^(153)S_m-EDTMP联合“云克”治疗多发性骨转移瘤的效果观察

Clinical outcomes of ^(153)S_m-EDTMP in combination with ^(99)Tc-MDP for the treatment of multiple bone metastatic tumors

目的比较单独使用153Sm-EDTMP与153Sm-EDTMP联合“云克”(99Tc-MDP)两种方法治疗多发性骨转移瘤的止痛效果及转移灶效果。方法96例确诊为多发性骨转移肿瘤中,60例单独使用153Sm-EDTMP治疗,36例使用153Sm-EDTMP联合“云克”治疗,比较两种方法的治疗效果。结果单独使用153Sm-EDTMP治疗,缓解骨痛的总有效率为61.67%,转移灶消除或缩小的总有效率为20.00%,而153Sm-EDTMP与“云克”联合治疗则分别为88.89%和44.44%,两组间比较差异有高度显著性(P均<0.01)。结论单独使用153Sm-EDTMP治疗和153Sm-EDTMP联合“云克”治疗多发性骨转移瘤都是有效的止痛方法,但153Sm-EDTMP联合“云克”对于多发性骨转移瘤止痛效果更佳(88.89%),同时使部分转移灶完全消失、缩小或减少。

Obieetive To outline the analgesic effects and clinical metastatic effects of ^153Sm - EDTMP vs. ^153Sm - EDTMP in combination with ^99Tc - MDP for treatment of multiple bone metastatic neoplasms. Methods 96 patients proven with multiple bone metastatic tumors were involved in this study. 60 patients were given ^153Sm, - EDTMP alone, 36 patients received ^153Sm - EDTMP in combination with ^99Tc - MDP. To compare the clinical outcomes between these two groups Results In patients treated tumors using ^153Sm - EDTMP alone, the total osteal- gia remission rate was 61.67%, the total response rates of metastatic loci eliminating or shrinking was 20.00% ; while in patients treated tumors using ^153Sm-EDTMP in combination with ^99 Tc - MDP, they were 88.89% and 44.44%, respectively. To compare between these two groups, there were statistically significant differences （ P 〈 0.01）. Conclusion Both ^153Sm- EDTMP alone and ^153Sm- EDTMP in combination with ^99 Tc-MDP are effective for analgesia in treatment of multiple metastatic neoplasms, but ^153Sm - EDTMP in combination with ^99 Tc - MDP is superior to ^153Sm - EDTMP alone, the former can be more effective and can make some of the metastatic loci eliminate completely, shrink or lessen.