| Object: Oxidative stress injury has played a promotion role in the occurrence anddevelopment of tumor, which has been approved by the academic. Researches on gastric canceralso have found that oxidative stress products in tumor tissue and plasma of patients with gastriccancer were obviously different from those in the control group. Researches on the differencesof oxidative stress injuries at different periods of the same disease have confirmed that theinjury will be increased gradually along with the progress of the disease. Therefore, by detectingthe parameters related to the oxidative stress injury in cancer tissue and non-cancer gastric tissuein patients with gastric cancer at different clinical stage, the differences between the data weredetected in this paper, thus the relationship between oxidative stress injury and the progress ofgastric cancer was revealed so as to provide theoretical and clinical basis for the detection andantioxidant treatment on gastric cancer in the future.Methods:60cases of patients with gastric cancer were selected in this study, who have beenadmitted in our hospital and undergone radical resection of gastric cancer from July2012toMarch2014. All of the cases were diagnosed with gastric cancer by preoperative gastroscopebiopsy. No performances of distant metastases were found in imaging detection. And thepatients did not have the history of antioxidant drug therapy such as preoperative adjuvantchemotherapy and anti-cancer drugs therapy. Surgical indications were clear and the operativecontraindication was excluded. Postoperative pathology confirmed the patients were withgastric cancer of phase I-III. And according to the postoperative pathologic staging, thepatients were divided into groups of phase I, phase II, and phase III. Specimens were taken fromthe center of the tumor and non-cancer gastric tissue after operation. Activities ofmalonaldehyde (MDA) and superoxide dismutase (SOD) were detected, and the differencesbetween the data were compared.Results:1. There were a total of60cases were included into the research. There were12cases (male:8cases; female:4cases) in group of phase I; aged of58.1±10.7;5cases weregiven laparoscope while the other7were undergone open surgery;10cases were given radicalresection of gastric cancer while2cases given distal gastric resection. There were20cases(male:13cases; female:7cases) in group of phase II; aged of63.1±8.3;9cases were givenlaparoscope while the other11were undergone open surgery;16cases were given full radicalresection of gastric cancer while4cases given distal gastric resection. There were28cases(male:19cases; female:9cases) in group of phase III; aged of64.8±8.8;13cases were given laparoscope while the other15were undergone open surgery;23cases were given full radicalresection of gastric cancer while5cases given distal gastric resection. Among the group, inaddition to the obvious difference (P<0.05) between age distribution in group of phase I withthose in groups of phase II and phase III, there was no significant difference with regards to theage distribution between groups, gender ration, operation methods, and resection range.2. In group of phase I, anesthesia time (time from the anesthesia induction to anesthesiadecannulation), block time of tumor blood supply (time from the separating right gastric-momentum of blood vessels to radical resection of gastric cancer), intraoperative blood losswere253.2±48.3min,68.1±15.4min and98±36.4ml; the corresponding values were267.2±53.1min,72.3±25.2min and103.5±42.1ml in group of phase II; and the correspondingvalues were271.2±44.2min,69.4±29.1min and123.1±58.1ml in group of phase III. Comparedintraoperative data between the three groups, there were no significant differences (P>0.05) inanesthesia time, block time of tumor blood supply and intraoperative blood loss.3. Comparisons within each group of the three groups: Compared the MDA concentrations oftumor tissue with the non-gastric tissue in the three groups, the former concentration was higher,and the differences of the within-group comparison were of statistical significance (P<0.05);Compared the SOD activity of tumor tissue with the non-gastric tissue, the former was lower,and the within-group comparisons were statistically significant (P<0.05).4. Comparison between the three groups: Compared the MDA concentration of tumor tissueand the non-gastric tissue, group of phase I was obviously lower than those in groups of phase IIand III, and the difference was statistically significant (P<0.05); group of phase II was lowerthan that in group of phase III, and the difference was statistically significant (P<0.05); MDAlevel was gradually increased in the three groups. Compared the SOD activity of tumor tissue,group of phase I was obviously lower than those in groups of phase II and III, and the differencewas statistically significant (P<0.05); difference between group of phase II and group of phaseII was not obvious (P>0.05). Compared the SOD activity of non-tumor gastric tissue, group ofphase I was obviously lower than those in groups of phase II and III, and the difference wasstatistically significant (P<0.05); group of phase II was also lower than that in group of phase III(P<0.05); and SOD concentration was increased in the3groups.Conclusion:1. Oxidative stress injuries of patients with gastric cancer at different periodswere all more aggressive in cancer tissue compared with the non-cancer tissue adjacent tocarcinoma.2. As the tumor progression, oxidative stress injuries show a gradually aggressivetrend in the tumor tissue and non-cancer tissue adjacent to carcinoma.3. The antioxidant injuryactivity of the cancer tissue was gradually increased. But the activity was limited. |
PDF Full Text Request