The Relationship Between Lymphatic Microvessel Density And Tumor Metastasis By The Expression Of VEGFR-3and LYVE-1in Rectal Carcinoma

Objective：To investigate the relationship between lymphatic microvessel density(LMVD)and clinical pathology of rectal carcinoma．Methods：The specimens were taken from46cases with rectal cancer and15cases with normalrectal tissue in the first affiliated hospital in Anhui Medical University from2010to2012.the ration of sex man and woman with rectal cancer was32:14,the age varied from38to76years old,20cases were the middle and well differtiated adenocarcinoma and26cases were low-and undiffertiated;30cases had lymphnode metastasis and16without;18cases tumor diameter were beyond5cm and28below;31cases infiltratedinto serosa and15without;26cases were located rectum upper middle section(from theanal adge more than7cm),operated Dixon resection,20cases were located rectum lowersegment(from the anal adge less than or equal7cm),operated Mile’s resection. Did notreceive preoperative chemotherapy, radiotherapy and biological therapy. According tothe pathological nature, tumor size, invasion depth and lymph node metastasis. HEstaining to determine organizational structure and confirmed that the normal rectaltissues of colon cancer.The expression of VEGFR-3、LYVE-1in46rectal cancers(RC) was detected byimmunohistochemistry (SP-9001),by which the LMVD was calculated.Results：1. The lymphangiogenesis was shown in tumoral tissue in RCs.The LMVD of tumoral tissue in GCs(13.73±4.69，15.97±6.76)was significantly higher than that of normalrectal tissue(8.97±2.28,9.65±2.32)(P=0.000).2. Immunohistochemistry in VEGFR-3:LMVD with lymphatic metastasis (18.56±4.66)was higher than that without lymphatic metastasis(8.72±3.91,)(P=0.000).LMVDwith tumor diameter greater than5cm(18.86±3.17) was higher than those less than5cm(10.38±4.02); LMVD with serosal invasion (17.37±4.52)was higher than thatwithout serosal invasion(13.33±3.47)(P<0.05).;LMVD with high differentiatedcolorectal cancer(12.97±4.78) and poor ly differentiated colorectal cance(14.45±3.87)ware no obvious difference between statistical significance (P>0.05); LMVD withPosition rectal cancer located in the upper section (14.79±4.08) and lower rectalsegment (15.62±4.54) ware no obvious difference between statistical significance (P>0.05).3.Immunohistochemistry in LYVE-1:LMVD with lymphatic metastasis (19.06±3.85)was higher than that without lymphatic metastasis(9.96±3.93,)(P=0.000).LMVDwith tumor diameter greater than5cm(20.49±4.62) was higher than those less than5cm(11.04±4.71); LMVD with serosal invasion (17.98±4.61)was higher than thatwithout serosal invasion(13.08±5.74)(P<0.05).;LMVD with high differentiatedcolorectal cancer(13.83±4.69) and poor ly differentiated colorectal cance(15.07±3.93)ware no obvious difference between statistical significance (P>0.05); LMVD withPosition rectal cancer located in the upper section (15.42±4.35) and lower rectalsegment (16.33±4.01) ware no obvious difference between statistical significance (P>0.05).4. There was no significant diference between LMVD and the tumor location andhistopathologic type of cancer．(P>0.05).LMVD in RCs showed positive relations withtumor size、tumor depth and lymphatic metastasis.(P<0.05)5.The result of immunohistochemistry in VEGFR-3is corrected with LYVE-1. Conclusion：LMVD in RCs showed positive relations with tumor size、tumor depth andlymphatic metastasis．It was benefit to evaluate the prognosis and treatment of rectalcarcinoma when it had become a number factor that tumor induced to generate1ymphatic vessel.