检索规则说明:AND代表“并且”;OR代表“或者”;NOT代表“不包含”;(注意必须大写,运算符两边需空一格)
检 索 范 例 :范例一: (K=图书馆学 OR K=情报学) AND A=范并思 范例二:J=计算机应用与软件 AND (U=C++ OR U=Basic) NOT M=Visual
作 者:张凤春[1] 左丽[2] 王红霞[3] 唐雷[3] 张玥[1] 徐迎春[3]
机构地区:[1]上海交通大学医学院附属苏州九龙医院肿瘤科,苏州215021 [2]复旦大学附属上海市第五人民医院肿瘤科,上海200240 [3]上海交通大学医学院附属仁济医院肿瘤科,上海200127
出 处:《肿瘤》2011年第2期160-164,共5页Tumor
基 金:国家十五科技攻关课题资助项目(编号:2004BA706B03-01);上海市教育委员会重点学科(第五期)资助项目(编号:J50208)
摘 要:目的:观察低功率超声空化治疗实体瘤的近期和远期疗效及不良反应。方法:53例晚期实体瘤患者随机分为超声空化+化疗组(A组18例)、单纯化疗组(B组18例)和单纯超声空化治疗组(C组17例)。超声空化治疗为每周治疗5d,1次/d,共治疗2周;或每周治疗3d,1次/d,共治疗3周。可同时进行化疗和超声空化治疗。结果:53例患者均可评价疗效和不良反应。A组中完全缓解1例、部分缓解6例、疾病稳定9例,临床获益率为88.89%(16/18);B组中无完全缓解患者、部分缓解4例、疾病稳定7例,临床获益率为61.11%(11/18);两组比较差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。C组中无完全缓解患者、部分缓解4例、疾病稳定6例,临床获益率为58.82%(10/17)。A、B和C组的生活质量改善率分别为83.33%、55.56%和58.82%。A、B和C组的1年生存率分别为66.67%、44.44%和41.18%,2年生存率分别为38.89%、16.67%和17.65%。A组与B组和C组的1和2年生存率差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05);B组和C组的1和2年生存率差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。超声空化治疗无血液学不良反应,主要不良反应为局部疼痛和发热,可自行缓解。结论:超声空化治疗晚期实体瘤的有效率较高,不良反应可以耐受,能够改善患者的生活质量。Objective:To observe the recent efficacy,long-term survival and the side effects of low energy ultrasonic cavitation in treatment of 53 patients with solid tumors.Methods:Fifty-three patients with solid tumors were randomly divided into three groups:group A(18 patients received low energy ultrasonic cavitation therapy combined with chemotherapy),group B(18 patients received chemotherapy alone) and group C(17 patients received low energy ultrasonic cavitation therapy alone).Low energy ultrasonic cavitation therapy was administrated five days in one week for 2 weeks or three times each week for 3 weeks.Results:All fifty-three patients were included in the analysis.In group A,one case achieved complete response(CR),6 cases achieved partial response(PR) and 9 cases achieved stable disease(SD);the disease control rate(CR+PR+SD) was 88.61%(16/18).In group B,no cases achieved CR,4 cases achieved PR and 7 cases achieved SD;the disease control rate was 61.11%(11/18).In group C,no cases achieved CR,4 cases achieved PR and 6 cases achieved SD;the disease control rate was 58.82%(10/17).The difference of disease control rate between groups A and B was significant(P0.05).One-year survival rates of these three groups were 66.67%,44.44% and 41.18%,respectively,and two-year survival rates were 38.89%,16.67% and 17.65%,respectively.The one-and two-year survival rates in group A were both higher than those in group B and group C(P0.05),but the difference was not observed between group B and group C.The proportions of patients with improved quality of life in groups A,B and C were 83.33%,55.56% and 58.82%,respectively.There was no blood toxicity in group C.The major toxicities were local pain and fever,which could be self-relieved.Conclusion:Low energy ultrasonic cavitation therapy in treatment of solid tumors is efficient and well-tolerated,and the quality of life in patients can be improved.
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在链接到云南高校图书馆文献保障联盟下载...
云南高校图书馆联盟文献共享服务平台 版权所有©
您的IP:216.73.216.3