出 处:《中国医药》2015年第8期1156-1160,共5页China Medicine
摘 要:目的 探讨肝动脉化疗栓塞(TACE)联合CT引导射频消融序贯治疗以及单独射频消融治疗肝细胞癌的临床效果.方法 采用前瞻性随机对照试验,选取2006年1月至2011年1月成都医学院第一附属医院收治的符合研究条件的61例初诊肝细胞癌患者为研究对象,按随机数字表法分为肝动脉化疗栓塞联合CT引导射频消融序贯治疗组(TACE联合射频消融组,31例)和单独射频消融治疗组(单独射频消融组,30例).对比分析2组患者治疗前后肝功能、总生存率以及无瘤生存率.结果 肝功能指标、肝功能Child-Pugh分级、肿瘤最大径TACE联合射频消融组改善的程度均明显优于单独射频消融组[丙氨酸转氨酶(ALT):(38 ±6) U/L比(50±7) U/L,天冬氨酸转氨酶(AST):(38±10) U/L比(50±10) U/L,总胆红素:(67 ±14) μmol/L比(86±15) μmol/L,清蛋白:(43±5) g/L比(38±4) g/L;Child-Pugh分级:A级28例、B级3例比A级23例、B级7例;肿瘤最大径:(2.2±0.9)cm比(3.1±1.0)cm;均P<0.05].TACE联合射频消融组共死亡16例,中位生存时间34个月,中位无瘤生存时间29个月;射频消融组共死亡23例,中位生存时间20个月,中位无瘤生存时间14个月,且TACE联合射频消融组的总生存时间(Х^2=4.025,P=0.045)、无瘤生存时间(Х^2=4.331,P=0.037)均明显高于单独射频消融组.TACE联合射频消融组1年、2年和3年的生存率和无瘤生存率依次为80.7% (25/31)和74.2% (23/31)、61.3%(19/31)和51.6%(16/31)及48.4%(15/31)和35.5%(11/31),相应的,射频消融组1年、2年和3年生存率和无瘤生存率依次为60.0%(18/30)和53.3%(16/30)、40.0%(12/30)和30.0%(9/30)、23.3%(7/30)和16.7%(5/30).TACE联合射频消融组具有较好的生存率(风险比=0.519,95%置信区间:0.325 ~ 0.816,P=0.004)和无瘤生存率(风险比=0.568,95%置信区间:0.374 ~0.882,P=0.013Objective To explore the short-term and long-term efficacy of transcatheter arterial chemoembolization (TACE) combined with CT-guided radiofrequency ablation (RFA) in treating hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).Methods A prospective,randomized and controlled trial was conducted among 61 patients with HCC from January 2006 to January 2011.The patients were randomly assigned into TACE-RFA group (31 cases) and RFA-alone group (30 cases).The liver function,overall survival rate and the tumor free survival rate were compared between the two groups.Results The liver function indices such as alanine aminotransferase,aspartate aminotransferase,total bilirubin and albumin in TACE-RFA group were significantly better than those in RFA-alone group[(38 ±6) U/L vs (50 ±7) U/L,(38 ± 10) U/L vs (50 ± 10) U/L,(67 ± 14) μmol/L vs (86 ± 15) μmol/L,(43 ±5) g/L vs (38 ±4) g/L];the Child-Pugh grade and tumor maximum diameter were significantly different between TACE-RFA group and RFA-alone group [Child-Pugh grade A:28 cases vs 23 cases,Child-Pugb grade A:3 cases vs 7 cases,tumor maximum diameter:(2.2 ± 0.9) cm vs (3.1 ± 1.0) cm] (P 〈 0.05).Totally 16 patients in TACE-RFA group were dead and 23 patients in RFA-alone group were dead.The median survival time and median tumor free survival time in TACE-RFA group were longer than those inRFA-alone group [29 months vs 20 months,23 months vs 14 months,x2 =4.025,4.331,P =0.045,0.037).The survival rate/tumor free survival rate of 1,2 and 3-year was 80.7% (25/31)/74.2% (23/31),61.3% (19/31)/51.6% (16/31),48.4% (15/31)/35.5% (11/31) in TACE-RFA group and it was 60.0% (18/30)/53.3% (16/30),40.0% (12/30)/30.0% (9/30),23.3% (7/30)/16.7% (5/30)in RFA-alone group.The patients in TACE-RFA group had a higher survival rate [hazard ratio (HR) =0.519,95% confidence interval (CI):0.325-0.816,P =0.004] and a higher tumor free survival rate (HR =0.568,95% CI:0.374-0.
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...