中国肝脏病杂志(电子版)

位置：首页 >> 期刊文章

热化疗联合介入栓塞治疗中晚期原发性肝癌患者的疗效

作者：侯倩倩 1 王大庆 1 肖杨 1 赵鹏 2

单位：1.河北省衡水市哈励逊国际和平医院肿瘤内科河北衡水 053000 2.河北省衡水市哈励逊国际和平医院放射科河北衡水 053000

关键词：肝肿瘤化学疗法热疗介入栓塞

分类号：

出版年,卷(期):页码：2016,8(4):39-43

摘要：

摘要：目的探讨微波亚高温热化疗联合介入栓塞术治疗中晚期原发性肝癌患者的近期疗效及安全
性。方法对本院2014年9月至2016年3月收治的79例中晚期原发性肝癌患者的资料进行回顾性分析，
根据治疗方法将患者分为联合组（42例）和对照组（37例），联合组患者经肝动脉栓塞治疗后序贯奥
沙利铂联合替吉奥热化疗，对照组仅进行经肝动脉栓塞治疗，以21天为1个周期，共治疗2个周期。
比较两组患者治疗后的近期疗效及不良反应。结果治疗后，联合组患者肿瘤总有效率和肿瘤疾病控
制率均显著高于对照组患者（71.4% vs 48.6%，92.9% vs 75.7%），差异有统计学意义（χ 2 值分别为
4.281、4.508，P值分别为0.039、0.034）。联合组根据肿瘤碘油沉积量计算的有效率显著高于对照
组（80.9% vs 51.4%），差异具有统计学意义（χ 2 = 8.936，P = 0.003）。联合组临床症状改善总有效
率和临床获益率均显著高于对照组（59.5% vs 37.8%，90.5% vs 75.7%），差异有统计学意义（χ 2 值
分别为4.133、5.221，P值分别为0.042、0.022）。联合组甲胎蛋白降低的总有效率显著高于对照组
（64.3% vs 40.5%），差异有统计学意义（χ 2 = 4.454，P = 0.035），而甲胎蛋白临床获益率差异无统
计学意义（85.7% vs 73.0%；χ 2 = 1.977，P = 0.160）。两组患者治疗期间常见的不良反应为胃肠道反
应、骨髓抑制、肝功能受损和外周神经系统受损等，均无严重不良反应，两组患者不良反应率差异无
统计学意义（P ＞ 0.05）。结论热化疗联合介入栓塞术治疗中晚期原发性肝癌患者的疗效较好，不良
反应轻微，可耐受，为原发性肝癌患者提供了一种新的治疗方法。

Abstract: Objective To explore the short-term curative effects and safety of microwave sub-high temperature
hyperthermia chemotherapy combined with interventional embolotherapy on patients with advanced primary
liver cancer. Methods The data of 79 patients with advanced primary liver cancer in our hospital from
September 2014 to March 2016 were retrospectively analyzed. The patients were divided into combination
group (42 cases) and control group (37 cases) according to different therapeutic methods. Patients in
combination group were treated with hepatic arterial embolization after interventional sequential oxaliplatin
combined chemotherapy of Gio heat, and patients in control group were treated with hepatic arterial
embolization only. All patients were treated for two cycles (21 days/cycle). The short-term effect and adverse
reactions after treatment were compared between two groups. Results After treatment, the rate of total tumor
response and disease control in combination group were significantly higher than those of control group
(71.4% vs 48.6%, 92.9% vs 75.7%), the differences were statistically significant (χ 2 = 4.281, 4.508; P = 0.039,
0.034). The effective rate of combination group according to the tumor amount of lipiodol deposition was
significantly higher than that in control group (80.9% vs 51.4%), the difference was statistically significant
(χ 2 = 8.936, P = 0.003). The total efficiency of clinical symptoms and clinical benefit rate in combined group

were significantly higher than those of control group (59.5% vs 37.8%, 90.5% vs 75.7%), the differences were
statistically significant (χ 2 = 4.133, 5.221; P = 0.042, 0.022). The total effective rate of AFP in combination
group was significantly higher than that of control group (64.3% vs 40.5%), the difference was statistically
significant (χ 2 = 4.454, P = 0.035), and the clinical benefit rate of AFP in two groups had no significant
difference (85.7% vs 73.0%; χ 2 = 1.977, P = 0.160). The common side-effects were gastrointestinal reactions,
bone marrow suppression, liver function affected and peripheral nervous system damage, no serious adverse
reactions occurred in both groups. The adverse reaction rates in two groups had no significant difference (P ＞
0.05). Conclusions The curative effect of primary hyperthermia chemotherapy combined with interventional
embolotherapy on patients with advanced liver cancer is preferable and the adverse reactions are slight and
tolerable, which provides a new treatment method for patients with advanced liver cancer.

基金项目：

作者简介：

参考文献：

服务与反馈：

【文章下载】【加入收藏】