自身免疫性胰腺炎43例诊治分析

2014-04-21 01:23刘其雨夏红天刘志伟蔡守旺张文智
解放军医学院学报 2014年12期
关键词:免疫性胰腺癌黄疸

刘其雨,夏红天,刘志伟,蔡守旺,张文智

1昆明市第一人民医院 肝胆外科,云南昆明 650031;2解放军总医院 肝胆外科,北京 100853

自身免疫性胰腺炎43例诊治分析

刘其雨1,夏红天2,刘志伟2,蔡守旺2,张文智2

1昆明市第一人民医院 肝胆外科,云南昆明 650031;2解放军总医院 肝胆外科,北京 100853

目的总结我院自身免疫性胰腺炎的临床特点并进一步探讨其诊治经验。方法回顾性分析我院2011年1月- 2014年6月收治的43例自身免疫性胰腺炎患者的临床资料。结果43例中,男女比例4.4∶1,年龄平均(57.4±12.0)岁。首发症状为黄疸25例(58.1%),腹部不适16例(37.2%),纳差2例(4.7%),就诊时体质量明显减轻22例(51.2%)。白蛋白/球蛋白比值<1.5的有38例(88.4%),血清淀粉酶增高5例(11.6%),CA19-9>100 U/ml 7例(16.3%),γ-球蛋白阳性率93.3%(14/15),IgG4阳性90.7%(39/43)。CT/MRI提示胰腺弥漫性肿大28例(65.1%),局限性肿大15例(34.9%)。PET/CT正确诊断率为58.3%(7/12)。行手术治疗5例(11.6%),激素治疗缓解率100%(43/43),6例过早停药复发。结论结合临床症状、血液学及影像学检查可提高自身免疫性胰腺炎的正确诊断率,必要时可行针刺细胞学检查或激素诊断性治疗,标准的激素治疗仍然是自身免疫性胰腺炎的首选。

自身免疫性胰腺炎;黄疸;免疫球蛋白;激素治疗

自身免疫性胰腺炎(autoimmune pancreatitis,AIP)是种罕见病,由日本学者Yoshida等[1]于1995年正式命名,是一类由自身免疫介导,以淋巴细胞、浆细胞浸润为主且胰腺纤维化、肿大、胰管不规则狭窄为特点的慢性胰腺炎。临床表现多样化,多数患者以梗阻性黄疸就诊,因其很难与胰腺癌、胆管癌及原发性硬化性胆管炎鉴别,最近越来越受到重视,并被大家所认识[2]。本文通过回顾性分析解放军总医院收治的43例AIP患者的临床资料,旨在提高对该疾病的认识,规范AIP的诊断与治疗。

资料和方法

1 资料 解放军总医院2011年1月- 2014年6月收治的43例AIP患者。

2 诊断标准 参照美国Mayo医学中心2006年推出的HISORt标准(组织学、影像学、血清学、其他器官受累情况、对激素治疗的反应)、日本和韩国2008年共同制定的亚洲标准和国际胰腺病协会2010年制定的国际标准。诊断标准主要包括以下5个方面:1)影像学:胰腺弥散性/局限性/局灶性增大,有时伴有包块和(或)低密度边缘;弥散性/局限性/局灶性胰管不规则狭窄,常伴有胆管狭窄。2)血清学:血清IgG或IgG4升高;其他自身抗体阳性。3)胰腺外器官受累:肝门部或肝内胆管狭窄、泪腺或涎腺受累、肺门淋巴结肿大、腹膜后纤维化等。4)组织病理学:病理所见为淋巴浆细胞硬化性胰腺炎,免疫组化显示IgG4阳性细胞>10个/高倍视野;胰腺导管周围有大量中性粒细胞浸润并导致导管上皮损害。5)激素疗效:激素治疗后胰腺和(或)胰腺外表现迅速消退或明显改善。

3 研究方法 收集上述43例患者的临床资料,包括性别、年龄、症状、胆红素、白蛋白、球蛋白、淀粉酶、CA19-9、IgG亚型测定、自身抗体测定、影像学特点以及治疗方案等。

结果

1 一般资料 43例中,男性35例(81.4%),女性8例(18.6%),男女比例4.4∶1,年龄(57.4±12.0)岁,首发症状为黄疸25例(58.1%)、腹部不适16例(37.2%)、纳差2例(4.7%),就诊时体质量明显减轻22例(51.2%)。

2 血液学检测 合并白蛋白/球蛋白比值<1.5的有38例(88.4%),血清淀粉酶增高5例(11.6%),CA19-9>100 U/ml 7例(16.3%),γ-球蛋白阳性率93.3%(14/15),IgG4阳性率90.7%(39/43),自身抗体中抗核抗体阳性率18.2%(4/22)。

3 影像学检查 CT/MRI提示胰腺弥漫性肿大28例(65.1%),局限性肿大15例(34.9%),PET/CT正确诊断率为58.3%(7/12)。弥漫性AIP的CT典型表现为胰腺弥漫性肿大成“腊肠样”,胰腺实质密度降低,动态增强扫描可见均匀、延迟强化;部分患者胰周出现界限清晰、平整的低密度包膜样边缘,是AIP的特征性表现(图1)。局灶性AIP的典型表现为低密度肿块,动态增强后肿块可见延迟、均质强化。MRI T1加权显示胰腺弥漫性增大或局灶性肿块,呈略低信号,T2加权呈稍高信号(图2),可见胰周低信号包膜样边缘;动态增强扫描动脉期无强化或轻度强化,门脉期或延迟期出现强化;典型磁共振胰胆管造影(magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography,MRCP)表现为主胰管较长、多发的不规则狭窄,可伴有胆管狭窄,呈硬化性胆管炎表现。

4 治疗 术前误诊为胰腺癌行手术治疗5例(11.6%),其中3例胰十二指肠切除术,术后病检证实为AIP;2例术中行穿刺细胞学检查证实后行胆肠吻合术。43例诊断明确后均使用激素治疗,10 ~ 60 mg/d,病情缓解率100%(43/43),6例由于过早停药复发,经重新激素治疗后缓解。

图 1 AIP胰腺CT动脉期表现图 2 AIP 胰腺MRI T2加权像表现Fig.1 CT feature of arterial phase in AIPFig.2 MRI feature of T2WI in AIP

讨论

近年AIP的发病率有逐年升高趋势[3-5]。AIP主要分为两类,1型与IgG4高表达有关,2型与粒细胞上皮损害有关。具体病因以及普通人群的流行病学情况仍不甚清楚[6-8]。我国主要为1型,多发生在中老年男性。1型AIP具有较高的复发率,6个月~ 1年复发率为30% ~ 50%[9]。日本AIP主要以梗阻性黄疸(33% ~ 59%)、腹痛(32%)就诊,就诊时出现体质量减轻的仅有15%[10]。而我们的研究发现患者就诊时体质量减轻高达51.2%,说明我国患者诊断清楚时多已病程较长,早期出现腹胀、背痛、纳差、乏力等不典型症状时很难被发现,因胰外脏器损伤就诊时更难被诊断,这与我国人群认识不足有一定关系。有学者将既往慢性胰腺炎的标本重新进行免疫组化,发现很多实为AIP;作为临床医生,与胰腺癌鉴别并能正确做出诊断是最重要也是最具挑战性的[11-12]。目前AIP的诊断标准主要有HISORt标准、亚洲标准和国际标准,但每个标准均有其局限性[13-16]。实际操作过程中3种诊断标准应相互补充、为临床所用,而不是仅利用其中某一标准。

我们发现本组病例中合并白蛋白/球蛋白比值<1.5的有38例,胰腺其他疾病并无此现象,提示白/球倒置可能是免疫性疾病的一个危险信号,因此检测白蛋白/球蛋白比值有助于诊断AIP。此外,AIP鲜有淀粉酶增高或CA19-9>100 U/ml。本组仅有11.6%的患者血清淀粉酶增高,16.3%的患者血CA19-9>100 U/ml,这有助于与急性胰腺炎、胰腺癌鉴别。AIP的特征性血液学检验是IgG4、γ-球蛋白以及自身抗体,本组病例IgG4、γ-球蛋白的阳性率均>90%。有学者认为单独检测CA19-9或IgG4都不十分准确,CA19-9<74 U/ml和IgG44>1.0 g/L有助于鉴别胰腺癌,联合检测CA19-9和IgG4具有更高的特异性和敏感性[17]。但目前在我国,依然有很多单位不提供IgG4等项目的检测,且PET/CT的费用较昂贵。该疾病尤其是局限性肿大的AIP主要需与胰腺癌鉴别,CA19-9正常或增高不明显的且合并白蛋白/球蛋白比倒置,CT/MRI见胰腺肿大而无胰腺密度明显降低者高度怀疑AIP,再应用IgG4及自身抗体等检验进一步明确[18-20]。ERCP脱落细胞学检查或经皮穿刺活检具有较高的特异性,但阳性率较低且有创伤,临床上很难普及,必要时可以使用短时间的激素诊断性治疗[21]。

早期干预可以有效保护受累器官的功能,发病2年的时间窗口尤为重要,因为AIP即便没有症状,仍然会消弱胰腺的内分泌功能,AIP的反复发作可以演变成慢性胰腺炎、胰腺萎缩、胰管结石等[22]。至于AIP是否会恶变仍未定论。最近Hart等[23]通过前瞻性研究发现,AIP并未增加癌变的风险。虽然有些AIP具有自限的特点,但激素仍是其标准治疗方案。使用激素治疗的适应证主要包括梗阻性黄疸、腹痛、背痛以及出现胰外脏器的症状。激素治疗之前可以进行胆汁引流治疗梗阻性黄疸,糖尿病患者需要控制好血糖。关于激素的用量尚有争议[14,24]。日本指南推荐口服泼尼松剂量从0.6 mg/(kg·d)开始,维持2 ~ 4周,再根据临床变化、血液生化检测、影像学复查每1 ~2周递减5 mg;到达2.5 ~ 5 mg/d的目标维持剂量至少需要2 ~ 3个月;激素撤离需要依据每个人的具体病情而定,持续3年影像学、血清学检查改善的患者方可考虑激素撤离。重新使用激素或激素加量可以有效治疗AIP的复发,激素抵抗的患者可以使用免疫抑制剂。由于激素的治疗,AIP的短期预后尚可;但长期预后尚不清楚,与很多不确定因素有关,比如复发、胰腺内外分泌功能不全以及恶变[24]。

总之,结合临床症状、血液学及影像学检查可提高AIP的正确诊断率,必要时可行针刺细胞学检查或激素诊断性治疗,标准的激素治疗仍然是AIP的首选。

1 Yoshida K, Toki F, Takeuchi T, et al. Chronic pancreatitis caused by an autoimmune abnormality[J]. Dig Dis Sci, 1995, 40(7):1561-1568.

2 Ketwaroo GA, Sheth S. Autoimmune pancreatitis[J]. Gastroenterol Rep (Oxf), 2013, 1(1):27-32.

3 Yamashita H, Naitoh I, Nakazawa T, et al. A comparison of the diagnostic efficacy in type 1 autoimmune pancreatitis based on biopsy specimens from various organs[J]. Pancreatology, 2014, 14(3):186-192.

4 Ikeura T, Manfredi R, Zamboni G, et al. Application of international consensus diagnostic criteria to an Italian series of autoimmune pancreatitis[J]. United European Gastroenterol J, 2013, 1(4):276-284.

5 Uehara T, Hamano H, Kawa S, et al. Comparison of histopathological features of pancreatic carcinoma and type 1 autoimmune pancreatitis[J]. Pathol Int, 2014, 64(2): 51-57.

6 Yanagisawa N, Haruta I, Shimizu K, et al. Identification of commensal flora-associated antigen as a pathogenetic factor of autoimmune pancreatitis[J]. Pancreatology, 2014, 14(2): 100-106.

7 Sumimoto K, Uchida K, Kusuda T, et al. The role of CD19+ CD24high CD38high and CD19+ CD24high CD27+ regulatory B cells in patients with type 1 autoimmune pancreatitis[J]. Pancreatology,2014, 14(3): 193-200.

8 Seleznik GM, Zoller J, O’connor T, et al. The role of lymphotoxin signaling in the development of autoimmune pancreatitis and associated secondary extra-pancreatic pathologies[J]. Cytokine Growth Factor Rev, 2014, 25(2): 125-137.

9 Okazaki K, Uchida K, Sumimoto K, et al. Autoimmune pancreatitis:pathogenesis, latest developments and clinical guidance[J]. Ther Adv Chronic Dis, 2014, 5(3): 104-111.

10 Okazaki K, Kawa S, Kamisawa T, et al. Amendment of the Japanese Consensus Guidelines for Autoimmune Pancreatitis, 2013 I. Concept and diagnosis of autoimmune pancreatitis[J]. J Gastroenterol,2014, 49(4):567-588.

11 Buijs J, Van Heerde MJ, Rauws EA, et al. Comparable efficacy of low- versus high-dose induction corticosteroid treatment in autoimmune pancreatitis[J]. Pancreas, 2014, 43(2): 261-267.

12 O'reilly DA, Malde DJ, Duncan T, et al. Review of the diagnosis,classification and management of autoimmune pancreatitis[J]. World J Gastrointest Pathophysiol, 2014, 5(2): 71-81.

13 Chari ST, Smyrk TC, Levy MJ, et al. Diagnosis of autoimmune pancreatitis: the Mayo Clinic experience[J]. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol, 2006, 4(8): 1010-1016.

14 Otsuki M, Chung JB, Okazaki K, et al. Asian diagnostic criteria for autoimmune pancreatitis: consensus of the Japan-Korea Symposium on Autoimmune Pancreatitis[J]. J Gastroenterol, 2008, 43(6):403-408.

15 Shimosegawa T, Chari ST, Frulloni L, et al. International consensus diagnostic criteria for autoimmune pancreatitis: guidelines of the International Association of Pancreatology[J]. Pancreas, 2011, 40(3): 352-358.

16 Van Heerde MJ, Buijs J, Rauws EA, et al. A comparative study of diagnostic scoring systems for autoimmune pancreatitis[J]. Pancreas, 2014, 43(4): 559-564.

17 Van Heerde MJ, Buijs J, Hansen BE, et al. Serum level of Ca 19-9 increases ability of IgG4 test to distinguish patients with autoimmune pancreatitis from those with pancreatic carcinoma[J]. Dig Dis Sci,2014, 59(6): 1322-1329.

18 Shin JU, Lee JK, Kim KM, et al. The differentiation of autoimmune pancreatitis and pancreatic cancer using imaging findings[J]. Hepatogastroenterology, 2013, 60(125): 1174-1181.

19 Zaheer A, Singh VK, Akshintala VS, et al. Differentiating autoimmune pancreatitis from pancreatic adenocarcinoma using dualphase computed tomography[J]. J Comput Assist Tomogr, 2014,38(1): 146-152.

20 Yukutake M, Sasaki T, Serikawa M, et al. Timing of radiological improvement after steroid therapy in patients with autoimmune pancreatitis[J]. Scand J Gastroenterol, 2014, 49(6): 727-733.

21 Asbun HJ, Conlon K, Fernandez-Cruz L, et al. When to perform a pancreatoduodenectomy in the absence of positive histology? A consensus statement by the International Study Group of Pancreatic Surgery[J]. Surgery, 2014, 155(5): 887-892.

22 Takahashi H, Yamamoto M, Shinomura Y, et al. Long-term outcomes and necessity of early intervention for IgG4-related disease[J]. Nihon Rinsho Meneki Gakkai Kaishi, 2013, 36(6): 442-451.

23 Hart PA, Law RJ, Dierkhising RA, et al. Risk of cancer in autoimmune pancreatitis: a case-control study and review of the literature[J]. Pancreas, 2014, 43(3): 417-421.

24 Kamisawa T, Okazaki K, Kawa S, et al. Amendment of the Japanese Consensus Guidelines for Autoimmune Pancreatitis, 2013 III. Treatment and prognosis of autoimmune pancreatitis[J]. J Gastroenterol, 2014, 49(6):961-970.

Diagnosis and management of autoimmune pancreatitis: An analysis of 43 cases

LIU Qi-yu1, XIA Hong-tian2, LIU Zhi-wei2, CAI Shou-wang2, ZHANG Wen-zhi2
1Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery, 1st People's Hospital of Kunming, Kunming 650031, Yunnan Province, China;2Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery, Chinese PLA General Hospital, Beijing 100853, China

XIA Hong-tian. Email: Xiahongtian115@sina.com

ObjectiveTo clarify the clinical characteristics of autoimmune pancreatitis (AIP) and explore the experience of diagnosis and treatment.MethodsClinical data about 43 patients with a diagnosis of AIP in Chinese PLA General Hospital from January 1, 2011 to June 1, 2014 were retrospectively analyzed.ResultsThe ratio of male to female was 4.4:1 with an average age of 57.4±12.0 years old in 43 patients with AIP. Obstructive jaundice was the most frequent initial symptom (58.1%), followed by abdominal discomfort (37.2%) and anorexia (4.7%). More than half of patients were complicated with weight loss (51.2%). The albumin/ globulin ratio of 38 (88.4%) patients’ serum was lower than 1.5, serum amylase increased in 5 cases (11.6%) and serum CA19-9 level above 100 U/ml occurred in 7 patients (16.3%). Serum immunoglobulin G4 levels were elevated in 39 cases (90.7%) and serum gamma globulin levels were elevated in 14 (93.3%) cases. Diffuse swelling of the pancreas was found in 28 patients (65.1%) and segmental swelling of the pancreas in 15 cases (34.9%). The correct rate of diagnosis upon PET/CT was 58.3% (7/12). The incidence of benign disease post-operation for a presumed malignancy was 11.6% (5/43). The remission rate of steroid-treated AIP was 100% and the relapsing rate within 12 months was 14.0% (6/43) without maintenance therapy.ConclusionCombining clinical symptoms, blood test, computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance (MR) fi ndings together can effectively increase the correct diagnosis rate of AIP. When a diagnosis of AIP is highly suspected, a biopsy is recommended, and a short course of steroid treatment should be considered if the biopsy does not reveal features suspicious for malignancy. The standard treatment for AIP is steroid therapy.

autoimmune pancreatitis; jaundice; immunoglobulin; steroid therapy

R 576

A

2095-5227(2014)12-1214-04

10.3969/j.issn.2095-5227.2014.12.010

时间:2014-08-11 09:11

http://www.cnki.net/kcms/detail/11.3275.R.20140811.0911.001.html

2014-06-17

刘其雨,男,博士,主治医师。研究方向:肝胆外科基础与临床。2013年7月- 2014年7月在解放军总医院进修。Email: liuqiyu_12@hotmail.com

夏红天,男,博士,副主任医师。Email: Xiahongtian115@sina.com

猜你喜欢
免疫性胰腺癌黄疸
胰腺癌治疗为什么这么难
鲁晓岚:黄疸
从扶正祛邪法探讨免疫性复发性流产的防治
吃柑橘何来黄疸——认识橘黄病
胸腺瘤与自身免疫性疾病的研究进展
手术后黄疸的病因诊断
Atg5和Atg7在自身免疫性疾病中的研究进展
新生儿黄疸护理观察
STAT1和MMP-2在胰腺癌中表达的意义
早诊早治赶走胰腺癌