介入化疗加栓塞术与新辅助化疗全身静脉化疗在宫颈癌根治性手术患者中的应用效果比较

Clinical comparison of interventional chemotherapy and embolization vs neoadjuvant chemotherapy and systemic intravenous chemotherapy in patients with radical hysterectomy

目的研究新辅助化疗全身静脉化疗对比介入化疗加栓塞术对行宫颈癌根治性手术患者的临床疗效。方法选取确诊并接受治疗的宫颈癌患者50例,将采用新辅助化疗全身静脉化疗联合宫颈癌根治性手术治疗的25例患者作为对照组;将采用介入化疗加栓塞术联合宫颈癌根治性手术治疗的25例患者作为治疗组。对两组患者的临床治疗效果、术后的病理变化情况及不良反应发生情况进行比较。结果治疗组的有效率为76.0%,高于对照组的44.0%(P<0.05);治疗组的淋巴结转移率为28.0%,低于对照组的52.0%(P<0.05);治疗组的呕吐、肝肾功能损害、骨髓抑制、脱发及色素沉着的发生率均低于对照组(P<0.05)。结论介入化疗加栓塞术比新辅助化疗全身静脉化疗在行宫颈癌根治性手术中取得了更好的临床治疗效果。

Objective To study the clinical effect of neoadjuvant chemotherapy and systemic intravenous chemothera-py vs interventional chemotherapy and embolization in patients underwent radical hysterectomy. Method 50 patients with clinically confirmed cervical cancer who received treatment were enrolled in the study, with 25 cases each in control group and study group, receiving systemic intravenous chemotherapy combined with radical hysterectomy or intervention-al chemotherapy plus embolization combined with radical hysterectomy, respectively, and the clinical effect, postopera-tive pathological changes and adverse reactions were compared between the two groups. Result The response rate in study group was 76.0%, which was higher than that in the control group at 44.0%（P〈0.05）;the pelvic lymph node metas-tasis rate in the study group was 28.0%, and was lower than that in the control group at 52.0%（P〈0.05）;the incidence of vomiting, liver and kidney dysfunction, myelosuppression, alopecia and hyperpigmentation were lower in the study group than in the control group （P〈0.05）. Conclusion Interventional chemotherapy plus embolization is much more effective than neoadjuvant chemotherapy and systemic intravenous chemotherapy when combined with radical hysterectomy.