两种腹腔热灌注化疗方式的对比研究  

Comparative research on two kinds of continuous hyperthermic peritoneal perfusion chemotherapy

作　　者：陈广龙[1] 杜记涛[1] 高阳[1] 万相斌[1] 李智[1] 

机构地区：[1]河南省肿瘤医院普外科,郑州450008

出　　处：《医药论坛杂志》2014年第4期45-46,共2页Journal of Medical Forum

摘　　要：目的通过对两种腹腔热灌注治疗(CHPPC)所产生的不良反应的对比研究,观察哪种热灌注方式更有利于腹腔热灌注化疗的实施及疗效的发挥。方法通过对两组胃癌T4期患者采用不同热灌注间隔时间进行治疗,观察胃肠道反应、腹痛、电解质紊乱、骨髓抑制四项不良反应发生率及患者可耐受400 ml/min流量的灌注次数进行统计学比较,了解两种热灌注方式的优劣。结果两种治疗方案不良反应发生率无统计学意义,但间隔24 h组患者可耐受400 ml/min灌注流量次数,较间隔48 h组多且具有统计学意义。结论术后早期热灌注治疗间隔24 h进行,在不增加不良反应前提下,增加了有效灌注次数,对于有效的发挥腹腔热灌注的疗效具有优势。：Objective To compare the toxicities arising from two kinds of CHPPC , observe which is more conducive to implementation and efficacy. Methods Through two groups of patients with gastric cancer of stage T4 with different in- tervals for treatment, observed gastrointestinal reactions, abdominal pain, electrolyte imbalance, bone marrow suppres- sion, four incidence of adverse reactions in patients and the number of tolerated 400ml/min flow and compared in statis- tics to understand which kind of heat perfusion superior. Results Two treatment programs incidence of side effects was not statistically significant, but the interval of 24 hours in patients tolerated 400ml/min flow perfusion times are more than the set interval of 48 hours with statistical significance. Conclusion Early postoperative perfusion treatment inter- val of 24 hours, without increasing side effects, increase the effective perfusion times, and is better to effectively play in- traperitoneal hyperthermic perfusion efficacy.

关 键 词：胃癌 腹腔热灌注治疗 不良反应 

分 类 号：R730.53[医药卫生—肿瘤]