (03) : 257 -264. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.2095-5782.2026.03.005

论著

125I粒子条联合胆道支架治疗不可切除Ⅲ和Ⅳ型肝门部胆管癌的对比研究
王肖健1,2, 李毫1,2, 顾俊鹏1,2, 阿斯哈尔·哈斯木1,2, 刘建华3, 任伟新1,2,()   
  1. 1 830054 新疆维吾尔自治区乌鲁木齐,新疆医科大学第一附属医院介入放射科
    2 830054 新疆维吾尔自治区乌鲁木齐,新疆介入治疗临床医学研究中心
    3 831100 新疆昌吉,新疆昌吉回族自治州人民医院介入中心
  • 收稿日期:2025-10-21 出版日期:2026-08-25
  • 通信作者: 任伟新
  • 基金资助:
    新疆维吾尔自治区自然科学基金(2021D01D22)

125I Seed Strands Combined with Biliary Stenting Versus Stenting Alone for Unresectable Ⅲ/Ⅳ Hilar Cholangiocarcinoma: A Comparative Study

Xiaojian Wang1,2, Hao Li1,2, Junpeng Gu1,2, ·Hasimu Asihaer1,2, Jianhua Liu3, Weixin Ren1,2,()   

  1. 1 Department of Interventional Radiology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Xinjiang Medical University, Urumqi 830054, Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region, China
    2 Xinjiang Clinical Research Center for Interventional Therapy, Urumqi 830054, Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region, China
    3 Interventional Center, Xinjiang Changji Hui Autonomous Prefecture People's Hospital, Changji 831100, Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region, China
  • Received:2025-10-21 Published:2026-08-25
  • Corresponding author: Weixin Ren
引用本文:

王肖健, 李毫, 顾俊鹏, 阿斯哈尔·哈斯木, 刘建华, 任伟新. 125I粒子条联合胆道支架治疗不可切除Ⅲ和Ⅳ型肝门部胆管癌的对比研究[J/OL]. 中华介入放射学电子杂志, 2026, 14(03): 257-264.

Xiaojian Wang, Hao Li, Junpeng Gu, ·Hasimu Asihaer, Jianhua Liu, Weixin Ren. 125I Seed Strands Combined with Biliary Stenting Versus Stenting Alone for Unresectable Ⅲ/Ⅳ Hilar Cholangiocarcinoma: A Comparative Study[J/OL]. Chinese Journal of Interventional Radiology(Electronic Edition), 2026, 14(03): 257-264.

目的

评估125I粒子条联合胆道自膨式金属支架(self-expanding metal stent, SEMS)与单纯胆道SEMS治疗不可切除Bismuth Ⅲ和Ⅳ型肝门部胆管癌(hilar cholangiocarcinoma, HCCA)的临床疗效与安全性。

方法

回顾性分析2019年6月至2025年1月新疆医科大学第一附属医院收治的60例不可切除Bismuth Ⅲ和Ⅳ型HCCA患者的临床资料,根据胆道SEMS是否联合125I粒子条分为联合组32例和对照组28例。比较2组术后肝功能、不良反应、支架通畅期及总生存期。

结果

两组手术成功率均为100%,黄疸明显缓解;肝功能改善与总体不良事件率的组间差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。联合组中位生存期9.00个月(95% CI: 6.25~11.75)优于对照组6.00个月(95% CI: 5.17~6.83; P<0.05);联合组中位支架通畅期为7.00个月(95% CI: 3.67~10.33)显著长于对照组的5.00个月(95% CI: 3.70~6.30; P<0.05)。

结论

125I 粒子条联合胆道SEMS置入治疗不可切除Bismuth Ⅲ和Ⅳ型HCCA,安全可控,可缓解胆道梗阻并延长支架通畅期及患者生存期。

Objective

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of iodine-125 (125I) seed strand combined with biliary self-expandable metallic stent (SEMS) versus SEMS alone in unresectable Bismuth Ⅲ–Ⅲ hilar cholangiocarcinoma (HCCA).

Methods

This retrospective study included 60 patients with unresectable Bismuth type III/IV HCCA treated at First Affiliated Hospital of Xinjiang Medical University from June 2019 to January 2025. Thirty-two patients received 125I seed strand plus biliary SEMS (combined group) and 28 received SEMS alone (control group). Postoperative liver function, adverse events, stent patency, and overall survival were compared between groups.

Results

Technical success was 100% in both groups, and jaundice was clearly relieved postprocedure. Improvements in liver function tests and overall adverse event rates did not differ significantly between groups (P>0.05). Median overall survival was longer in the combined group (9.00 months; 95% CI: 6.25–11.75) than in the control group (6.00 months; 95% CI: 5.17–6.83; P<0.05). Median stent patency was also longer in the combined group (7.00 months; 95% CI: 3.67–10.33) versus the control group (5.00 months; 95% CI: 3.70–6.30; P<0.05).

Conclusion

Placement of 125I seed strand combined with biliary SEMS is safe and feasible for unresectable Bismuth III–IV HCCA. It effectively relieves biliary obstruction and prolongs stent patency and patient survival.

表1 两组患者一般临床资料比较
表2 两组患者肝功能指标变化情况比较
肝功能指标[M(Q1,Q3)] 联合组(n=32) 对照组(n=28) Z P
TBIL(μmol/L)
术前 183.75(127.99,244.99) 188.25(105.00,314.55) -0.815 0.415
术后1周 102.72(59.54,169.80)a 93.10(48.85,177.65)a -0.059 0.953
术后4周 33.87(22.25,56.75)a,b 48.95(28.86,59.90)a,b -0.830 0.407
DBIL(μmol/L)
术前 79.27(38.31,135.00) 97.53(51.43,183.78) -1.274 0.203
术后1周 28.40(11.66,65.59)a 51.70(20.40,89.53)a -1.637 0.102
术后4周 18.15(12.93,29.18)a,b 26.21(14.05,41.43)a,b -1.319 0.187
IBIL(μmol/L)
术前 29.50(24.15,39.98) 40.96(20.19,71.75) -1.534 0.125
术后1周 21.85(13.78,35.20)a 31.90(13.96,50.77)a -1.363 0.173
术后4周 12.40(7.03,21.61)a,b 13.75(9.12,20.60)a,b -0.837 0.402
AST(U/L)
术前 105.55(72.06,153.58) 73.50(48.79,148.25) -1.763 0.078
术后1周 76.74(52.53,90.97)a 50.70(33.83,94.73)a -1.734 0.083
术后4周 51.50(35.55,73.68)a,b 44.80(32.03,74.50)a -0.504 0.614
ALT(U/L)
术前 110.50(59.25,162.00) 69.85(57.18,199.93) -1.111 0.266
术后1周 78.00(44.75,111.75)a 54.35(33.58,85.83)a -1.852 0.064
术后4周 35.25(22.30,63.75)a,b 41.80(28.85,66.00)a -0.548 0.583
ALB(g/L)
术前 35.59(32.48,37.66) 35.75(30.25,38.28) -0.452 0.651
术后1周 35.11(30.90,36.96) 32.90(28.18,35.66) -1.712 0.087
术后4周 36.41(33.28,38.29) 34.45(33.05,36.29)b -1.556 0.120
表3 单支架及双侧支架术后胆红素变化
图1 125I粒子条联合支架置入后造影 图1 A:Ⅲ型HCCA;图1B:Ⅳ型HCCA。HCCA为肝门部胆管癌。
图2 术后支架通畅时间的Kaplan-Meier生存曲线分析
图3 术后总生存期的Kaplan-Meier生存曲线分析
表4 两组患者不良反应发生情况比较 [n(%)]
表5 影响患者预后的独立危险因素分析
[1]
张东, 李起, 张健, 等. 从病理学角度探讨肝门部胆管癌的治疗与预后[J]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2021, 10(1): 10-14.
[2]
Dar F S, Abbas Z, Ahmed I, et al. National guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of hilar cholangiocarcinoma[J]. World J Gastroenterol, 2024, 30(9): 1018-1042.
[3]
Qurashi M, Vithayathil M, Khan SA. Epidemiology of cholangiocarcinoma[J]. Eur J Surg Oncol, 2025, 51(2): 107064.
[4]
张素芳, 徐建波, 洪晟乾, 等. 腹腔镜肝门部胆管癌根治术8例临床体会[J]. 肝胆胰外科杂志, 2024, 36(5): 276-281.
[5]
秦亚鹏, 商中华. 微创胆道引流对肝门部胆管癌的临床疗效及预后[J]. 实用癌症杂志, 2020, 35(7): 1149-1152.
[6]
Li Z, Jiao D, Han X, et al. A Comparative study of self-expandable metallic stent combined with double (125)I seeds strands or single (125)I seeds strand in the treatment of advanced perihilar cholangiocarcinoma with malignant obstructive jaundice[J]. Onco Targets Ther, 2021, 14: 4077-4086.
[7]
Chai J, Liu K, Xu B, et al. Biliary self-expandable metallic stent combined with iodine-125 seeds in the treatment of malignant biliary obstruction (Bismuth type Ⅰ or Ⅱ)[J]. Surg Endosc, 2023, 37(10): 7729-7737.
[8]
李艳, 徐文海, 王勇, 等. 胆道双金属支架联合125I粒子条植入治疗高位恶性梗阻性黄疸的疗效[J]. 医学影像学杂志, 2022, 32(07): 1183-1187, 1191.
[9]
Okuno M, Iwata K, Mukai T, et al. Comparison of unilateral and bilateral intraductal plastic stent placement for unresectable malignant hilar biliary obstruction: a propensity score-matched cohort analysis[J]. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci, 2024, 31(4): 284-293.
[10]
中国研究型医院学会肝胆胰外科专业委员会, 《中华消化外科杂志》编辑委员会. 肝门部胆管癌诊断和治疗指南(2025版)[J]. 中华消化外科杂志, 2025, 24(1): 1-20.
[11]
张育诚, 车斯尧. 肝门部胆管癌的临床研究进展[J]. 中国肿瘤外科杂志, 2024, 16(5): 514-520.
[12]
Keulen AV, Gaspersz MP, Van Vugt JLA, et al. Success, complication, and mortality rates of initial biliary drainage in patients with unresectable perihilar cholangiocarcinoma[J]. Surgery, 2022, 172(6): 1606-1613.
[13]
张燚. 经皮肝穿刺胆道引流术在肝门部胆管癌治疗中的应用研究[J]. 中国校医, 2022, 36(01): 35-37, 40.
[14]
宋飞, 向盈盈, 车佳音, 等. 胆道125I粒子支架与金属裸支架治疗Bismuth Corlette Ⅲ型胆管癌合并梗阻性黄疸的临床对比[J]. 昆明医科大学学报, 2022, 43(11): 85-89.
[15]
Ba Y, Yue P, Leung JW, et al. Percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage may be the preferred preoperative drainage method in hilar cholangiocarcinoma[J]. Endosc Int Open, 2020, 8(2): e203-e210.
[16]
Zhou CG, Zhang Y, Li H, et al. Outcomes of iodine-125 seed strips combined with double self-expandable metallic stent for Bismuth type III and IV malignant biliary obstruction[J]. World J Gastrointest Surg, 2025, 17(8): 108579.
[17]
Wu JZ, Li CL, Shi HB, et al. Hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy following simultaneous metallic stent placement and iodine-125 seed strands for advanced cholangiocarcinoma causing malignant obstructive jaundice: a propensity score matching study[J]. Jpn J Radiol, 2022, 40(4): 396-403.
[18]
王学俊, 朱军, 祁志, 等. 胆道125I粒子支架置入术在不可切除肝外胆管癌中的疗效分析[J]. 中国肿瘤外科杂志, 2024, 16(03): 261-265.
[19]
沈海洋, 周中华, 宋浩, 等. 胆道支架联合引流管置入125I粒子条治疗恶性梗阻性黄疸[J]. 中国介入影像与治疗学, 2022, 19(07): 401-405.
[20]
Lin J, Wu AL, Teng F, et al. Stent insertion for inoperable hilar cholangiocarcinoma: comparison of radioactive and normal stenting[J]. Medicine (Baltimore), 2021, 100(21): e26192.
[1] 黎立喜, 桑蝶, 段博识, 李巧佴, 郑晓娟, 彭雪楠, 曾成, 祁亚龙, 张晓童, 岳静, 兰波, 王佳玉, 李俏, 马飞. 艾立布林在不同分子分型晚期乳腺癌中的疗效分析:多中心回顾性研究[J/OL]. 中华乳腺病杂志(电子版), 2026, 20(04): 213-218.
[2] 冉苏叶, 喻超, 孙诚谊. 胰腺癌生存期提升的破局点:从基础研究到临床实践的转化困境[J/OL]. 中华普通外科学文献(电子版), 2026, 20(03): 179-186.
[3] 李晶晶, 闫伟娜, 贾波, 刘灿, 徐竟益. 肝门部胆管癌胆道穿刺引流后胆汁回输的临床价值与研究进展[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2026, 20(04): 390-393.
[4] 袁强, 范慈勃, 韩丽丽, 陈光, 陈纲, 赵锁. 融合病理图像与报告的多模态模型用于乳腺癌预后预测[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2026, 20(04): 374-378.
[5] 李志超, 叶梓绎, 辛万鹏. TACE在肝细胞癌根治性切除术后MVI阳性患者的疗效分析[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2026, 20(03): 252-256.
[6] 杨雪, 尚培中, 陈晓丽, 贾国洪, 宋创业, 翟佳琪, 左利媛, 史雪萍, 李晓英. 无黄疸肝门部胆管癌切除后将空肠与门静脉壁和肝实质吻合一例报道[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(06): 709-710.
[7] 袁强, 向文瑞, 吕远, 闫璋哲, 朱含放, 陈光, 孙亮, 陈纲, 赵锁. 基于随机生存森林的胃肠道间质瘤无复发生存期预测模型研究[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(04): 438-441.
[8] 刘薇, 刘洪飞, 姬骁亮, 崔红伟, 郑明明, 刘方硕, 刘志静, 张燕. 受体相互作用蛋白激酶2、程序性细胞死亡因子1表达对肺癌患者免疫疗法疗效预测及预后分析[J/OL]. 中华肺部疾病杂志(电子版), 2026, 19(01): 62-69.
[9] 周嘉敏, 梁贇, 陈洁, 王鲁. 减瘤术在神经内分泌肿瘤肝转移应用中的安全性和疗效[J/OL]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2026, 15(01): 89-94.
[10] 杨刚, 黄徐建, 朱建交, 熊永福, 李敬东. 两种不同类型肝门周围胆管癌临床病理特征及生存预后[J/OL]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2025, 14(06): 931-938.
[11] 高彬, 宋铭杰, 宁江红, 邵英梅. 内镜下光动力疗法联合胆道支架治疗不可切除胆管癌的疗效[J/OL]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2025, 14(04): 595-600.
[12] 中国研究型医院学会肝胆胰外科专业委员会, 《中华消化外科杂志》编辑委员会. 肝门部胆管癌诊断和治疗指南(2025版)[J/OL]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2025, 14(03): 317-337.
[13] 张雨霄, 潘怡, 邱田, 邹霜梅. 行二代测序结直肠癌患者cMET的表达水平与临床病理特征和分子特征的相关性及预后价值的研究[J/OL]. 中华结直肠疾病电子杂志, 2026, 15(02): 122-132.
[14] 刘丽, 高福磊, 黄祥忠, 朱翠芳. 主客体互倚模型下125I粒子植入患者及照顾者病耻感与生活质量关联分析[J/OL]. 中华介入放射学电子杂志, 2026, 14(02): 188-194.
[15] 叶书文, 李鑫, 李一帆, 张玉元, 李臻. 可回收125I粒子导管治疗肾盂癌术后下腔静脉癌栓一例[J/OL]. 中华介入放射学电子杂志, 2025, 13(03): 266-269.
阅读次数
全文


摘要


AI


AI小编
你好!我是《中华医学电子期刊资源库》AI小编,有什么可以帮您的吗?