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:刘帅[1] 彭丽静[1] 胡效坤[1] 李子祥[1]
机构地区:[1]青岛大学附属医院介入医学中心,山东青岛266555
出 处:《医学影像学杂志》2016年第4期674-677,共4页Journal of Medical Imaging
摘 要:目的比较光动力疗法联合支架植入与单纯支架植入治疗中晚期及复发性食管癌的临床疗效。方法 18例患者在食管支架植入后行光动力治疗,24例行单纯支架植入术,术后对临床症状、生存时间、不良反应进行观察。结果联合治疗组平均随访时间8.9(3~22)月,半年生存率83.3%(15/18),1年生存率61.1%(11/18);中位生存期为17个月。1例术后3周出现光过敏,并发症发生率为5.56%(1/18);未见大出血等不良反应发生。单纯支架组平均随访时间6.8(3~12)月,半年生存率45.8%(11/24),1年生存率29.2%(7/24);中位生存期为11个月。两组相比,半年生存率和1年生存率之间差异有统计学意义(P〈0.05)。结论光动力疗法联合支架植入对中晚期及复发性食管癌患者生存质量和生存期有明显改善,不良反应少,具有较好的临床价值。Objective To compare the clinical efficacy of photodynamic therapy combined with stenting and stent implantation alone in the treatment of advanced or recurrent esophageal cancer. Methods 16 patients were taken photodynamic therapy after stent implantation and,18 patients were taken stenting alone. Post-operative clinical symptoms,survival rate,and adverse events were observed. Results The mean follow-up time of treatment group was 8. 9( 3 ~ 22) months,survival rate of half a year was83. 3%( 15 /18),1-year survival was 61. 1%( 11 /18); the median survival time was 17 months. One case after three weeks appeared light allergy,the complication rate was 5. 56%( 1 /18). There were no bleeding and other adverse reactions. The mean follow-up time of stent group was 6. 8( 3 ~ 12) months,six months survival rate was 45. 8%( 11 /24),1-year survival rate was29. 2%( 7 /24); median survival was 11 months. The difference between two groups of six months and one year survival rate of survival was statistically significant( P〈0. 05). Conclusion Photodynamic therapy combined with stent implantation is effective and safe in treating advanced or recurrent esophageal cancer,and quality of life and survival have improved significantly with fewer adverse reactions.
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:216.73.216.7