血小板内皮细胞黏附分子1和平滑肌肌动蛋白对瘢痕疙瘩综合治疗预后的影响

摘要
图/表
参考文献(0)
相关文章 (15)

全文: PDF (1385 KB) HTML (1 KB)
输出: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS) 背景资料

文章导读

摘要目的：探究瘢痕疙瘩血管内血小板内皮细胞黏附分子1（platelet endothelial cell adhesion molecule-1，PECAM-1）与平滑肌肌动蛋白（smooth muscle actin，SMA）的表达水平对瘢痕疙瘩综合治疗预后的影响。方法：回顾性分析2020年8月至2022年6月江苏大学附属医院皮肤科门诊收治的瘢痕疙瘩患者61例，共计69处瘢痕疙瘩，均接受手术切除与90Sr同位素敷贴综合治疗，免疫组织化学染色检测手术切除瘢痕疙瘩标本血管内PECAM-1及SMA表达水平，电话及门诊随访6个月。结果： 19处（27.5%）瘢痕疙瘩6个月内复发，11处（15.9%）在90Sr同位素敷贴治疗后发生不良反应，复发组PECAM-1与SMA的高表达率均高于未复发组（χ2=7.496，P=0.006；χ2=5.197，P=0.023）；治疗后不良反应发生率与PECAM1及SMA的表达水平无明显关系（χ2=0.172，P=0.935；χ2=1.110，P=0.484）。结论：瘢痕疙瘩血管内PECAM1及SMA的表达水平与综合治疗预后呈负相关，二者可能是判断瘢痕疙瘩预后的潜在指标。

	服务

	把本文推荐给朋友
	加入我的书架
	加入引用管理器
	E-mail Alert
	RSS
	作者相关文章
	羊逸飞1
	2
	许辉1
	2
	龙卫国3
	李遇梅1
	2

关键词 ： , 瘢痕疙瘩 83, 179), font-family: ????, font-weight: 700, text-align: -webkit-right, background-color: rgb(212, 226, 255), ')" href="#">">, 放射性核素敷贴治疗 83, 179), font-family: ????, font-weight: 700, text-align: -webkit-right, background-color: rgb(212, 226, 255), ')" href="#">">, 免疫组织化学染色 83, 179), font-family: ????, font-weight: 700, text-align: -webkit-right, background-color: rgb(212, 226, 255), ')" href="#">">, 血小板内皮细胞黏附分子1 83, 179), font-family: ????, font-weight: 700, text-align: -webkit-right, background-color: rgb(212, 226, 255), ')" href="#">">, 平滑肌肌动蛋白

Abstract： Objective： To explore the effect of the expression levels of platelet endothelial cell adhesion molecule-1 (PECAM-1) and smooth muscle actin (SMA) in the blood vessels of keloid on the prognosis of comprehensive treatment of keloid. Methods： From August 2020 to June 2022, a total of 61 patients with keloids diagnosed and treated in the Department of Dermatology, Affiliated Hospital of Jiangsu University were retrospectively analyzed, with a total of 69 keloids. All patients received comprehensive treatment of surgical resection and 90Sr isotope application. Immunohistochemical staining was used to detect the expression levels of PECAM-1 and SMA in blood vessels of surgically resected keloid specimens. All patients were followed up for 6 months by telephone and outpatient service. Results： A total of 19 (27.5%) keloids recurred within 6 months, and 11 (15.9%) had adverse reactions after 90Sr isotope application. The high expression rates of PECAM-1 and SMA in the recurrence group were higher than those in the non-relapse group (χ2=7.496, P=0.006; χ2=5.197, P=0.023); the incidence of adverse reactions after treatment had no significant association with the expression levels of PECAM-1 and SMA (χ2=0.172, P=0.935; χ2=1.110, P=0.484). Conclusion： The expression levels of PECAM-1 and SMA in keloid blood vessels were negatively correlated with the prognosis of comprehensive treatment, and they may be potential indicators for judging the prognosis of keloid.

Key words：

收稿日期: 2023-04-14

基金资助: 国家自然科学基金资助项目（81573053）；江苏省医学重点学科建设单位（JSDW202229）

通讯作者: 李遇梅（通讯作者），主任医师，博士生导师，E-mail： yumeili@ujs.edu.cn

作者简介: 羊逸飞（1998—），男，硕士研究生

引用本文:

羊逸飞1,2，许辉1,2，龙卫国3，李遇梅1,2. 血小板内皮细胞黏附分子1和平滑肌肌动蛋白对瘢痕疙瘩综合治疗预后的影响[J]. 江苏大学学报:医学版, 2024, 24(01): 57-60. YANG Yifei1,2, XU hui1,2, LONG Weiguo3, LI Yumei1,2. Effect of PECAM-1 and SMA on the prognosis of keloid after comprehensive treatment. Journal of Jiangsu University(Medicine Edition), 2024, 24(01): 57-60.

链接本文:

http://zzs.ujs.edu.cn/xbyxb/CN/ 或 http://zzs.ujs.edu.cn/xbyxb/CN/Y2024/V24/I01/57

［1］Shim J, Oh SJ, Yeo E, et al. Integrated analysis of singlecell and spatial transcriptomics in keloids: highlights on fibrovascular interactions in keloid pathogenesis［J］. J Invest Dermatol, 2022, 142(8): 2128-2139.

［2］Liu X, Chen W, Zeng Q, et al. singlecell RNAsequencing reveals lineagespecific regulatory changes of fibroblasts and vascular endothelial cells in keloids［J］. J Invest Dermatol, 2022, 142(1): 124-135.

［3］施晋升, 王茂松, 李本忠, 等. 食管癌细胞来源的外泌体促进人脐静脉血管内皮细胞血管生成［J］. 江苏大学学报(医学版), 2021, 31(5): 412-416, 420.

［4］Dey N, De P, Brian LJ. Evading antiangiogenic therapy: resistance to antiangiogenic therapy in solid tumors［J］. Am J Transl Res, 2015, 7(10): 1675-1698.

［5］Limandjaja GC, Niessen FB, Scheper RJ, et al. Hypertrophic scars and keloids: Overview of the evidence and practical guide for differentiating between these abnormal scars［J］. Exp Dermatol, 2021, 30(1): 146-161.

［6］蔡景龙. 瘢痕疙瘩的诊疗指南建议［J］. 中国美容医学, 2016, 25(6): 38-40.

［7］Gastl G, Spizzo G, Obrist P, et al. EpCAM overexpression in breast cancer as a predictor of survival［J］. Lancet, 2000, 356(9246): 1981-1982.

［8］Mankowski P, Kanevsky J, Tomlinson J, et al. Optimizing radiotherapy for keloids: a metaanalysis systematic review comparing recurrence rates between different radiation modalities［J］. Ann Plast Surg, 2017, 78(4): 403-411.

［9］Renz P, Hasan S, Gresswell S, et al. Dose effect in adjuvant radiation therapy for the treatment of resected keloids［J］. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys, 2018, 102(1): 149-154.

［10］Newberry CI, Thomas JR, Cerrati EW. Facial scar improvement procedures［J］. Facial Plast Surg, 2018, 34(5): 448-457.

［11］Limandjaja GC, van den Broek LJ, Waaijman T, et al. Reconstructed human keloid models show heterogeneity within keloid scars［J］. Arch Dermatol Res, 2018, 310(10): 815-826.

［12］Suttho D, Mankhetkorn S, Binda D, et al. 3D modeling of keloid scars in vitro by cell and tissue engineering［J］. Arch Dermatol Res, 2017, 309(1): 55-62.

［13］Limandjaja GC, Belien JM, Scheper RJ, et al. Hypertrophic and keloid scars fail to progress from the CD34 /αsmooth muscle actin (αSMA)+immature scar phenotype and show gradient differences in αSMA and p16 expression［J］. Br J Dermatol, 2020, 182(4): 974-986.

［14］Rask L, Hgdall CK, Kjaer SK, et al. Association of CD31 and p53 with survival of ovarian cancer patients［J］. Anticancer Res, 2019, 39(2): 567-576.

［15］Wimmer I, Tietz S, Nishihara H, et al. PECAM1 stabilizes bloodbrain barrier integrity and favors paracellular TCell diapedesis across the bloodbrain barrier during neuroinflammation［J］. Front Immunol, 2019, 10: 711.

［16］Deng K, Xiao H, Liu X, et al. Strontium90 brachytherapy following intralesional triamcinolone and 5fluorouracil injections for keloid treatment: A randomized controlled trial［J］. PLoS One, 2021, 16(3): e0248799.