期刊文献+

不同介入模式治疗肝癌的疗效分析 被引量:1

Efficacy of different modes of intervention in the treatment of liver cancer
原文传递
导出
摘要 目的探讨不同介入模式治疗肝癌的疗效。方法选取收治的原发性肝癌患者300例,根据介入治疗方式随机分为A组、B组和C组,每组100例。其中A组患者采用肝动脉化疗栓塞术(TACE),B组患者采用肝门静脉化疗栓塞(PVCE)治疗,C组患者在A、B组患者治疗方法基础上行经皮肝穿刺乙醇消融(PEI)治疗,比较3组患者治疗后肝功能检查指标、总有效率及不良反应。结果C组患者治疗有效率为43.0%,明显高于A组(23.0%)和B组(29.0%)患者,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。C组患者甲胎蛋白变化显著多于A、B两组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。A、B、C组患者并发症发生情况比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);C组患者丙氨酸转氨酶和白蛋白水平与A、B两组患者比较,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论 TACE、PVCE联合PEI治疗对肝癌患者有显著疗效,可有效控制病情,缓解症状,值得推广。 Objective To explore the curative effect of different modes of intervention treatment of liver cancer. Methods 300 patients with primary liver cancer were selected and divided into group A, group B and group C ( 100 cases respectively) according to modes of intervention treatment. Group A re- ceived embolization treatment with pirarubicin, ultra fluid lipiodol emulsion and gelfoam particles, Group B hepatic portal vein embolization, and Group C PEI on the basis of group A and B. Liver function, the total ef- fective rate and adverse reactions were compared. Results The direct curative effect of group C was signifi- cantly better than that of group A and B ( P 〈 0. 05 ). The alpha-fetoprotein change of group C was signifi- cantly more than the number of group A and B (P 〈 0. 05 ). There were no significant differences in compli- cation incidence among the three groups ( P 〉 0.05 ). Liver functions of group C was significantly different from those of group A and B ( P 〈 0.05 ). Conclusion Combined treatment of TACE, PEI and PVCE has significant curative effect in patients with liver cancer, effectively control diseases, alleviate the symptoms, which is worthy of promotion.
出处 《中国肿瘤临床与康复》 2014年第7期840-842,共3页 Chinese Journal of Clinical Oncology and Rehabilitation
关键词 介入模式 肝肿瘤 治疗效果 Intervention mode Liver neoplasms Treatment outcome
  • 相关文献

参考文献9

二级参考文献76

共引文献141

同被引文献3

引证文献1

二级引证文献2

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部